# Interview with Scott Rouse, Chris Perkins & Bill Slavicsek



## Morrus (Apr 27, 2007)

The promised interview has been posted on the news page.   Feel free to comment here.  Please remember EN World's rules and the recent moderator warning when doing so.

The interview is with Scott Rouse (Senior Brand Manager for D&D), Bill Slavicsek (Director of R&D for D&D) and Chris Perkins (D&D Design Manager).

_Repeating my intro to the interview: _ As promised, here is the interview with WotC. Apparently, with so many people away at the GAMA tradeshow, it took a few days to get this together over email. One thing to note is that, in several places, Scott, Chris and Bill ask for opinions on what people would _like_ to see happening regarding the planned online content model, and that they'll be watching the forums to see what people have to say. So, if you do have any thoughts, please feel free to have your say.


----------



## Vigilance (Apr 27, 2007)

Awesome job Morrus. A lot of good information to ponder.

Thanks.

Chuck


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 27, 2007)

Hmmm.  I'm not actually finding the interview to be very revealing...  At least none of the answers I really was interested in were answered directly.

Two points of interest: 
(1) The DRAGON and DUNGEON names will probably be used in the Digital Initiative somehow.  
(2) This quote. 


> We have not come up with a solution for “portability” of content after your subscription has ended but we are discussing ideas with in our development team. We do not have a DRM solution yet but have a range of options available to us.



This is a very telling quote.  It means that there *is* DRM in use for certain (if there weren't DRM, the solution would be pretty obvious.  Keep the PDF).  How draconian (hmmm...) a DRM system is still up for grabs at least.

What really confuses me though...  It sounds like I REQUIRE a subscription to access the content?  It really isn't going to be ala carte then?  I wonder if we're just going to be getting a bunch of webpages (not even PDFs) with a subscription model like TimesSelect


----------



## Ghendar (Apr 27, 2007)

Nice job compiling Morrus. It is appreciated.

However, after reading it I know little more now than I did a week ago. The answers provided really didn't answer anything for me. <shrug>


----------



## JeffB (Apr 27, 2007)

meh...lotsa corporate speak. i.e. little content, lots of words.


----------



## Imaro (Apr 27, 2007)

I'm concerned about the "portability after your subscription ends" bit.  It makes it seem like I will only have access to material for the duration of my subscription(unless of course they come up with a solution by release).  I don't think I'd be too cool with that.  It's like I'm renting instead of buying(like with the magazines).  If I pay for something I want it to be mine.  If this is implemented for the online material, I would have to seriously ponder subscribing for it.

My general impression is that it really didn't fill in much of what I was wondering.


----------



## Fieari (Apr 27, 2007)

At least there's going to be print compilations alongside the online content.


----------



## MerricB (Apr 27, 2007)

"Portability after your subscription ends" is troublesome because they're probably referring to quite a bit of content there.

If there's a character generator, then having access to it after your subscription ends is troublesome.

Mere information pages... I can't see anything they can do to stop you saving those on your computer for the future, or printing them out, etc.

We're looking at a lot of potentials here, so it's hard for them to say anything definite. I'd like there to be more information, but - in some ways - them not giving too much information out allows Paizo more of a good time for the last few issues.

Cheers!


----------



## Vigilance (Apr 27, 2007)

DRM could mean watermarking as well. I hope they go that route, and given that they use watermarking for full-fledged PDFs, it doesn't seem to stretch the mind much that they'd go that way again.


----------



## Alynnalizza (Apr 27, 2007)

My biggest concern seems to be we are what... four months away from Dungeon/Dragon ending, and there are still a lot of open-ended questions out there for a decision that started over a year ago.

Why not pump the heck out of the DI? The final months of the mags are gonna sell, probably even more now that we know they are ending. 

Give us bits and pieces, gives us TEASERS. I've found nothing to get me to go...ewww, gotta sign up. Four months may not be that close to some, but it goes by quicker than most realize.

Haven't decided on DRM yet? Really? I get the sense of too much cloack and dagger. Cryptic can be good sometimes, but a starving dog only gets angrier as time goes by.

I really wish that something more substantive would have been said by the 'interview'. Kinda sad, and has me really not caring about DI.


----------



## Felon (Apr 27, 2007)

Here's question that was asked:


> Our understanding at present is that the online content is set to replace the magazines. What factors were involved in the decision to replace one with the other, rather than to allow the two media - the online platform and the magazines - to co-exist?




Here was the response:


> Chris: Our online content plans will replace the printed magazines. That aside, we are still very much in the business of producing printed products.
> 
> Bill: I also want to take a moment to quell some related rumors. D&D is not going away. In no way do our plans call for the end of face-to-face tabletop gaming. We are not making an MMORPG. We will continue to produce printed, for-sale, published products.



Is it just me, or are these *not* answers to the question posed to them?

We already _know_ that the online content plans will replace the printed magazines. The question was, why "replacement" instead of "co-existence"? I think we can guess the answer. Just come out and say it.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Apr 27, 2007)

WoTC said:
			
		

> What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that? If this new incarnation of the magazines could encompass anything you could want, what would that be?




I want to answer this question - the challenge for me in using Dragon's content is portability.  I can't bring 100 back-issues to my game.  It would be a huge hassle, and copying/scanning/re-typing it is a lot of time and effort.

I'd like to see some method of saving a "campaign profile" on the new site.  Each article might have monsters, or feats, or spells; what I'd like to have in addition is a master list (or multiple master lists - like one for monsters, one for feats, etc) that has a check box by every feat, or group of feats, so that you can select them individually, or in groups.  Those selections could then be compiled into the campaign profile, so that you could print out or view online a "Feats chapter" or Monster Manual of only the items you want to use in your game.  The Master lists could include core material and material from other books (the complete books, MM4, etc)

For example, I coud select the PHB feats as a whole, maybe all the feats from an article about swashbuckling (selected as a group), and then several (but not all) feats from an article about undead.  Then I could turn that into a useable output either viewable onscreen or as a downloadable option (ideally), like a PDF or HTML or XML output.  Then I could go back over time and add or subtract to the Campaign Profile; ideally I could have more than one.

That's an example of how this could be made very useful to me.


----------



## MerricB (Apr 27, 2007)

Fieari said:
			
		

> At least there's going to be print compilations alongside the online content.




Honestly, that's how a lot of D&D books got written. Unearthed Arcana (1e) being the poster child for that, but it's not alone (AD&D Player's Handbook). Material got printed first in Dragon magazine or similar (The Strategic Review), then the best of it got massaged into shape and printed in official books.

Classes like the Cavalier, Barbarian, Ranger and Illusionist saw their starts in the pages of The Strategic Review and The Dragon. A lot of material in Dragon Magazine rightfully has never seen the light of day again, but the great stuff gets reprinted in official rulebooks.

Cheers!


----------



## Mercule (Apr 27, 2007)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> This is a very telling quote.  It means that there *is* DRM in use for certain (if there weren't DRM, the solution would be pretty obvious.  Keep the PDF).  How draconian (hmmm...) a DRM system is still up for grabs at least.




Not necessarily.  "No DRM" is a DRM option.  Plus, they are just begging for backlash if they intimate in any way that there isn't/may not be DRM and then decide there is.  Much better to say, "We're weighing our options," and come out with better news than expected.

For all we know, the whole WotC staff is gung-ho for DRM-free PDF downloads but they're waiting for a Hasbro lawyer to sign off on it.  Yeah, not likely, but let's wait before we lynch.


----------



## Shadeydm (Apr 27, 2007)

These answers did absolutly nothing to sway my opinion that this was a terrible decision. Nor did it offer any concrete reason why the printed magazines could not have continued along with the DI.


----------



## Ranger REG (Apr 27, 2007)

I gotta be brutally honest. Sounds more like a late-night infomercial disguised as an interview.


----------



## Roman (Apr 27, 2007)

Good interview and thanks to WotC staff for answering the questions and to Morrus for compiling them. 

I think the responses were good and reasonably informative given the circumstances that they are not ready to announce details about the Digital Initiative yet. Since I have never been keen on online subscriptions, I am also quite happy that WotC has decided to compile the information into print products. All in all, this sounds quite exciting.


----------



## mxyzplk (Apr 27, 2007)

I'm a little worried myself.  I work with the Internet for a living, and creating a good online content strategy isn't easy.  And in general WotC's Internet presence, and most especially their forays into software development, in the past haven't inspired a huge amount of confidence that they have what it takes.  They do have a lot of decent content on their site right now which if supplemented with the content from Dragon and Dungeon would be a sizable portfolio.  But in terms of building an online community, "we got us some forums and sells us some PDFs" isn't exactly state of the art (no offense EN World, WotC has about a million times as much money as you do I imagine).


----------



## KB9JMQ (Apr 27, 2007)

Well not a whole lot of answers but I really didn't expect any.
I am glad to see they want to open the lines of communication up more. It would be nice to have a regular presence by a bunch of WoTC people again.


----------



## HeavenShallBurn (Apr 27, 2007)

I expect the entire thing had to be translated into meaningless CorporateSpeak^TM by their in-house lawyers before they could reply.  As it is this answered no questions let alone the ones asked.  It said NOTHING for all its words. 

And the one thing likely to kill the entire DI is if they include DRM or prevent it from being used once your subscription is over.  DRM is well-hated on teh intarwebs in all it's forms and if the new material isn't fully portable I expect their revenue to be abysmal.


----------



## Thaumaturge (Apr 27, 2007)

Morrus, thanks for putting together the interview.  I'm hoping the DI works out as well as it might.  There is great potential in that there interweb. 

Thaumaturge.


----------



## MerricB (Apr 27, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> I want to answer this question - the challenge for me in using Dragon's content is portability.  I can't bring 100 back-issues to my game.  It would be a huge hassle, and copying/scanning/re-typing it is a lot of time and effort.
> 
> That's an example of how this could be made very useful to me.




I agree. It's one of the big flaws with the magazine format: portability.

Cheers!


----------



## Cyberhawk (Apr 27, 2007)

Hey Morrus, thanks for doing this.

The WOTC folks "Scott, Chris and Bill" are asking for what we'd like to see.  Here are few things I would like:

Campaign Classics.  The Campaign Classics issue was one of my favorite things in Dragon.  I would love to see this picked up, especially as an online venture we can see content at times year-round instead of only once a year.

Class Acts: The new 'overview' style of Class Acts (ie Adventurer, Warrior, etc. instead of 'cleric', 'Fighter' etc.) was both useful and entertaining.  I'd love to see that continue, although I would also add a "Psionic" as well.

Low DRM:  I have no problem with watermarking downloadable content, but if the DRM is heavier than that then I doubt I'll be purchasing it.  

I'm happy to hear that the new initiative will be a welcoming place for outside writers, but I would like to hear what is going to happen to the articles submitted but not printed by Paizo and the Queries that were sent to Paizo before this was announced.  (obviously this may be more of a concern for Paizo instead but thought I'd bring it up...)

Thanks.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

Well, for starters, they really don't sound like folks with a concrete plan as of yet. I've been on both sides of such interviews in the past, and I certainly understand saying "we can't say that yet" (I worked for a very, very closed-off videogame company and my primary responsibility was dealing with the press and fan community), but there's an awfully high percentage of "we can't say" there compared to anything concrete.

It's also interesting to hear that Dragonlance may not be a settled issue from the point of view of Wizards. Is this Margaret Weis power-playing Wizards or are they in the process of talking to someone _else_ about the license?

It's also dismaying that they felt they had to respond to some of the more out there responses. Did anyone genuinely think that D&D was going to be replaced by a MMORPG in the near term?

I think this was well-intentioned on their part, but none of this was a surprise to them, and they should have had at least a small nugget to say "this here is an example of what we will be selling you in the future." Going back to the videogame industry, no one in a company comparable to Wizards just announces a new product without immediately having something to preview, even if it's just concept sketches, a logo and maybe a mock-up game screen. The DI should have a logo, a short bullet point list of things folks can look forward to (with the caveat that stuff is still changing) and a new piece of art relating to one of the planned features.

Wizards normally seems to run a much more polished operation than they appear to have in the last few weeks.


----------



## Ranger REG (Apr 27, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> It's one of the big flaws with the magazine format: portability.



That's a non-issue for me.

The same argument could be applied to the _D&D_ printed products.


----------



## blargney the second (Apr 27, 2007)

There are a few things that I particularly enjoyed about Dungeon that I'd like to see continue in the DI:

1) Awesome artwork.  There was a lot of original & evocative artwork that added significant value to the magazine.  Being able to show my players a page with a piece of art was invaluable.
2) Eberron adventures.  I love the setting, and I want more adventures set there!  I really enjoyed the three adventure mini path that came out a year ago.
3) Awesome artwork.  While I appreciate (and have used) the free adventures on the WotC site up until now... I really hope that the DI has more original pieces.
4) Portability to the table.  I run adventures from Dungeon by bringing the physical mag to the table.  (That being said, the encounter page formatting could be wonky, particularly with ads breaking things up.)  Easily printable adventures are an absolute must before I even consider the DI.
5) Did I mention artwork?   It's particularly useful when there are separate pictures & maps for players & DMs.  Paizo's web enhancements for Dungeon were great for that.
6) Variety to cost ratio.  I got many different things in Dungeon for a cheap price.  When pricing the DI, bear in mind that I will need to pay for the ink to print it in order to use it.  Unfortunately, good art is going to be expensive on my end one way or the other. 

-blarg


----------



## MerricB (Apr 27, 2007)

mxyzplk said:
			
		

> I'm a little worried myself.  I work with the Internet for a living, and creating a good online content strategy isn't easy.  And in general WotC's Internet presence, and most especially their forays into software development, in the past haven't inspired a huge amount of confidence that they have what it takes.




Hmm. The trouble of talking in general is that you miss the specifics.  The specificality I'm talking about at present is Wizards' presence with Magic: the Gathering. Their online site is exceptional in the content it offers.

Their Magic: the Gathering Online game, despite the problems it has had, is also extremely successful.

Wizards on the D&D side hasn't been great online - although it's had some great successes - but it looks a lot better on the Magic side.

Cheers!


----------



## WhatGravitas (Apr 27, 2007)

First of all, nice interview, thanks for the efforts, Morrus. That wasn't exactly clearing up everything... but sooo much better than the "oops, we dropped"-reaction last friday.


> =Chris Perkins]"That said, we’re working to make WotC R&D and Brand team members more accessible and visible online, and this interview is a beginning step toward that long-term goal. We’re excited by this opportunity and look forward to participating more fully in the future."



Sounds nice... I always liked seeing some people actually online/responding, and Monte is still posting on his boards (occasionally). If they get this again, coupled with the friendliness/directness (unlike these "Ask Wizards"-thingies)... would be great. Looking forward to this.


			
				Scott Rouse said:
			
		

> That’s a much more important and timely message at this moment than what WotC plans to do down the road.



That part with Paizo sounds reasonable and good.


			
				Chris Perkins said:
			
		

> "We have not come up with a solution for “portability” of content after your subscription has ended but we are discussing ideas with in our development team. We do not have a DRM solution yet but have a range of options available to us."



DRM. Ugh. If it's not watermark... then it'll be ugly for the paranoia people (like me). :\


			
				Bill Slavicsek said:
			
		

> "As with the magazines, the online content represents only one part of our D&D efforts, *and those without Internet access will have other options.*"



Perhaps I'm just misinterpreting it... but it sounds like "No internet? Suck it up." Not happy.


			
				Bill Slavicsek said:
			
		

> "Sounds like a great idea! In fact, it’s been part of our plans all along."



So... compendium/hardcover is planned... at least something, so they're showing some redeeming qualities... 


			
				Chris Perkins said:
			
		

> "Yes. This is exactly how I broke into the industry, and we’re always looking for new talent to complement our core team."



Okay. That is something, that sounds genuinely cool - while non-print articles are far less glorious, they're at least keeping that channel open!

_______________________

So, the bottom line is: Much corporate speech. Marketing speech, but some gems... and that they're still working out things (crucial things, like DRM), makes me a bit anxious about the result... may end in a "fall flat on the face", colour me skeptic :\

EDIT: Whoah! This thread is moving *fast*! 15 new posts since starting typing!


----------



## lrsach01 (Apr 27, 2007)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity
Hmmm. I'm not actually finding the interview to be very revealing....


I don't know...I found the statement about Dragonlance very interesting:

*Scott: No decisions have been made regarding the Dragonlance license, and we don’t discuss the details of ongoing negotiations.
*
That ALMOST sounds like they are shopping Dragonlance around. Is there another reason not to confirm that setting information would be included in the digital format. I'd feel a lot better knowing that WotC will continue to produce Dragonlance content. I'm sure the fans of Dark Sun, Birthright, Ravenloft and Greyhawk would love to know they were going to get new material too.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

Felon said:
			
		

> Is it just me, or are these *not* answers to the question posed to them?



/meta on

This is why the Q&A format, which is very common online, is a bad idea in general. It makes those answering questions look evasive if they don't answer to a reader's satisfaction (and while I agree with you in this case, someone ALWAYS feels a question isn't fully answered) and it sometimes hurts the questioner in a similar fashion.

It takes more work to write up in a news story format, like Comic Book Resources, to pick an example, tends to, but the results are almost always worth it.

There were a TON of questions and long answers, though, and a lot of pressure to get these results up _now_, of course. No criticism is intended toward Morrus, just airing some general long-term observations on the Q&A format.

/meta off


----------



## blargney the second (Apr 27, 2007)

ps - Morrus, thank you for putting that together.  WotC guys, thanks for playing ball with us!


----------



## HeavenShallBurn (Apr 27, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> bear in mind that I will need to pay for the ink to print it in order to use it.-blarg




Yeah someone did a bit of math and figured out that we're paying more than $1000US per gallon of printer ink.  If you think gas prices are a rip-off


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

HeavenShallBurn said:
			
		

> I expect the entire thing had to be translated into meaningless CorporateSpeak^TM by their in-house lawyers before they could reply.



PR flaks. Lawyers are only required when the creative types might say something actionable, which isn't the case here.


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 27, 2007)

Its nice to get some official answers even though they didn't really answer too much of what I was looking for. I do miss the days when Ryan et al were more frequent on these boards.

As to Scott's questions of what I would like to see, here's my hopes (and yeah, some of this are pretty far fetched, but what the hell):

• Online character generator that is Mac/PC compatible and allows me to store all of the information for my character(s). This would allow easy print output as a full character sheet so that if I forget my character at home, I retrieve my character by logging into the website.

• A digital tabletop that allows me as a DM to easily manage a game from a laptop. If I bring up a monster, all of its abilities are hyperlinked so to see the rules on grappling, I click on grappling and voilà no more page flipping.

• HTML versions of all of the books I own that are all easily hyperlinked (see d20srd.org for an example). Online versions of the book are updated frequently with errata.

• Monster generator for DMs that puts all of the monster creation rules in the Monster Manual in a digital format and calculates all of the skill bonuses, hit points, ranks, etc.

• A huge reservoir of NPCs, adventure hooks, character backgrounds, artwork, locations, for Players and DMs that is added to every month.

• An interactive online experience for playing games over the internet via VOIP. This would include official sanctioned tournaments by Wizards, postings to find and join games, and various timeslots so people can play all over the world.

• A 3d NPC builder that allows players and DMs to create 3d models of their characters and NPCs. Includes equipment and clothes to customize the look of characters (see Oblivion and various MMOs).

• A WYSIWYG Campaign Website creator for a DM to use to easily create a website for his games. Think MySpace for D&D Campaigns.

I cannot possibly stress how IMPORTANT it is to have Mac and PC compatibility. If anything, please make sure this works on my Mac.


----------



## w_earle_wheeler (Apr 27, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> I gotta be brutally honest. Sounds more like a late-night infomercial disguised as an interview.




I have to agree with this. 

Lots of words, few answers.


----------



## HeavenShallBurn (Apr 27, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> PR flaks. Lawyers are only required when the creative types might say something actionable, which isn't the case here.




Looking through it again you're most likely right, it's got that kind of vibe of emptiness I get from PR & PIO people.  In general the technique tends to get associated with lawyers because they proliferated it, but it's done much more by other professions that need to talk a lot without saying anything.


----------



## Grimstaff (Apr 27, 2007)

Well, having hoped to hear their reasoning behind cancelling the printed magazines and some specifics on what the DI will be, I guess I was disappointed by the responses.

Where's Ari Fleicher working now, anyway?  

This statement scared me:
"Chris:  We have a lot of ideas that we’re happy with, but let me turn the question around. What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that? If this new incarnation of the magazines could encompass anything you could want, what would that be?"

Does this mean they have no idea what they are doing?


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Apr 27, 2007)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> As to Scott's questions of what I would like to see, here's my hopes (and yeah, some of this are pretty far fetched, but what the hell):




Those are some pretty good suggestions...


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Apr 27, 2007)

Grimstaff said:
			
		

> Does this mean they have no idea what they are doing?




Yeegads, they can't win, can they?  If they say they don't need input, they're ignoring the fans, but if they ask for input, they don't know what they're doing.

And then people wonder why they're not hanging out around here.


----------



## blargney the second (Apr 27, 2007)

Morrus said:
			
		

> One thing to note is that, in several places, Scott, Chris and Bill ask for opinions on what people would like to see happening regarding the planned online content model, and that they'll be watching the forums to see what people have to say.




By the way, I'm taking this to mean that the WotC guys are listening in this thread to what we want them to do.  Empowerment to shape the future of a product doesn't come every day.  I'm as sad as anybody at the loss of Dungeon, but that doesn't prevent me from letting them know what parts of it I want to see continued.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Apr 27, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> That's a non-issue for me.
> 
> The same argument could be applied to the _D&D_ printed products.




In my case, the argument doesn't apply, as I use E-Tools with add-on packs for most of my sourcebooks, so that I don't need to bring any books to my game.  In fact, I almost never bring any D&D books to games that I run; I rely on the SRD and preprepared stablocks created (mostly) in E-Tools.


----------



## Roman (Apr 27, 2007)

I think they actually answered quite a lot of questions - ranging from possibility of freelancers to contribute, to the print compilation and lots in between.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> Yeegads, they can't win, can they?  If they say they don't need input, they're ignoring the fans, but if they ask for input, they don't know what they're doing.
> 
> And then people wonder why they're not hanging out around here.



Asking for input and having ideas of their own are not mutually exclusive. Showing at least one of the cards in their hand would have allayed a lot of people's concerns.

As my father likes to say, this ain't rocket surgery.


----------



## Ry (Apr 27, 2007)

I can't help but feel really disappointed in what I've just read.  I was hoping I'd see Wizards coming clean, revealing details, and so forth.  Honestly, I was hoping that we could get some straight talk, i.e.:

1) Tell us the details.
or
2) Admit Wizards doesn't have a sufficient plan for what it's doing.

Sounds like the DI is behind schedule, nebulous, and could easily turn out to be a total disaster.  And for this, they cancelled my favorite magazines?  This is just dumb.  If the DI isn't up to snuff, all this anger they've created is going to get rekindled when they try to release it.  I am so bummed that I put as much money as I did into Wizards products in the last 2 years.  I feel like a sucker.


----------



## freyar (Apr 27, 2007)

Morrus, thanks for compiling the questions, and also thanks to Scott, Chris, and Bill for taking time to reply.  

I was myself a little disappointed in the lack of some specifics in terms of answers, but I'll still tell them some things important to me...


Make sure various OS can use this.  Not just Mac & PC, but Linux too.
Keep the DRM low.  Watermark on PDF is good...
Before I subscribe, I'd like a preview period.  Maybe a week with the DI open to the public for free before subscriptions are required (yeah, I know, not likely ).  Or else some kind of limited content that we can browse w/o a subscription.  Otherwise, how will I know if I'm interested?
It sounds like you want to keep the value of the magazines.  That's good -- unless it's really spectacular, we won't want to pay a whole lot.
Once subscriptions are done, we should really be able to keep the content we paid for.  That's a must.
Print compilations will be good!

Thanks again!


----------



## Riley (Apr 27, 2007)

Thanks for turning up and having something to say, if only a very little.  You didn't in any way address the need to eliminate the printed magazines in order to make the online model work, but I understand that you are not allowed to give much if any ground in your official capacities.  I'm still *very* unhappy with the cancellation of the magazines, and I don't see a limited access, DRM-encoded DI with limited permanence or portability to be any kind of replacement for magazines like the 400 or so I've got on my shelves for ready access.  Fortunately, Paizo is willing to give me a partial replacement for what you've taken away, even if you aren't.

As for your DI, I want it to be great, and I want it to be something I would want to pay for.  I don't care about online character generators or other shiny gadgets.  What's important to me is to have pretty, printable articles and adventures with inspiring illustrations.  Also, if I'm going to pay for it, I want to be able to keep what I've bought.  Any DRM'ing beyond watermarking would be an absolute non-starter.  I own five computers, and I'll own new computers in the future.  I will not tolerate keys or licenses or any of that nonsense.

So good luck, I wish you the best in winning me as a customer for your new endeavor.  Keep coming around to visit, and I'll be glad to hear what you have to say.  Or, if you ever get your message board's search function working, I'll be happy to come over to your place to find what, if anything, you've posted.


----------



## Ranger REG (Apr 27, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> In my case, the argument doesn't apply, as I use E-Tools with add-on packs for most of my sourcebooks, so that I don't need to bring any books to my game.  In fact, I almost never bring any D&D books to games that I run; I rely on the SRD and preprepared stablocks created (mostly) in E-Tools.



Yay for you. So, what's better for you is better for me?  :\


----------



## Joël of the FoS (Apr 27, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I agree. It's one of the big flaws with the magazine format: portability.
> 
> Cheers!




And it's one of its greatest quality too - that you are able to read it anywhere, anywhen, without batteries involved 

---

The question of multiple point of access by the same account is important, or ease of saving / printing, since not all DMs plays in their own house.

Joël


----------



## blargney the second (Apr 27, 2007)

Print compilations would be really really good.  I hate printing things myself if I can avoid it.  (I have a lousy printer.)


----------



## Mindseye (Apr 27, 2007)

Thanks to Morrus for putting this together.

I'm dissapointed that we waited on this all week. No content whatsoever. To have a decision in the works for over a year and have the announcement made in the manner it was is unbelievable to me.

I want to give their new plans a chance, but I'm having a difficult time thinking it will be any sort of a viable replacement for the print mags for me.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Apr 27, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> Yeegads, they can't win, can they?  If they say they don't need input, they're ignoring the fans, but if they ask for input, they don't know what they're doing.




Yep. Much like they're evil if they don't provide answers _right now_, but then when they do so, it's corporate spin/empty PR.  :\


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 27, 2007)

Thinking on this, I wouldn't be surprised if there are two different type of subscription models. "Dragon" being a more general type of subscription and a focus for Players and "Dungeon" being a subscription focused on DMs.


----------



## Grimstaff (Apr 27, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> Yeegads, they can't win, can they?  If they say they don't need input, they're ignoring the fans, but if they ask for input, they don't know what they're doing.
> 
> And then people wonder why they're not hanging out around here.



Yeah, but aren't those questions you ask before making a decision? Why not ask those questions before the whole licenses issue came up? It's kind of like rather than asking you "chicken or fish?" they just bring you the fish and then ask what you'd like on it.

Let's face it: Business is hard. When you make a controversial decision that upsets the people you depend on for a paycheck, you have to justify that decision. I can't imagine that WotC would intentionally take the position "If you don't like it, then don't buy it, we don't need you", because they do need us. 

They certainly can win, and that's by getting fans to trust them again. The decision to yank Dungeon and Dragon was about more than a magazine, it was about WotC demonstrating to their customers that they can pull the rug out any time they feel like it. The deciding factor is whether or not they can justify it. It's going to be very hard for them to make money, especially on a subsription basis, if the customer base feels they can't trust the folks they're paying in advance for their product.


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 27, 2007)

Morrus: Thanks for the good work. 

Scott, Bill, Chris: Thanks for your participation.

I'm still not interested by DI, and I specifically did not like the way you turned the question around about what "we" would like to see (I really do appreciate the communication initiative - but that wasn't the moment to turn the tables around). *Either you have a plan that justified to kill Dragon and Dungeon, or you don't. If you do, explain to me*. Then I can make a decision as a customer. Thanks.


----------



## w_earle_wheeler (Apr 27, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Yep. Much like they're evil if they don't provide answers _right now_, but then when they do so, it's corporate spin/empty PR.




I don't think anyone has called them evil. Maybe I skimmed past that bit. Is there a paladin in the thread?


----------



## Mortellan (Apr 27, 2007)

Good interview. I have an 'I'll believe it when I see it' attitude over this.


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 27, 2007)

> Yep. Much like they're evil if they don't provide answers right now, but then when they do so, it's corporate spin/empty PR.




Get down your high horse, Ari. Please. You know that anything that you'll say about the topic will be associated with the fact you've been/are writing for WotC. Bottom line: WotC has failed its PR strategy as far as I'm concerned. Indeed, from now on, that's damage control and a sort of lose/lose situation. The people working on the PR are responsible of this crap, not the people who react to the PR. 

Note that I for one am not calling _anyone_ evil.


----------



## MerricB (Apr 27, 2007)

Mortellan said:
			
		

> Good interview. I have an 'I'll believe it when I see it' attitude over this.




Good attitude to have, from my point of view.  Not enough information for a good decision, but a lot of emotion - rightfully so. I _like_ Dungeon magazine!

Cheers!


----------



## Imaro (Apr 27, 2007)

You know the more I think about this interview, the more I feel like it would've been a great opportunity to showcase something, anything, even if it wasn't the total package.  Instead I get a very "up in the air" type vibe about this project, yet Scott Rouse and others claim they are very excited about it.  Well show us something to be excited about.  Nothing in the interview made me more interested in the least bit about this and I feel it might be a failed opportunity.  My general feeling as of right now is just...Meh.


----------



## rom90125 (Apr 27, 2007)

Shadeydm said:
			
		

> These answers did absolutly nothing to sway my opinion that this was a terrible decision. Nor did it offer any concrete reason why the printed magazines could not have continued along with the DI.






			
				Ranger REG said:
			
		

> I gotta be brutally honest. Sounds more like a late-night infomercial disguised as an interview.




I totally agree....a whole lot of nothing...aka...corporate speak poured over by the lawyers.  My disappointment with WoTC deepens.


----------



## Vigilance (Apr 27, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> Asking for input and having ideas of their own are not mutually exclusive. Showing at least one of the cards in their hand would have allayed a lot of people's concerns.
> 
> As my father likes to say, this ain't rocket surgery.




We now know that we're getting print compilations, and that the amount of content will be equal to what was delivered in Dungeon and Dragon "or more" at a comparable price.

Those are things we didn't know before.

They showed some of their cards, they just didn't give the mea culpa some people seemed to be wanting or expecting.


----------



## Zaukrie (Apr 27, 2007)

First: nice start in recovering from the PR fiasco so far. While it won't placate many, it will likely help the process for some.

Second: If I don't own the content (not tools, but content) under this plan, I'm 100% out. I've purchsed Dragon on and off (mostly on) since issue 14 or so, and I own about 1/2 of the Dungeon magazines. I want to have what I pay for, so if portability is not an option (and I mean 100% I can put it on any storage device I want for the rest of my life and my kids' life).

Third: What do I want:

All the classic articles: Giants in the Earth, monster ecologies, new monsters, adventure paths, stand alone adventures, demonicon (already a classic), new spells, faiths of faerun, pretty much what I've got for the last few years, and from the glory years. I want new, non-WotC authors to get a chance, I want WotC authors. I want art, really want art. I can't stand monster articles w/o art. I want to be able to print any content I paid for. I want maps in 1'=5' scale for every adventure. I want content that is unique to the site, and content that is in support of published products.

I want tools: character, monster, mapping, whatever tool you can think of in support of a DM or player, I want it. I want to be able to look up feat trees. I want to be able to put in my own house rules. I want you to experiment with new design ideas.

I want WotC to be more involved with their fans on line. 

I want you to take the best content from througout the history of Dragon and print it in compendiums (heck, I think Erik has done most of the work for you here). 

Frankly I still want both magazines in hard copy, but that wasn't your question.


----------



## w_earle_wheeler (Apr 27, 2007)

*What do I want from the DI?*

What do I want from the Digital Initiative?

I've been running (and occasionally playing) in D&D games regularly since 3e was released. Since 2000, I've had three different 5 person groups. In each group, I was the only person who ever (semi-)regularly picked up a Dungeon or Dragon magazine printed in the 21st century. I was also the only person who mined the freebies and articles from the WotC website.

So, if anyone in my group is going to get in on the DI, it's going to be me.

What I want from the DI is something cost-effective that I can use in my weekly tabletop games. I'll have to print out anything I plan on using for the group, so I expect the subscription price to reflect that. Five bucks a month, max. This isn't a MMORPG after all.

I want battle maps and visual aids I can print out, with a low-ink option for most of them.

I want more revisions of old modules WITHOUT tie-ins to non core products. I didn't mind the tie-ins/promotions when they adventures were free. If I'm paying for them, that's a different story.

I want all the material released in the DI to be open material. I want the DI to have a private community dedicated to refining d20/D&D into a sleek, easy-to-play, OGL ruleset that can stand the test of time. 

I want the impossible.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Apr 27, 2007)

Odhanan said:
			
		

> Get down your high horse, Ari. Please.




Beg pardon? People have been screaming bloody murder, comparing WotC's actions to assault and even _rape_, and it's inappropriate of _me_ to have finally lost patience and object? I don't think so.



> You know that anything that you'll say about the topic will be associated with the fact you've been/are writing for WotC.




Ah, yes. I forgot about the "turning over my free will" part of the contract I signed with WotC.

Oh, wait. No, I didn't sign that section.

Maybe you're referring to the "Freelancers for WotC aren't allowed to express an opinion" part of ENWorld's terms of use.

Nope. Didn't check that box, either.

Here's a stunner for you. I disagree with WotC on this. I don't think they should have canceled the magazines.

Doesn't mean I'm suddenly excused from common courtesy and basic human decency when discussing it.

How about at least some acknowledgment that the people who are _trying_ to answer our questions, to the best of their ability, have their hands tied by people higher up in the company? How about at least some acknowledgment that WotC isn't a faceless, monolothic entity, and that the _real people _who are being insulted and denegrated across the Internet are fellow gamers, fans of D&D, writers and developers, most of whom had no say in this decision at all?

Trust me, you haven't _seen_ high horse from me yet.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Apr 27, 2007)

Nice job, Morrus. It's so great that you've stepped up as an ambassador for the community, and organized these questions. And kudos to Scott, Bill, and Chris for being so forthcoming.

Someone earlier griped "many words, little content", and reading the interview I just don't understand how that opinion could have been formed. Given the realities of a publicly traded company (it's ILLEGAL to reveal certain information prematurely) they're astoundingly open. 

For ideas on what the DI should be, this thread has a bunch:


WotC is going online. What do you want the digital initiative to be? 

-z


----------



## Riley (Apr 27, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> People have been screaming bloody murder, comparing WotC's actions to assault and even _rape_




I haven't seen anyone actually compare this action to rape.  Maybe I missed it.  However, I do keep reading posts *claiming* that people have been comparing this to rape.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Apr 27, 2007)

Riley said:
			
		

> I haven't seen anyone actually compare this action to rape.  Maybe I missed it.  However, I do keep reading posts *claiming* that people have been comparing this to rape.




It might've been edited out by a moderator by now, but it happened. It was in one of the first threads about this whole issue, the day Paizo made the announcement.


----------



## LeaderDesslok (Apr 27, 2007)

Thanks for doing all the work compiling the questions Morrus, and thanks to Scott, Bill, and Chris for responding.

I was hoping for more information about pricing but had a feeling it was still too early to get anything solid. I don't expect we'll get real numbers until August.

I would have liked some idea about content structure besides an undecided plan for DRM (which I despise; I barely tolerate watermarking). Will it be PDFs? Unlikely, considering that they expect to have very frequent updates. Will there be a searchable database of posted content? No idea from the responses given. Will it be Open Game Content? Unlikely, considering that nothing WotC has done after the core rules has been OGC (nor any Dungeon/Dragon content).

Most problematic to me was the non-answer to the questions regarding the kind of content that will be available. I applaud their "turning the question around" and asking us what kind of content we want to see. However, before they turned it around I would have liked _at least_ one example of content that is definitely going to make it into the DI.

Ultimately, I'm still left with an empty feeling. We got a few definites on things that don't directly impact the DI, like submissions from freelancers. We got some notion of what is still being decided on, like the pricing structure and DRM concerns. BUT when all is said and done, *we still know absolutely nothing about the content  * of the DI product.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> We now know that we're getting print compilations, and that the amount of content will be equal to what was delivered in Dungeon and Dragon "or more" at a comparable price.
> 
> Those are things we didn't know before.
> 
> They showed some of their cards, they just didn't give the mea culpa some people seemed to be wanting or expecting.



I don't see anyone in this thread looking for a mea culpa, they want to know what the heck is going to be in the DI. That it'll be compiled into a hardcopy form and they will be pricing it at or near the Dungeon/Dragon magazine price are both terribly unsurprising and not telling us _what_ the DI will actually be.


----------



## Riley (Apr 27, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> It might've been edited out by a moderator by now, but it happened. It was in one of the first threads about this whole issue, the day Paizo made the announcement.




There's always one idiot - until they get banned.  Good riddance.  _[Edit: Or better yet, apologize and admit their error, as mentioned below]_  I'd like to think that we might move past what that one person said, and talk on a more reasoned level.


----------



## Joël of the FoS (Apr 27, 2007)

Riley said:
			
		

> I haven't seen anyone actually compare this action to rape.  Maybe I missed it.  However, I do keep reading posts *claiming* that people have been comparing this to rape.




No there was one guy who said it felt like a rape. I'm too lazy to check, it's in the first thread about this news, the one that got a zillion page in an hour.

His words offended many, Ari and me included and others too, and he said later the wording was poor and his idea should have been said otherwise.

Joël


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> Someone earlier griped "many words, little content", and reading the interview I just don't understand how that opinion could have been formed. Given the realities of a publicly traded company (it's ILLEGAL to reveal certain information prematurely) they're astoundingly open.



I worked for a game company that everyone on this thread knows the name of, and which is arguably the most closed company in the videogame industry.

This was by no stretch of the imagination "astoundingly open" and nothing people are asking about is subject to scrutiny from regulators.

I've done _exactly this sort of interview before_ and I would have included what I said in my first post: A logo, a bullet point list of some intended (but not promised) features and a piece of art relating to one that's essentially a lock.

If they don't have those three items, they're in a lot of trouble. I am confident they have all those available and could -- and should --  have shown them.

"Trust us, it'll be cool" is not a way to respond to the problems their lack of communication over the last week and change has created.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Apr 27, 2007)

Riley said:
			
		

> There's always one idiot - until they get banned.  Good riddance.  I'd like to think that we might move past what that one person said, and talk on a more reasoned level.




Sure, if it was just the "one idiot." But while the rape comparison only happened once (that I saw), several people agreed, and the "assault" comparison was more common. Even moving beyond that, the tone across every RPG forum I've seen in the last week, hasn't just been _angry_, which is perfectly understandable, but raving and hostile.

Anyone who knows me in person, and many who know me online, know full well that I don't have much of a temper, and that I try to be reasonable. But frankly, the whole thing has gotten to be way too much. I'm not reacting to one or two posters, but to the entire gestalt of the past week. As I said, I want answers as much as anyone, but I have to wonder if we'd have gotten more of them, or gotten them sooner, if the forums hadn't become such a zoo.


----------



## Joël of the FoS (Apr 27, 2007)

Will it have ads? Which company's?

Even if the page count is irrelevant given the online format, will it have a similar / smaller / larger content size than Dragon / Dungeon?

Will it support new WotC releases? Will it be only there to support / promote WotC's new releases? Some cross marketing between books / DI is fine, but too much and you feel betrayed.

Joël


----------



## Zaukrie (Apr 27, 2007)

One thing I forgot: I limit my childrens' computer time. What is your suggestion for getting them access to this content. I used to just let them read our Dragon magazines.


----------



## Christoph the Magus (Apr 27, 2007)

After my first read through, the phrase that comes to mind is "much ado about nothing," in the sense that I've been eagerly awaiting the interview responses and now that they're here I don't feel that I know anymore than I did before. I mean, I don't know what they're going to offer online, what the fees will be, how it's supposed to replace Dragon/Dungeon, etc. There just didn't seem to be much meat in the answers. Color me disappointed.


----------



## Joël of the FoS (Apr 27, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> I want answers as much as anyone, but I have to wonder if we'd have gotten more of them, or gotten them sooner, if the forums hadn't become such a zoo.




Agreed, and guilty of some angriness too.

It was pretty obvious as to why we didn't see anybody from WotC debark here or on the WotC boards, and discuss on the threads: he/she would have been quickly ripped to shreads (metaforically, of course  ). It was best for them to let some time passes.

Joël


----------



## Christoph the Magus (Apr 27, 2007)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> A lot of good information to ponder.
> 
> Chuck




Not to be snarky, but could you clarify just what new information they have provided?


----------



## JeffB (Apr 27, 2007)

RE: Th DI

Will it be available on paper and purchasable in said format at my local bookstore/newstand?


 


On a serious note: I forgot to thank Morrus for going to the trouble. Thank You Russ.


----------



## Qualidar (Apr 27, 2007)

*I Want...*

1) I'm a Mac guy: I want it to work on my computer.

2) I want a character generater to start out NPCs quick and easy.

3) If I'm paying a subscription, I want that generator to have every option available in every curent book: I want to greate a 10th level Wu-Jen, an 5th level warlock, and a Bo9S Crusader without buying additional content "modules".

4) Likewise, I want the equivilant of d20srd.org with all the stuff from all the books. I don't expect to have access to it once the subscription runs out, but while I'm forking over my money I want the whole shabang.

5) Finally, don't be expecting me to be paying more than $13 or so a month.

~Qualidar~


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Apr 27, 2007)

> Chris: We’re working on content details now, and we’re certainly interested in what the community thinks. It’s fair to say that all things related to D&D will be part of our content. We value all of our settings and the history behind them, and we’re fans of all these worlds, too. But we have to find a way to deliver this kind of content without fracturing our audience, which I believe was one of the factors that led to the end of 2nd Edition. As for non-D&D content, those plans are still being evaluated.




For what it's worth, while I was an infrequent purchaser of _Dragon_, I always picked up the issues featuring "Campaign Classics". Support for WotC's non-D&D rpg products would shift this from a maybe, to a must buy for me.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 27, 2007)

Odhanan said:
			
		

> Get down your high horse, Ari. Please.




A general request folks - given the current atmosphere _and Morrus' request for you to watch it in the first post in the thread_, could you please try to keep things from getting personal?  Please?  It isn't hard to address the poster's position, rather than the poster, and it goes a long, long way to keep the nastiness from recurring.


----------



## coastiemike (Apr 27, 2007)

I'm not too worried about them not answering specific questions.  I understand the legal issues as I have worked as a Public Relations Specialist for 10 years.  I'm not worried that much that they didn't address specific issues.  The one thing that worries me above all else and has me more disinterested than when I first heard about DI is the following:

_We have not come up with a solution for “portability” of content after your subscription has ended but we are discussing ideas with in our development team. We do not have a DRM solution yet but have a range of options available to us._

You have got to be kidding. Sometime last year, you guys got together with Paizo and agreed to let the licensing run out and go the online route. That's fine adn I understand the corporate stance on saving cash frompublishing magazines.  

But, someone in your office had to know it would be a huge concern to your customer base about keeping the materials published online that they had access to during their membership, and that they would be able to take this material with them when they decided to drop their subscription.  To say that in quite a few months, you still don't have a solution to something that is a major concern is very disheartening. 

What it sounds like is you guys haven't put alot of thought at all into anything besides, "Hey, wouldn't it save some money to drop the physical mags and put all that info on line?"  I will reserve further judgements for the next four months as you decide to release info. As of now, there is nothing you have said that would even remotely interest me i n subscribing to an online version.


----------



## Riley (Apr 27, 2007)

> Even moving beyond that, the tone across every RPG forum I've seen in the last week, hasn't just been _angry_, which is perfectly understandable, but raving and hostile.
> ...I try to be reasonable. But frankly, the whole thing has gotten to be way too much.




A lot of people are angry.  I was quite angry.  I'm still sad.  But now, the anger on one side just makes the other side more angry.  And the cycle goes on.  We've gotta stop it some time.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Apr 27, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> I've done _exactly this sort of interview before_ and I would have included what I said in my first post: A logo, a bullet point list of some intended (but not promised) features and a piece of art relating to one that's essentially a lock.




I know a company that did exactly what you advocate. It was called Ion Storm. They made a game called Daikatana. 

Daikatana promised a *lot*. When released, it delivered enough that--if able to stand on it's own merits--it would have been adequate. But since Ion Storm jumped the gun and promised too much too early, the game failed. So, eventually, did the entire company.



> If they don't have those three items, they're in a lot of trouble. I am confident they have all those available and could -- and should --  have shown them.
> 
> "Trust us, it'll be cool" is not a way to respond to the problems their lack of communication over the last week and change has created.




It's way, way too early. The DI is a major initiative requiring tremendous resources. Revealing their hand now:

1. Sets up a future PR calamity (see Daikatana, and any number of products that overpromised and underdelivered)
2. Gives competitors time (a lot of time) to come up with something comparable
3. May be considered communication of insider information

Basically, if they're still in the scoping stages it would be irresponsible to speculate. Not only would that be a Bad Thing for us ravenous fans, it may be a Bad Thing for Hasbro shareholders. 

You've read the interview. They've told us what they can, and they've asked for feedback on that as well as suggestions for other features. That's great!

It's unfair to ask for a full and accurate feature list for a product that is still being scoped.

-z


----------



## Dr. NRG (Apr 27, 2007)

Strategically, the timing of the cancelation of the magazine licenses could have been better coordinated with the announcement of their replacement.  I strongly suspect a number of people inside WotC would agree with this notion. 

The press release they issued, in the form of responses to questions, provides more information than they have provided before, which is good.  That said, it provides less information than they would have been wise to provide at the outset of this business.  The clumsy handling of the transition here suggests to me that those in control of the flow of information are either not conversant with the community they are facing or that they believe that the reactions of the hardcore fanbase represented by EnWorld is not that important.  For all I know, they may well be right.    

Again, there is no point in attacking the messengers here.  I appreciate the information that's been provided, and realize that the interviewees are operating as cogs in a larger machine that undoubtedly limits their capacity to respond.  I just wish they had been permittted to be more directly responsive and less Scott McClellany.  For example, answering a question with a question is evasion 101, and serves only to make the person answering look squirelly.  It's almost always wiser just not to answer, if given the option.

NRG


----------



## Merifluous (Apr 27, 2007)

I'm normally just a lurker, but I was a big fan of both magazines and want to put my 2 cents in terms of how I would like to see the new content online.

First, I like having the paper, but I am ok with an an online model. More content spread out over a month would be fine with me, but here is what I want to see:

1. Average quality of content equal to or better than what the magazines have today - if we can get more content, great, but it had better be just a bunch of fluff to justify the price of the service. Theses a value proposition to more quantity, but I think its better to err on the side of quality.

2. DRM (if any) should be as unobtrusive as possible. Don't be like the movie and music industries - realize that if you make a good product, your customer will buy it. The folks who want the content and don't want to pay for it will find a way to get it for free no matter what you do, so cater to the people who will buy it. Basically, make the content as user-friendly as possible at the expense of fancy copy protection methods that aren't going to work anyway.

3. If I have a subscription, I should have unfettered access to whatever has came before. Basically, anything that has ever been posted on the site is available to me. It would be a pain to have to deal with purchasing content piecemeal and would cause more ill will than profit (if you don't believe this, look at the constant complaining about the pricing model for downloads on xbox live). To offset people buying a subscription for a month, getting all the content, and then quitting, require minimum commitments - say 6 months to a year. I think another possible compromise would be to provide unfettered access to people with long term subscriptions.

4. Most content should be printer and storage friendly. Just like I get a magazine I can always keep every month, I need to be able to keep any content I paid for even if my subscription runs out. I realize some content may be "episodic" and not make sense as a big PDF, but PDF compilations would be great once a complete run of articles are finished (though not to the extent that it would hurt the market for the large print products). 

These are very user-centric and could be problematic, but if you want a price point anywhere the magazine's (which I always considered a weakness - I thought it was a bit pricey) you're going to have to make it a value to succeed in a new media format. All that said, I think it is a bold move to go online that could greatly benefit the gaming community and WotC if its done right (making a product with the user interests first and foremost). However, if it follows the lead of some of the other media that has made one dunderheaded move after another in the online space (music and movies) it will probably fall flat on its face.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 27, 2007)

Christoph the Magus said:
			
		

> Not to be snarky, but could you clarify just what new information they have provided?




I'l give that a go.  While I don't guarantee that the info is what you personally want, there is information there that we didn't have before.  Let me go for 10 things:

1) Specific previews will be coming before Dragon/Dungeon end - i.e. in the next few months.

2) The decision was made more than a year ago.

3) Content has not yet been decided.

4) Some Dragon/Dungeon features and columns will continue.

5) Accounts will be user based; payment options without credit cards will be available; content will be "previewable" before purchase.

6) Content will be released in frequent small bursts and then collected together.

7) DRAGON and DUNGEON, as brands, will continue to exist; implication being that this doesn't _replace _ the magazines, it's the _evolution _ of them.

8) Hardcopy compilation is a part of the plan.

9) Freelancers will still be used.

10) There is some suggestion that the Dragonlance issue isn't as clear cut as Margaret Weiss portrayed it.


----------



## Christoph the Magus (Apr 27, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Yep. Much like they're evil if they don't provide answers _right now_, but then when they do so, it's corporate spin/empty PR.  :\




But they didn't really provide any answers.  There's just not much solid information in their responses.  So yeah, it looks a lot like empty PR.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Apr 27, 2007)

coastiemike said:
			
		

> But, someone in your office had to know it would be a huge concern to your customer base about keeping the materials published online that they had access to during their membership, and that they would be able to take this material with them when they decided to drop their subscription.  To say that in quite a few months, you still don't have a solution to something that is a major concern is very disheartening.
> 
> What it sounds like is you guys haven't put alot of thought at all into anything besides, "Hey, wouldn't it save some money to drop the physical mags and put all that info on line?"  I will reserve further judgements for the next four months as you decide to release info. As of now, there is nothing you have said that would even remotely interest me i n subscribing to an online version.




I think it's not so much a matter of "we don't know what we're doing" as "we haven't decided from the options we have".

Plenty of ENWorlders are comfortable with PDF's, but a company like WotC that considers piracy a real threat, has to manage where they fall on the accessibility scale. If one division wants watermarks and the other wants full on DRM, then they must come to a conclusion...

That's a far cry from "we don't know anything".


----------



## LeaderDesslok (Apr 27, 2007)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> It's way, way too early. The DI is a major initiative requiring tremendous resources. Revealing their hand now:
> 
> 1. Sets up a future PR calamity (see Daikatana, and any number of products that overpromised and underdelivered)
> 2. Gives competitors time (a lot of time) to come up with something comparable
> ...



I don't think anyone is asking for anything close to a full and accurate feature list. What we are asking for is some kind of sample content, but none has been shown. If they've been working on this for a year, they cannot possibly still be in the scoping stages. If they are, then they are WAY behind schedule, considering that there are just 4 months left until the print mags are gone! I'd say that gives them until October 1 before another metaphorical mob armed with pitchforks and torches comes pounding at their door.


----------



## HeavenShallBurn (Apr 27, 2007)

Merifluous said:
			
		

> 2. DRM (if any) should be as unobtrusive as possible. Don't be like the movie and music industries - realize that if you make a good product, your customer will buy it. The folks who want the content and don't want to pay for it will find a way to get it for free no matter what you do, so cater to the people who will buy it. Basically, make the content as user-friendly as possible at the expense of fancy copy protection methods that aren't going to work anyway.




This is I believe the one thing that will make or break DI.  DRM is one of the worst examples of corporate incompetence I've ever seen, ticking off customers without actually doing anything.  I personally avoid DRM of any form like the plague.  When it's absolutely unavoidable to associate, I do whatever is necessary to remove it and I'll say this I've never seen a form of DRM that hasn't been beaten, EVER.  And I'm aware of a not-insignificantl number of people who would be in the market for the DI but won't touch it if has DRM.


----------



## 00Machado (Apr 27, 2007)

Regarding Chris' question of what I'd like to see...

Here it is. Probably not everything that I'd like. But at least the stuff that first comes to mind.

Make the game easier to play, not harder. Right now the crunch makes it one of the harder games for me to play. Create tools that make it one of, if not the easiest. I'm not talking about just a forum where I can meet people who play (because this is the largest gaming brand), I mean specifically create tools that literally make it more time consuming to play anything else, and then content that inspires me to want to play. Do that, and you'll have 1) justified the online format in my mind, and 2) hooked me as a GM.

Open things up with options, but don't go crunch crazy. Any new mechanic is a thing to remember. Every thing to remember needs to be worth that mental weight, book lookup time when you can't remember it, etc.

The game needs mysteries that aren't always explained, and magic that PCs can't always replicate, or can't fully replicate. There is no sense of mystery when literally everything a villain might use, a location (even a long forgotten tomb!) might have, just turns into something the PCs can repeat ad nauseum.

Maps. Floor plans and miniature scale. The fantastic location products can become part of the service, combined with the below idea to make up "adventure builder components", or "adventure builder kits".

Encounter locations and adversary tactics that you can build larger adventures around. Instead of always making everything a full adventure, make a few pieces that I can interpret in multiple ways. I will flesh out the details from there. Ease of use, without making me read too much, or really memorize more than an isolated encounter or two. It's easier for me to remember (and to adapt on the fly) something that I've made up, rather than something you've made up and I've read.

Start making the downloadable 3D terrain products again. Make them more than just buildings. Trees, walls, furniture, all the good stuff. Make them so that you can have matching miniature scale maps for encounters. Make fold up card stock counters that you can print out too, because I don't have a bunch of miniature, and don't have money to buy them all, or room to store them all.

Put up archives of all the old Dungeoncraft articles.

Put up other things that are pivotal to strong and efficient GM sills - the relevant opening section of DMG II, the AD&D DM Design Kit, maybe 2e Campaign Sourcebook & Catacomb Guide, or Complete Book of Villains. Content that builds all the various GM skills that are needed to plan and execute at the table. And write more of it. GM skill development is a woefully underdeveloped topic in gaming.

Build in a mechanism for subscribers to review "everything". Every article should get ratings by those who have read it. Even a response thread/blog where it can be discussed, expanded upon, and authors can chime in to clarify if they wish. Or a link to the message board thread for any content that ends up prompting an online discussion.

Provide a mechanism to preview the ideas that are going into future products, and to help shape the content of those products. I don't want any more products that feel like modern pop albums - with one or two good songs, chapters, etc. I want products that are stuffed with page after page of excellence and stuff I can't wait to use. I want the classic rock albums of gaming products. Hero executes on the idea via their 'What would you like to see?' threads when development of new products begins. I want the subscribers to be able to send ideas that no one is interested in to the cutting room floor, to make more for the stuff people want.

I'd like expansion of content from other books that was too lengthy for the printed product. For example, the Stronghold Builders Guide is said to have a system for building something from the ground up, but not for expanding, taking over something that's ben abandoned, and so on. So, a system like that which can make the print product more useful, or stand on it's own, would be welcome.

I might like playtesting options. The chance to test out rules before they're finalized. I probably wouldn't use it much, but I think others might like it.

This may sound weird, but I'd also like the type of content that will go away with 3.5e to be weighted toward the online service as much as possible. I don't want a bunch of obsolete books when 4e comes out. I'd rather have printed content that's still relevant, and online content that can be replaced. Books that support a mechanic that's gone are just shelfware at that point.

Greyhawk please.

Offer some benefits that are simply not possible in a printer format. Examples include the following two ideas.

Something to make NPC creation fast. I'm talking drag and drop fast. Type in stats. Drag and drop feats. Auto calculate bonuses. Fill in a character sheet/encounter sheet I can use. One format for encounters, and one fully detailed. Let me login and drag and drop modifiers onto the NPCs during play. Post an encounter cheat sheet that tells me which condictions apply to whom.

I want to plug in any two locations from a WotC setting, and have a menu option of travel methods/routes to select that are relevant, weather conditions to overlay on top of that, and have it auto calculate travel times, identify common stopping points like inns, camp sites, Portals/shortcuts, or note any conspicuous absence of safe places to rest. As GM, I'll pick the place my PCs decide to stay, and the service will display a few possible encounters related to that location that I might want to throw in. An inn might have a fight, and a link to rumors to overhear - ideally targeted at the area (that might pull in info from a column like the Eberron news dispatches). Bring things that are useful at that moment in the game right to my finger tips. And hopefully those things spark creativity for instant use in the game.

The service should have vast (and fast) search capabilities. I should be able to mark things as favorites, and tie them to 'buckets'. Maybe one campaign uses this article, and another this other one, so I create groups, and tag things as relevant for one of more (or all groups), so that when I go to those buckets, it only brings up the content I've put there. It might suggest new stuff that's similar as well.

Also, hurry up on the timeline. The longer this takes to become available, the more I lose interest, get distracted by other hobbies, and will find my gaming fix via other products. Not a dig. I'm just saying.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Apr 27, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Beg pardon? People have been screaming bloody murder, comparing WotC's actions to assault and even _rape_, and it's inappropriate of _me_ to have finally lost patience and object? I don't think so.




"People"? Ari, in fairness man - there were not too many comparing it to rape.  But it sure makes it easy to dismiss the other 99 out of 100 posts by pointing at a few over the top analogies. 

The were more than a few over the top posts on WotC's forums - and on RPG.net, and the murdered analogy came out on Paizo's forums a few times as well.

And yes - a few over the top analogies here too on ENworld.

But for the most part - there were hundreds of not-too-over-the-top-posts from some pretty angry people. And that attitude was present everywhere on the net where RPGs are discussed. This time, it wasn't particularly confined to a given discussions forum's  "board culture". It was literally across the board.

And its for that reason that I *do* think that Morrus over-reacted when he was told that there were game designers from WotC who would not post here to discuss it.  As if there were some fans besmirching the ENWorld brand - as distinct from any other forum. 

The moderation and implied threats came off as heavy-handed to me. *shrug*  Not saying the people who posted in the manners that they did were being terribly reasonable (they were not) but lifetime bans seemed a little twitchy, capricious and arbitrary to me. There it is.

It wasn't much different anywhere else. Par for the course.

So sure Ari - there are a lot of designers at WotC who would have had nothing to do with this given a chance and would like to say so - but they can't. For example, I have a hard time seeing Chris Perkins willingly kill off _Dungeon_ if it had been up to him. So  I'm willing to assume that it _wasn't_ up to him.

********

Anyways...I don't feel as if there were many reasons given in the QA  for doing what they did.  Instead, there was a whole lot of hype about DI that was short on specifics. I think WotC just doesn't care to explain it with specifics right now. And that's ok I guess - as, tbh, I'm not much in the mood for listening right now either.

Perhaps in the fall I will be open to hearing about it. It's not like I am uninterested in digital gaming. Far, far from it.  

But right now? Nah. This whole DI thing has been linked in my mind to the death of print magazines I've read since _The Strategic Review_. That's pretty much enough to ensure that I will react hostilely to DI as a twitch reaction for a very long time indeed. 

Which, when you think about it, is pretty silly - given that I literally do not think you will find anyone on ENWorld more KEEN on integrating more digital gaming into their pnp games  than me. And I mean that, I really do. I'm ordinarily the #1 fan of this crap.

And that's just bizarre. Because despite the fact I'm a huge propopnent of digital gaming, I can't shake the feeling I'm not WotC's target customer.  

Seeing as I have a few thousand D&D minis and 48 WotC hardcovers on my shelf, I have a hard time understanding why that would ever be so.  (Answer: I guess it's because of the several hundred magazines _also_ sitting on that shelf). 

If I wasn't the customer they wanted - why do they have so much of my money? If there's a better customer out there than me - well - damnit - there can't be many of them. This whole question of who is their target customer is a big one for me, and nothing much in that interview answered that question for me at all.  

I'm not too sure much of what I hear WotC say in the short to medium run ever will answer that question. It will take someone like a Ryan Dancey, explaining this decision many years later in hindsight that will probably be necessary to put all of this in context.

Anyways - enough of this crap. I think I'll go back to talking about 3.5 gaming. It is, after all, why we are here.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Apr 27, 2007)

rycanada said:
			
		

> I can't help but feel really disappointed in what I've just read.  I was hoping I'd see Wizards coming clean, revealing details, and so forth.  Honestly, I was hoping that we could get some straight talk, i.e.:
> 
> 1) Tell us the details.
> or
> 2) Admit Wizards doesn't have a sufficient plan for what it's doing.



Wizards in general has stuff plotted out months in advance, so I'd be surprised if there wasn't content already planned. What isn't finalized are some of the things people most want to know. (price, etc) 

I assume there will be better announcements down the line, but they do mention (as some of us figured) that the timing of the announcement was more to Paizo's need than their own. A month is a long time, and a lot of these issues could be decided within that time.

I think it'd be worse to give details that are later reversed.



> Sounds like the DI is behind schedule, nebulous, and could easily turn out to be a total disaster.  And for this, they cancelled my favorite magazines?  This is just dumb.  If the DI isn't up to snuff, all this anger they've created is going to get rekindled when they try to release it.  I am so bummed that I put as much money as I did into Wizards products in the last 2 years.  I feel like a sucker.




The odds of them rereleasing the magazines is not good, given they wanted to kill them off years ago. Perhaps they should have expanded on how Dragon failed their needs, but I think a lot of the flak in this thread is more due to expectations, WotC seemed to answer a good amount of stuff, but not everything. Perhaps more will be forthcoming if they think it's needed.


----------



## caudor (Apr 27, 2007)

Thanks for putting this together Morrus 

And thank you Scott, Chris, and Bill for answering 

I have just two requests:

The number one thing I'd like to see in the DI:  tools that will make the game easier to prepare and play.  A character creation tool (with access to sources we pay for) would be number one on my list.  With the number of source books published already, it would make it much easier to put characters together without flipping through 10 or more source books.

Number two would be a method, maybe a virtual tabletop, that would allow us to play with distant friends online.

Cover these two and I'll be extremely happy...and so will my group.

If for some reason a character generator cannot be done online via the DI, please consider working with a third party to provide one (like was previously worked out with CMP).

Thanks again for stopping by to answer questions; your time and efforts are greatly appreciated by this gamer


----------



## bento (Apr 27, 2007)

I think the DI still sounds promising.  I can understand Bill, Chris and Scott not wanting to show their hands because I'm sure there's still a lot of discussion going on with exactly how things will be delivered.

As for the interview, when you don't have a lot to say, you tend to stick with short simple messages.  I think this was what they delivered - sad about the print magazines going away, it was in the plans for a while with both parties, and they are working to try something new that we'll have to wait for.

I can wait on DI because there are always other companies coming out with new stuff all the time to keep me spending my money.


----------



## Matthan (Apr 27, 2007)

I want to chime in and leave my hopes for WOTC's upcoming digital offering.  For whatever it's worth, I'm not the core audience.  I haven't spent money on rpgs in more than a year and that's including the magazines.  I cannot find a group and I've always been a little intimidated by the amount of rules mastery that I feel that I would need to DM.  In spite of that, I love the idea of rpgs and continue to seek out a group online or otherwise.  

So my wishlist revolves around a program (virtual tabletop or otherwise) that makes it easier to play the game.  I don't want to have to look up the rules for turning or figure out which book a spell is in.  I want an interface that will do that for us either by hotlinking abilities in an online character sheet so that when you scroll over a character ability it displays the corresponding rule text or even better making the computer do the heavy lifting of calculating the dimensions and mechanics of the action or ability.  My main goal in playing or DMing is to be able to have a good time with my friends.  I want a program that will make that easier to achieve.  

While I'm wishing about that program, here's a few more requests:

An advanced toolset or option set to allow experienced DMs to tweak/add rules or at the very least to override and redesign the current scene to account for something that is not built in the rules
I would love for there to be online adventure modules that came with maps and art that synced with the program (say battlemaps for specific areas, portraits for certain npcs, and special art for monsters for the battlemaps)
I would like for there to be a robust campaign journal feature for both players and dms.  If I'm involved in two campaigns, I want to be able to access the program and click on the campaign that I'm interested in and see who the players are and (as a DM) check their character sheets and (as a player) look over my own.  I want it to remember my health and status and little things like that.  The more it can reasonably do, the better.
I do want what a lot of people have been talking about: a robust character designing program that also stores your character online.  I would love for that to be combined with an equally robust portrait designing program that allows you to tweak and customize your character's appearance and gear.  I understand that they may be a pipe dream, but if it makes it any easier, I would be satisfied if it was just a 2-D paper doll effect as long as it had a lot of options.
I want it to support VOIP and video through webcams so that I can mimic the tabletop as much as possible.  
I also want it to be usable for offline games as well.  Say a DM could run it off his labtop to help manage his responsibilities.

I'm not worried about the other content.  WOTC has a long history of making some amazing and inspiring work that really sparks creativity.  I want to see that continued online, but I have no reason to doubt that.  My big question mark is whether or not I would have the opportunity or need to use that content and without the program above, I don't find it likely.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Apr 27, 2007)

LeaderDesslok said:
			
		

> I don't think anyone is asking for anything close to a full and accurate feature list. What we are asking for is some kind of sample content, but none has been shown. If they've been working on this for a year, they cannot possibly still be in the scoping stages. If they are, then they are WAY behind schedule, considering that there are just 4 months left until the print mags are gone! I'd say that gives them until October 1 before another metaphorical mob armed with pitchforks and torches comes pounding at their door.




Well, they do have sample content. Pick up an issue of Dragon and Dungeon. That kind of content will be part of the DI. They've even said they'll use many of the same freelancers; the content will even sound the same.

So the Dragon and Dungeon portions of the DI will have the same kind of content, written by the same people, except you can access it anywhere in the world through a browser.

It's way too early to talk about pricing and delivery. That kind of thing is very hairy, and involves lawyers (lots of IP issues, there), banks (they handle the credit card transactions), retailers and distributors (for any non-credit card solution), micropayment experts (if they go the Xbox Live "points" route), and so on. 

Plus, frankly, they're likely still researching the scope and pricing--and ENWorld is providing some good data on what people want and how much they want to pay.

In other words: they're still collecting data. From us. Wouldn't you rather they do that, instead of saying something like "Here's the plan. It's set in stone. Don't bother commenting. Resistance is futile." 

-z

PS: Totally agree that they need to move swiftly, and finalize plans ASAP. Definitely before October. Ideally before Gencon and PAX.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Apr 27, 2007)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> And its for that reason that I *do* think that Morrus over-reacted when he was told that there were game designers from WotC who would not post here to discuss it.  As if there were some fans besmirching the ENWorld brand - as distinct from any other forum.



I don't think that's accurate, simply because I don't think there were official responses anywhere else either. But, the threads grew too quick and too heated for much good to come from an official response on Page 32, so there's that. In addition, though sporadic, there were WotC folks posting here or there, they just couldn't really say anything.



> The moderation and implied threats came off as heavy-handed to me. *shrug*  Not saying the people who posted in the manners that they did were being terribly reasonable (they were not) but lifetime bans seemed a little twitchy, capricious and arbitrary to me. There it is.



I don't think moderation went far enough, even after all the "no warnings" stuff posted, I still saw lots of warnings about personal attacks, even in this very thread...

If those warnings are needed, then I don't see how it's "heavy-handed".




> So sure Ari - there are a lot of designers at WotC who would have had nothing to do with this given a chance and would like to say so - but they can't. For example, I have a hard time seeing Chris Perkins willingly kill off _Dungeon_ if it had been up to him. So  I'm willing to assume that it _wasn't_ up to him.




To the contrary, I would not be surprised if many of the folks that decided Dragon & Dungeon had to die, were fans of the magazines and wished they'd last forever. They just decided it made more business sense to end them.



> Anyways...I don't feel as if there were many reasons given in the QA  for doing what they did.  Instead, there was a whole lot of hype about DI that was short on specifics. I think WotC just doesn't care to explain it with specifics right now. And that's ok I guess - as, tbh, I'm not much in the mood for listening right now either.




They don't say why, it's true. I assume the reason is "profit", in the end. The specifics are up for debate.

The way they talk about the lack of magazines not affecting future announcements though, it's obvious that to them, the magazines were no longer a significant inroad to the D&D audience.


----------



## Christoph the Magus (Apr 27, 2007)

Morrus said:
			
		

> 1) Specific previews will be coming before Dragon/Dungeon end - i.e. in the next few months.




I look at this and have a hard time considering it news.  It seems obvious that they'd preview their new product before the last issue of the old.  Almost as obvious as having something concrete to show when announcing said new product and cancellation...



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> 2) The decision was made more than a year ago.




This is new info, and makes me very nervous.  They had a year to prepare this announcement and this was the best they could come up with?!  We're in for a bumpy ride folks...



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> 3) Content has not yet been decided.




See above answer.



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> 4) Some Dragon/Dungeon features and columns will continue.




Again, seems like a no-brainer and not really news.



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> 5) Accounts will be user based; payment options without credit cards will be available; content will be "previewable" before purchase.




Maybe it's just because I'm a credit card slinging American, but not having a credit card to pay for your online purchases seems ludicrous.  As far as it being previewable, this is something that again seems like a no-brainer.  I'm not going to whip out said credit card without having an idea of what I'll be getting.



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> 6) Content will be released in frequent small bursts and then collected together.




Definite news.



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> 7) DRAGON and DUNGEON, as brands, will continue to exist; implication being that this doesn't _replace _ the magazines, it's the _evolution _ of them.





News, but I doubt that anyone thought they would dump titles with the name recognition of Dungeon and Dragon.



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> 8) Hardcopy compilation is a part of the plan.




Again, seems like a no-brainer.  Paizo had been doing this with their hardcovers already.



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> 9) Freelancers will still be used.




This is nice, but not something that I'd imagine the majority of Dungeon/Dragon readers was worried about.



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> 10) There is some suggestion that the Dragonlance issue isn't as clear cut as Margaret Weiss portrayed it.





News, but not really related to the issue at hand, IMO. 

Please understand that I appreciate your efforts to have these questions answered.  I'm just dissapointed with the information that was actually provided.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 27, 2007)

*Thanks everyone*

First Post.   

I just want to say thanks for all the responses so far. I am only at about 50 into the thread and so far but so far it's been a great read.  I appreciate the comments and suggestions.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 27, 2007)

Christoph the Magus said:
			
		

> I
> Maybe it's just because I'm a credit card slinging American, but not having a credit card to pay for your online purchases seems ludicrous.  As far as it being previewable, this is something that again seems like a no-brainer.  I'm not going to whip out said credit card without having an idea of what I'll be getting.




I don't think it's anything to do with your nationality, and a lot more to do with 14 year-old D&D players.  I was playing at 10 years old, and I sure as hell didn't have a credit card for another 8 years!


----------



## Vigilance (Apr 27, 2007)

Christoph the Magus said:
			
		

> Please understand that I appreciate your efforts to have these questions answered.  I'm just dissapointed with the information that was actually provided.




Being disappointed with the answer is not the same as the questions not being answered.

We know more than we did before. Their responses contained some real substance.


----------



## Christoph the Magus (Apr 27, 2007)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> Being disappointed with the answer is not the same as the questions not being answered.
> 
> We know more than we did before. Their responses contained some real substance.





We'll have to agree to disagree, because substance is the last thing that I would attribute to the responses.


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 27, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> How about at least some acknowledgment that the people who are _trying_ to answer our questions, to the best of their ability, have their hands tied by people higher up in the company? How about at least some acknowledgment that WotC isn't a faceless, monolothic entity, and that the _real people _who are being insulted and denegrated across the Internet are fellow gamers, fans of D&D, writers and developers, most of whom had no say in this decision at all?




To answer your question, I DID thank Chris, Bill and Scott for their answers, so there is acknowledgment. 

Further, I think there is a paradox in what you're saying from my point of view because INDEED, I do believe that Chris, Bill and Scott are trying to manage this situation despite having their hands tied, but I do also believe that this is BECAUSE of this type of situation that INDEED WotC is a perceived as faceless, monolithic entity.


----------



## Michael Silverbane (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> First Post.
> 
> I just want to say thanks for all the responses so far. I am only at about 50 into the thread and so far but so far it's been a great read.  I appreciate the comments and suggestions.




And thanks for coming into the lions' den, so to speak.  When folks in the industry come to fan-sites, it gives everyone (well, most everyone) a happy feeling to that we are appreciated and being listened to.

Later
silver


----------



## Owen K.C. Stephens (Apr 27, 2007)

When Wotc says it's going to include something or even suggest it's looking at including something in a product, and then doesn't include it, people get upset. Not "you killed my childhood" upset, but unhappy enough to talk about how WotC "lied" to them and suggest the product is not worthy buying.

I've seen this before. This is one of the big reasons we authors often don't say much about our books until they're in print. Even if the book is written, developed and edited, something may get cut at the last moment for all sorts of reasons. I've had whole sections cut from books days before it gets printed because layout didn't quite manage to squeeze it in, or another book turned out to be a better match for the information, or a license changed, or a late playtest report discovered a serious problem, or a piece of art failed to arrive in useable condition, or someone came up with a better idea at the last moment, or because it turned out to overlap or contradict information from another book in production I never got to see. So I try not to talk about what's going to be in any book until I at least have a preview.

Now, the DI isn't a book, but there are certainly lots and lots of reasons why anything in it might change in the _half-year_ between now and when it goes online. Even if WotC is waaay ahead of schedule developing it, they might change their mind about any one factor. So if they give you any solid details at all, they're forcing themselves to either stick with an idea even if they think of something better or risk further disappointment and anger by taking away something they mention then change.

Because this isn't a book, there just isn't as pressing a need for lead-time. You don't need to know if you're going to pay for this now. Retailers don't need to decide to carry it. WotC doesn't need to convince the book trade to pre-order a few thousand. In fact, WotC doesn't need to "print" them at all, so they have even more time to get it ready than Paizo does Pathfinder. Ultimately, WotC only needs to have everything in place 1 hour before their go-live deadline.

Paizo, however, _does_ need all that lead time. In fact, they needed it before THIS WEEK so they could present what they needed at the GAMA Trade Show. They need to be able to explain what Pathfinder is, and why a retailer might want it. They need to convince people to use leftover subscription money to buy Pathfinder, and find out how many the book trade is going to want. They need time to deal with customers who are losing something Paizo has been selling them. Paizo -has- to be ready starting now. From a practical standpoint, WotC just doesn't.

WotC extended the license to Paizo would be able to finish their existing adventure path. Obviously Paizo has known about this for some time, but no one is upset they waited until the last possible moment to tell us -- the week before GAMA. The fact Paizo had a lot of details isn't a sign of corporate incompetence or some hidden agenda on WotC's part. It's a sign WotC wanted to let Paizo do everything they needed to for this transition to go easily for Paizo, even though WotC isn't ready to reveal details yet. The chance of two companies having all their ducks in a row on two separate projects at the same time is really low. So WotC let the announcement go out now, when Paizo needed it.

If people want WotC to have not said anything until they were ready to give us details, they're likely wishing WotC had made life very difficult for Paizo. I, for one, am glad they didn't.


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> First Post.
> 
> I just want to say thanks for all the responses so far. I am only at about 50 into the thread and so far but so far it's been a great read.  I appreciate the comments and suggestions.





Thanks for the responses, Scott.

And please feel free to come by as soon as you *can* say more so that we can have another Q&A with you to get all the details.


----------



## Christoph the Magus (Apr 27, 2007)

Morrus said:
			
		

> I don't think it's anything to do with your nationality, and a lot more to do with 14 year-old D&D players.  I was playing at 10 years old, and I sure as hell didn't have a credit card for another 8 years!




That's a good point.  At 31, the net obviously wasn't around when I started playing at 14, but I remember bugging my mom enough that she got me a subscription to Dragon.  I'd imagine that the same things still happens now, not to mention prepaid debit cards are pretty common.


----------



## LeaderDesslok (Apr 27, 2007)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> Well, they do have sample content. Pick up an issue of Dragon and Dungeon. That kind of content will be part of the DI. They've even said they'll use many of the same freelancers; the content will even sound the same.
> 
> So the Dragon and Dungeon portions of the DI will have the same kind of content, written by the same people, except you can access it anywhere in the world through a browser.



Yes, but there's a lot of content in those magazines. They didn't pin down anything that would actually cross over. A nit-pick perhaps, but it still leaves one wondering what will stay and what will be cut.



> It's way too early to talk about pricing and delivery. That kind of thing is very hairy, and involves lawyers (lots of IP issues, there), banks (they handle the credit card transactions), retailers and distributors (for any non-credit card solution), micropayment experts (if they go the Xbox Live "points" route), and so on.



I agree completely. In fact, I noted that myself in an earlier post in this thread. Pricing will most likely be one of the last things to be finalized.



> In other words: they're still collecting data. From us. Wouldn't you rather they do that, instead of saying something like "Here's the plan. It's set in stone. Don't bother commenting. Resistance is futile."



I can't disagree with you; in fact, I'm really happy the are reaching out to us for ideas and suggestions. That being said, they definitely have a core or skeletal content plan laid out, but haven't really shared anything except that the content will be like the content you already find in the print mags. But if it's like the print mags, I don't see any added value in eliminating print and going fully digital. At least tease us with some of the flashier new stuff they have in mind.



> PS: Totally agree that they need to move swiftly, and finalize plans ASAP. Definitely before October. Ideally before Gencon and PAX.



I'd like to see WotC and Paizo get together and do an event of some sort at GenCon to clebrate the evolution of the brands. Love it or hate it, something for the readers and gamers would go a long way. And who can pass up free stuff, food and/or booze?


----------



## Morrus (Apr 27, 2007)

Christoph the Magus said:
			
		

> That's a good point.  At 31, the net obviously wasn't around when I started playing at 14, but I remember bugging my mom enough that she got me a subscription to Dragon.  I'd imagine that the same things still happens now, not to mention prepaid debit cards are pretty common.




Well, for me, I had to pay for it myself out of the earnings from my paper round.


----------



## el_skootro (Apr 27, 2007)

Riley said:
			
		

> If you ever get your message board's search function working, I'll be happy to come over to your place to find what, if anything, you've posted.




Ain't that the truth? Digital Iniative from people who can't even get a search function working? 

Honestly fellas, I want to buy what you are selling, but please meet me halfway, alright?


----------



## caudor (Apr 27, 2007)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I cannot possibly stress how IMPORTANT it is to have Mac and PC compatibility. If anything, please make sure this works on my Mac.




I'll second that.  Please don't forget us Mac users.


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> First Post.
> 
> I just want to say thanks for all the responses so far. I am only at about 50 into the thread and so far but so far it's been a great read.  I appreciate the comments and suggestions.




Thanks Scott for showing up. Welcome to ENWorld.


----------



## r_jk (Apr 27, 2007)

Here is a quote from the interview,

"Our creative team features the top talent in the industry, including Rich Baker, Logan Bonner, Bart Carroll, Michele Carter, Jennifer Clarke Wilkes, Andy Collins, Bruce Cordell, Rob Heinsoo, Gwen Kestrel, Mike Mearls, Kim Mohan, Dave Noonan, Steve Schubert, Matt Sernett, Chris Sims, Chris Thomasson, Rodney Thompson, Rob Watkins, Steve Winter, and James Wyatt."

Some of these people I recognize, but most I don't.  I have purchased a good amount of WotC D&D products since the release of 3E, none of which left me overly impressed.  I will say, that in my opinion, for the money, nothing before or since has held a candle to late '90's Forgotten Realms products written by Dale Donovan and Steven Schend.  It seems to me that with 3E and beyond, wizards got rid of or had good writers leave when the format of their products changed to the less fluff material to make way for the crunchy pre-generated stuff.  With new writers cropping up more frequently, (which may or may effect product quality) and poor business decisions, is it quite possible that the D&D brand will continue to decline?  I think so.  Printed products have become shorter and more expensive with the amount of usable material in even shorter supply.  So no matter what format their content takes, if it isn't quality, what difference does it make.  

Does anyone know what happened to Dale Donovan and Steven Schend?


----------



## Khairn (Apr 27, 2007)

Let's see what we got ....

Were you surprised at all the negative reaction ? ... Nope, we knew it was coming.  We've been planning for this moment for over a year.

Any idea on the Payment Plan? ... Nope, still working on it

What can you tell us about Content? ... Nothing much, what would you like us to do?

What about support for other WotC RPG's ... Don't really know, what would you like us to do?

When will the online content start? ... After the magazines end.

Will you need freelancers ... Sure!

Will I be able to access info after my subscription runs out? .... Don't know

What's up with Paizo ... We're all good budies

What's up with Dragonlance ... Really cant say



So after all the hoop'la over the last week, the answers we've got are ...

Its coming after the magazines die in September, we'll need folks to write it and we all like Paizo.

With over a year of prep time, that's what they have to give us now that the news came out.

WOW

I mean ... double WOW.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 27, 2007)

*Thanks to Russ as well*

I also want to thank Russ for combining all those questions from the thread into categories, placing them into a single document, and taking the time to work with us.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Apr 27, 2007)

r_jk said:
			
		

> Does anyone know what happened to Dale Donovan and Steven Schend?




Not sure on Donavan. I think he was involved in the Book of Erotic Fantasy wasn't he? (Not something to brandish too loudly...) Oh. I thin he also worked on Complete Warrior as well as one of his most recent titles.

Schend was doing stuff at Green Ronin on M&M last I heard. Might still be?


----------



## Khairn (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> I also want to thank Russ for combining all those questions from the thread into categories, placing them into a single document, and taking the time to work with us.




Absolutely.  Thanks Russ for all the hard work.  Some of us have been really upset over the past week and you've handled it well.


----------



## MerricB (Apr 27, 2007)

r_jk said:
			
		

> "Our creative team features the top talent in the industry, including Rich Baker, Logan Bonner, Bart Carroll, Michele Carter, Jennifer Clarke Wilkes, Andy Collins, Bruce Cordell, Rob Heinsoo, Gwen Kestrel, Mike Mearls, Kim Mohan, Dave Noonan, Steve Schubert, Matt Sernett, Chris Sims, Chris Thomasson, Rodney Thompson, Rob Watkins, Steve Winter, and James Wyatt."




I don't recognise Logan Bonner. All the rest are names I'm familiar with. I can't tell you what every one of them does, but there are some really good names in there.

As a note, Rich Baker, Andy Collins, Rob Heinsoo, Mike Mearls, Steve Schubert and Rob Watkins tend to have more of an internet presence. Well, enough for me to know they're great people through that. (Some of the others may be posting, but they don't cross my path much).

I really miss Mike Donais and Rob Heinsoo's posts from the early days of DDM.

It's a long line-up of names, though. Not many gaming companies have so many people involved in R&D.

Cheers!


----------



## MerricB (Apr 27, 2007)

OStephens said:
			
		

> When Wotc says it's going to include something or even suggest it's looking at including something in a product, and then doesn't include it, people get upset. Not "you killed my childhood" upset, but unhappy enough to talk about how WotC "lied" to them and suggest the product is not worthy buying.
> 
> ...
> 
> If people want WotC to have not said anything until they were ready to give us details, they're likely wishing WotC had made life very difficult for Paizo. I, for one, am glad they didn't.




Well said, Owen. Very, very true.

*points at the product that became e-Tools*

It's very dangerous to announce something too soon. 

Cheers!


----------



## MerricB (Apr 27, 2007)

My wishlist:

* A way to subscribe that doesn't involve a credit card.
* If subscription *does* need a credit card, being able to do so as a bulk deposit, rather than a "by month" charge.

Apart from that, I'm going to wait and see. More articles from R&D on what goes into to design and development would be nice, though.

Cheers!


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 27, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I don't recognise Logan Bonner.





Logan is a newer member ofthe R&D team. He has worked on a few of the recent releases including the tables in the back of Magic Item Compendium


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 27, 2007)

Assuming WotC really is reading this to find out what we want from the Digital Initiative, here's what I'd like to see.

Have it be cheap. Seriously, an issue of _Dragon_ and _Dungeon_ each cost about $12 newsstand price, and less to subscribers. For something that won't be a physical copy, I'm expecting something no more expensive than that, and less would make me more likely to subscribe.

Have it as (or at least give us the option of) downloadable PDFs. Also, please go light on the DRM. Watermarking is something I can live with, but anything heavier than that is something of a hassle. Also, pay-only areas of a website suck, especially if there's no option to download the page as a nice, clean PDF.

Please put a lot in whatever hard copy compilations you make. I'm fine with buying those separately, but less is not more where those are concerned.


----------



## MerricB (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Logan is a newer member ofthe R&D team. He has worked on a few of the recent releases including the tables in the back of Magic Item Compendium




Thanks, Scott!

Given I've been using those tables a lot recently, and I find them really useful, I think he's off to a great start! 

Cheers!


----------



## DItheringFool (Apr 27, 2007)

Thank you Morrus.

That did nothing to make me feel better.

What WotC doesn't get is that I will not tolerate getting screwed so they can make more money.

I paid $35 for Demonweb Pits because (i) Wolfgang wrote it and it's dang good, and (ii) unless I get robbed or my house burns down I have it in my possession.

I utterly refuse to pay $X dollars for their bright idea (even if Wolfgang writes in it) because I do not trust that they have my interests in mind.

It's been a week and I'm still unreasonably upset...but I'm done with them and their "I know better" attitude.


----------



## TwinBahamut (Apr 27, 2007)

Well, to all WotC people reading this (and Morrus), thank you for this interview. I, at least, found it to be interesting and informative.

My suggestions for the Digital Initiative:

I know I am going against what other people are sking about on this one, but PDFs are the last thing I want to see for this Digital Initiative. I honestly don't care if I can't download it or "own" it (I used to play MMORPGs, I'm used to that kind of thing), my main concern is how readable and useable it is. Normal website-style content is a lot more functional and comfortable to read than PDFs have ever been. So, even a simple website-style interface for reading through articles would be good.

I would prefer to have the content as all-or-nothing. I don't like the idea of "issues" for web content, and would prefer a constantly updated mass of information. Certainly, having access to all previous content from before I subscribe would be essential.

I never bought a single issue of Dragon or Dungeon, so I don't particularly care much if content from those publications continue as-is into the Digital Initiative, but I would appreciate more tips on running non-traditional campaigns (that is actually something I could use a whole sourcebook on, but web articles might be more efficient).

My biggest request is for a real solid set of tools for playing D&D across the internet with friends. I am about to graduate from college right now, and I am facing the real possibility of having to leave an ongoing campaign (my first long D&D campaign) in the middle of a major plot arc, with years left to go before the campaign'c conclusion. If WotC can put out a product to make playing across the internet easier, it would help me out a lot.

And this may be a strange request, but I would also like to possibly see a new campaign setting soon. I never got into the Forgotten Realms, and I am already in the midst of a long Eberron campaign and am seeing less need for more books in that setting, so I would appreciate something new.

I think that about covers it... Oh... I also want to say that I don't think WotC is as mistaken in this move as so many people are making them out to be. I really think this is a good idea... as long as the DI is a good product.

Edit: I forgot... Please make sure I can use this content while using the Opera browser on my Mac.


----------



## Sholari (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> First Post.
> 
> I just want to say thanks for all the responses so far. I am only at about 50 into the thread and so far but so far it's been a great read.  I appreciate the comments and suggestions.




Scott.  A couple days I was very irate about the Dungeon/Dragon cancellation.  I said some things that were clearly below the belt, but should have realized that these were real people I was talking about and not some corporate behemoth.  I want to apologize to you and any other WOTC staffers I offended.  I'm sure you guys are very passionate and care a great deal about what you do. My attitude about the decision weekend was pretty immature and not very constructive.

I also wanted to say thanks for answering people's questions, as I'm sure it will pay real dividends in the long run.  Although I still have a bit of adjusting to do to the decision, I'll keep an open mind as to DI.


----------



## caudor (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> I also want to thank Russ for combining all those questions from the thread into categories, placing them into a single document, and taking the time to work with us.




Thanks again for dropping by   Please pass along a thanks to Bill and Chris too.  I appreciate, as many of us do, the opportunity to be heard by WotC.

P.S.  Oh, please remember two words regarding the DI -- character generator


----------



## Angel Tarragon (Apr 27, 2007)

I'd still like to know how the Digital Initiative is going to affect gamers w/o internet access.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Apr 27, 2007)

This interview was very worthwhile.

I'm a bit disappointed that the question wasn't asked, nor any insight given, about platform neutrality (OS/browser). So what I would like to see is that nothing is offered in the Digital Initiative that requires one OS to function or the use of one web browser to the exclusion of others. This would basically mean that whatever is done works equally on MacOS/Windows/Unix and uses industry standards if viewed in the web browser.


----------



## KB9JMQ (Apr 27, 2007)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> Anyways - enough of this crap. I think I'll go back to talking about 3.5 gaming. It is, after all, why we are here.




Besides seeing Scott Rouse here in this thread, this quote is the most important thing on this board today. At least to me.

I agree. Back to PLAYING the game.


----------



## Twowolves (Apr 27, 2007)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Sure, if it was just the "one idiot." But while the rape comparison only happened once (that I saw), several people agreed, and the "assault" comparison was more common. Even moving beyond that, the tone across every RPG forum I've seen in the last week, hasn't just been _angry_, which is perfectly understandable, but raving and hostile.
> 
> Anyone who knows me in person, and many who know me online, know full well that I don't have much of a temper, and that I try to be reasonable. But frankly, the whole thing has gotten to be way too much. I'm not reacting to one or two posters, but to the entire gestalt of the past week. As I said, I want answers as much as anyone, but I have to wonder if we'd have gotten more of them, or gotten them sooner, if the forums hadn't become such a zoo.




Wait a minute. 

1) They said they had planned to end the print version of both magazines as far back as a year ago;

2) They also said they expected the decision to upset fans;

3) You say you wonder if they would have provided more answers sooner, *IF * these forums hadn't become a zoo?

Does it not logically seem that they knew, well in advance, what kind of reaction this decision would evoke, but they waited a week to reply because _teh intrawebz _ became a zoo? Either they had advance warning, or they were caught off guard and shied away. Or, more likely in my opinion, they felt it was best to let the diehard fans twist in the wind while the dust settled before granting an interview that reads more like a senate hearing than a consolation or pep talk. You also talk about how WotC is not a monolithic entity, but instead composed of Real People (tm), and then turn around and say those same Real People have their hands tied by.... the Monolithic Entity of the Men Upstairs. Uh huh. I see.   


I understand that Paizo got an extension of the license to finish the AP, and that's great. I also understand that they had to announce when they did due to GAMA. Everything's kosher so far. But for WotC to have had this in the works for over a year, to know it was going to royally cheeze off HUGE swaths of their customer base, and NOT have; a) a prepared statement to coincide with Paizo's (beyond the press release, cold as ice blurb typical of a corporate merger); b) a dedicated person or persons posting on the top 3-5 message boards, staying in touch with fans and calming the storm before it became a hurricane; and c) some kind of preview or solid answers about the upcoming DI, just doesn't wash. They saw this trainwreck coming down the tracks for miles, and then show up a week late with a box of band-aids. 

Needless to say, this does NOT bode well for the DI, IMO.

A lot of people overreacted, yes. Not just on these boards, but universally across the entire community. But a lot more people reacted in a completely justified  manner. The loss of these magazines DOES hurt, some a lot more than others. No one can point at another person and say "your feelings are disingenuous" because we don't really know how they feel deep inside. I personally have hundreds of issues of these magazines, bought almost entirely at the FLGS, at a higher price than I could have paid with a subscription, just to help support the community. I have been reading them continually for over 20 years. Who has the right to tell me that the loss I feel inside is unjustified? Who? No one, that's who. 

I hope one and all will excuse me, but I don't feel excited about having WotC tell me "trust us, you'll love it". WotC, and TSR before them, lost that level of trust with Spellfire, Dragon Dice, shoving Polyhedron down our (the Dungeon readers') throats, and now, the cancellation of Dragon and Dungeon magazines.


----------



## Tzeentch (Apr 27, 2007)

The interview seemed a bit uh ... "content lite" but it does answer _some_ of the questions that have been posed (the low hanging fruit at least). I would suspect that they have material for a rollout of whatever it is, and the comments about "what would you like to see" is a reasonable attempt to try to turn negativity into more constructive feedback. I'm just glad they are not going to completely sit back and let this mistrust seep into the fandom so deep that it screws up the entire player network.

WotC almost certainly has content for their DI ready now or in production (really, it could even just be the long-missing errata and many would be jumping for joy) and are probably looking to tailor it as best they can via internet feedback, monitoring the traffic on their website articles, and checking what worked in Dragon/Dungeon. I mean seriously, if they can get their house staff to write articles praising the company direction they can break out the whips to generate material for the house organ as well ("You! Yes, you behind the copy of Synibarr! Get that material cut from Races of Eberron in printable form by 7 am! Stand STILL laddie!" <whipcrack>)

*What I Want to See*
* _Little DRM._ Really, don't bother. If you allow printing of the material all DRM will do is piss off the customers and drive a LOT of traffic to bookwarez. If you don't allow printing ... well good luck with that ... and it still won't prevent the books from getting released. Laugh in the face of anyone claiming otherwise.
* _Campaign Classics._ Not everyone cares, or even likes, the "official" takes on old material that has slowly come out. I'd love to see old stuff revisited independently, even the same stuff with different viewpoints.
* _Buy-in Sweeteners._ Have an old D&D PDF available for free each month to subscribers (ideally, newer scans of the old books since many of the current PDFs are almost unreadable). Heck, if you theme monthly content have it tie-in somehow and get a writer to create some conversions to the new rules versions.
* _DDM Content._ A regular article on using DDM in your RPG campaign - different characters or creatures that can use the existing minis (or require only minor kitbashing) would be cool. For example, a series of NPCs or monsters of various CR/campaign type using X figure. You can start by releasing FIXED versions of the DDM RPG stat cards (I'd volunteer to work on this since stat errors annoy me almost as much as John Cooper). Heck, even some Dreamblade action or the Axis and Allies vehicles in d20 Modern 
* _Magic of the Month._ Get some brand synergy going. Have a Magic: The Gathering card each weak translated into D&D/d20 terms. Thrulls and Sera Angels oh my!
* _Content Contests._ If you guys still own the old Dragon/Dungeon articles have some small contests (swag or PDF prizes or something) for putting new spins on the old material. If you are not giving access to old issues for basic subscription then release the article as content along with the contest guidelines. Things like that ancient Dragon article for growing warriors from dragon teeth - but maybe with a Dragonlance spin or a version where you grow things from troll teeth. Mainly thinking this would be a way to empower readership to contribute and maybe grow a new freelancer.
* _Campaign Cartography._ As a GIS major in college, I'd personally love to see the staff cartographers tips and tricks to make good looking maps and such. Stuff like tips on creating good item libraries, basic cartographic principles for noobs, and how the artists manage their Photoshop/Illustrator/whatever layers.


----------



## Sammael (Apr 27, 2007)

@Scott: 

I can see that my own question was not answered (and I am not sure if it was sent along with the others, or if Russ made a selection of questions prior to sending them). Whatever the case, I have a bit of friendly advice (as an IT industry professional): your current website and message board issues are making WotC look very, very bad. I frequent at least 5 gaming-related message boards, and threads/posts regarding your website availability, errors, bugs, and so on, appear on each and every one of them with what you would probably consider disturbing frequency. Now, I know that you *must* have a whole new infrastructure planned for the DI, but this doesn't mean that the problems with your current infrastructure won't turn people off from the DI because of your track record.

My suggestion is to migrate the current website to your new infrastructure "as is" as soon as possible, and to allocate additional resources (maybe just 4-5 additional employee/hours per day) to fixing it. Also, you need to have a webmaster/web developer available outside your usual business hours, which is (from what I can tell, and from what I've heard) currently not the case. For instance, there have been many instances of web site problems that occur on Friday night when an article goes live according to the planned schedule, but they generally don't get fixed until Monday. This is not acceptable now, and it sure won't be acceptable when DI goes live and people start paying for content.


----------



## sakkara (Apr 27, 2007)

I appreciated hearing information from WOTC, but think they were still pretty vague on most of the details, and at this stage (announcement of cancellation made, and ending issues only a few months away), I would expect to be hearing a bit more about the DI than we are.

In terms of what I am looking for:
* Portability & Price - Price should be directly tied to portability.  If all I can do is read it (ie., can't save it, can't print it, etc.), I would only be willing to pay a very small amount ($5/mo.).  That amount increases with the more control I have with the information I am paying for.  Little DRM on PDF / downloadable content, then some more ($10-20/mo, depending on what it becomes).

* No Ads - If you are getting me to pay a subscription for the content, I don't want the landscape littered with spinning twirling blinking ads.  Web content is supported by either subsciption or ads, but not both.  So if you're making me pay for it -- no ads!

* Content - I would like to see similar content that filled the pages of Dungeon and Dragon.  Articles, spells, PrCs, feats, class focuses, monster ecologies, etc., etc.  I'd like to see artwork mixed in.  Having the materials collected, into bundles either of WOTCs choosing or my own is interesting.  A character generator (including spells) that has access to all the WOTC material (books/dragons/web enhancements) would be cool or encounter & treasure generators.  Material that supports existing campaign settings, as well as the unsupported ones (Planescape, Dark Sun, et al).

* Don't care about -- I don't care at all for migration of my actual game to the web.  Anything having to do with character libraries, virtual table tops, chat etc., don't interest me in the least.  Having some tools there for the DM is fine, but my game is rooted in pen & paper.


Sakkara


----------



## Khairn (Apr 27, 2007)

Twowolves said:
			
		

> Wait a minute.
> 
> 1) They said they had planned to end the print version of both magazines as far back as a year ago;
> 
> ...




Agree completely.  With a full year to prepare I have to say I'm a bit underwhelmed.

Oh well, I guess after 25 years of purchases and despite the 3 different D&D groups I'm currently GMing, I don't fit into their new & well defined business model

Best of luck with the DI !


----------



## Razz (Apr 27, 2007)

Oh, cool, *Scott Rouse* is here!

I just want to say I am dissapointed, like almost everyone else, that Dragon and Dungeon are gone but I am very willing to see what you have in store for this Digital Initiative. I also want to thank you for being here and for answering those questions for Morrus and all of us here.

Since you say you're listening to suggestions, I'll add my thoughts in:

---I definitely would like the content to be equal to Dragon/Dungeon. Since you guys said it will and MORE, I am eagerly awaiting to see the results

---I am glad to hear you guys are still taking freelancers for this DI

---I would like to see the "big hits" make it into DI. Particularly *Demonomicon*, *Class Acts*, *Campaign Classics*, and *Creature Catalog*

---I'd like to see campaign content for *Forgotten Realms* and *Eberron*

---I would like to know that I get to keep whatever content I've paid for with my subscription

---I would like to see material updated from old settings like *Kara-Tur*, *Maztica*, *Dark Sun*, *Ravenloft*, *Planescape*, and others

---I really would like to see more game material for non-core products such as *Incarnum*, the Complete Book Classes (and the Archivist, Dread Necromancer, Factotum, and the classes in PHB2), *Psionics*, *Epic* (I really missed "Epic Insights" on your website), *Tome of Magic*, *Tome of Battle*, and others (such as vile and exalted spells from *Book of Vile Darkness* and *Book of Exalted Deeds* or Reserve feats from _*Complete Arcane*_, and definitely more _*Oriental Adventures*_ material that's not Rokugan-related)

---Work with *Paizo* and get out a *Dragon Compendium Volume 2*  

Other than that, I am patiently waiting until the final issues of Dragon and Dungeon are released and hoping by then you guys will start the Digital Initiative soon afterwards.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Apr 27, 2007)

Twowolves said:
			
		

> No one can point at another person and say "your feelings are disingenuous" because we don't really know how they feel deep inside.



I wouldn't say that, but I would say that , in my opinion, 90% of the invective wouldn't have been typed if people were not hidden behind the veil of anonymity and pseudonymity. Attach one's name to one's words and it is amazing how much craziness gets toned down... usually.   


			
				Twowolves said:
			
		

> WotC, and TSR before them, lost that level of trust with Spellfire, Dragon Dice, shoving Polyhedron down our (the Dungeon readers') throats, ... .



Uh, I'm pretty sure it was Paizo that did that. The way I'm remembering it was that it happened after Periodicals was spun off... so it would be a Paizo decision to have done that. But more seriously, holding a grudge over Spellfire and Dragon Dice?


----------



## Razz (Apr 27, 2007)

Is that Spellfire as in the ability in the Forgotten Realms setting that utilizes raw magic, or is that Spellfire as in some form of gaming material I haven't heard of...?


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Apr 27, 2007)

Razz said:
			
		

> Is that Spellfire as in the ability in the Forgotten Realms setting that utilizes raw magic, or is that Spellfire as in some form of gaming material I haven't heard of...?



I'm guessing he's referring to the short-lived tradable card game competitor to Magic: The Gathering that TSR created.


----------



## rironin (Apr 27, 2007)

While I have to echo a bit of concern over the fact that I didn't learn too much from that interview, in the words of someone pretending to be Sean Connery, "I'll play your game you rogue!"

Here is what I would like to see from a DI:

*Leverage the Online Format -* Wikify everything - classes, prestige classes, monsters, stats, abilities, etc, all linked in to take away any semblance of virtual page-turning. I'm sure you've already thought of this, and even though it's simple, it's probably one of the greatest advantages the online content can provide over a book.
*Experiment with Adventure Formats -* Seems to me, one of the toughest things about giving a DM an adventure (especially one that's non-linear or has many potential branches) is formatting it into a magazine or booklet in a way that makes sense. Web page navigation could probably provide a whole new format that makes getting the right information into the DM's hands much easier. Of course, this would only benefit those of us who DM with a computer nearby.
*Dice Rolling & Table Generation -*As new content is added to a subscriber's vault of articles and resources, seamlessly incorporate this new content into tables - treasures, locations, etc. With treasure especially, I could enjoy being able to instantly roll up a treasure generated from a list of everything in the SRD, combined with all the new items and loot that I've been exposed to with my DI subscription. Nearly any bit of data in the DI content could be massaged and collated this way without any effort on the subscriber's part, if the infrastructure is in place.
That's about it really. Others have expressed disinterest in the bells & whistles of the internet age, but I don't see any point to a DI unless you play those bells & whistles to the hilt.

As others have mentioned, I can't imagine myself being able to accept content that is rented or difficult to manage outside of the website's confines. I know that people who exploit free access to data give you guys headaches, but I can't part with my money unless the content becomes my own. If you offer tools for generating creatures, characters, etc, I'm fine with only accessing the tool if I'm paying for the content - so long as I can download and keep the things I make with those tools, to use and enjoy long after my subscription has ended.


----------



## the Lorax (Apr 27, 2007)

Ok, first - Morrus.  Thanks for whipping the cries of an angry mob into something coherent.  Most appreciated.

Second, Scott Rouse, Chris Perkins & Bill Slavicsek.  Thank you for taking time out to answer some of the concerns of the online community.  I'm sure that many other will bring up that they would've liked to have recieved SOMETHING about the new DI - even if there was only links to concept sketchs of the opening page or some such.  Clearly regular previews of D&D minis keeps people excited and interested in the miniatures side of things.  Some eye candy of some sort would be a nice way to introduce the DI.  I applaud your efforts to allow Paizo to utilize this time and not distract from the final issues of Dragon and Dungeon nor distract from the announcement of the Pathfinder series.

I'd like to comment on this - 


			
				Chris said:
			
		

> We have a lot of ideas that we’re happy with, but let me turn the question around. What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that? If this new incarnation of the magazines could encompass anything you could want, what would that be?




Hope for, exciting and useful?  Well off the top of my head -

Completely searchable

Include a variety of online tools to speed play or reduce preparation workload

Usable as I see fit - any type of DRM quickly becomes a deal breaker

Similar or better quality content to what Dungeon and Dragon have been providing - just more of it

Adventures that update and scale automaticly based upon my input of character level

Perpetual access to material I've already paid for

Access to content even when not online

Reviews of gaming related products

Hyperlinks galore

Digital versions of maps - including maps without location keys - that can be printed and used as a map on my table

Direct links to message board topics - such as how individual posters used the content

Active/live editing - if there are errors in the content, they should be corrected - and the corrected version should be what is available


How much content have I been able to use?  
That's hard to say.  Some issues of Dungon have had zero adventures I have wanted to use.  Some I've used every one, heck I have a couple that I've used as backdrop for my campaign - as in "News from the other side of the kingdom - Druids attacked and overran a border fort"
Dragon is even harder to measure.  Reading new ideas, even those I dont use, keeps me excited about this hobby.  Often a small portion of an article will spark some idea of my own.

How much work did you have to do to accomplish that?
Tools that allow easy modification to an adventure would be amazing.  If I dont want an Illithid in an adventure because they dont exisist in my game, something that lets me easily swap it out in whatever format I bring to my table (print or on screen) would be amazing.


----------



## GAAAHHH (Apr 27, 2007)

Thanks for the interview.  This clears up some of my questions and I'm not quite as upset as I was before.  I will continue to buy Wizards of the Coast products, and I no longer wish ill health on anyone over this.  I doubt i'll pay for the DI, but who knows?  I may change my mind if I like the coming previews.


----------



## Shade (Apr 27, 2007)

What I'd most like to see:


The continued support of "dead" campaign settings.  The Campaign Classics issues were always among my favorites (and apparently were top sellers)
The continuation of the Demonomicon articles...but only if James Jacobs writes them (unless he chooses to pass the torch)
The continued mix of new monsters and updated monsters from past editions.  MMIII had only a small handful of monsters from past editions, and MMIV had none.  There are still a great number of classic creatures out there that can easily go toe-to-toe with many of the new ones presented in the books listed earlier (quickling anyone?)
The retention of the current talent pool of the magazines.  I hope you'll keep accepting the bulk of the articles from the slush pile, rather than doling out assignments to in-house staff.  There's plenty of cross-pollination now between WotC and Paizo contributers, but I'd hate to lose some of the up-and-comers because they didn't go through the WotC mailroom.  I think the fierce competition is a large reason both magazines have been in a golden age lately.
Keep working in all the wonderful Easter Eggs, updating villains and locales from D&D's rich past, and so on.  Nostalgia is a powerful force for us veteran gamers, and really no detriment to new gamers who may never even realize what they're seeing has come before.

What I don't want to see (and will factor into what I'm willing to pay):

Software to do the "heavy lifting".   I have no interest in character generators, monster generators, online tabletops, etc.   I understand the desire for these by some folks, but I'd rather see it as a separate service so those of us who just want to keep subscribing to what we've got now in the magazines don't have to pay for additional unwanted content.
Greater focus on Eberron and Forgotten Realms.  One of the main reasons I subscribed to Dungeon after years of picking and choosing issues was the strong focus on the core/generic setting.  I think the current ratio of support for these settings in Dragon and Dungeon are about as much as I'd tolerate.
More "how to" articles on playing the game.  As a veteran gamer, I have no use for these articles.  I appreciate that folks new to the game need some help, but that's probably best served in the free portion of your web content (as it is now).  Dragon and Dungeon haven't focused much on entry gamers, other than the occasional Class Acts with handy reference sheets.

Basically, I'd like to keep subscribing to Dragon and Dungeon with the content they've been providing for the past few years.  If I have to get them online, then so be it.  But much loss of any of that content to make room for interactive aids or how-to articles will probably send my gaming dollar elsewhere.

Thanks for asking, and listening.


----------



## Lalato (Apr 27, 2007)

I would love to see a Print on Demand option to go along with the Online content.  So if I ever want to add some of the content to my personal collection, I can order a POD book with just the stuff I want in it.  That would solve some of the issues of portability and "ownership" for me.

--sam


----------



## caudor (Apr 27, 2007)

Shade said:
			
		

> [*]Software to do the "heavy lifting".   I have no interest in character generators, monster generators, online tabletops, etc.   I understand the desire for these by some folks, but I'd rather see it as a separate service so those of us who just want to keep subscribing to what we've got now in the magazines don't have to pay for additional unwanted content.
> 
> Basically, I'd like to keep subscribing to Dragon and Dungeon with the content they've been providing for the past few years.  If I have to get them online, then so be it.  But much loss of any of that content to make room for interactive aids or how-to articles will probably send my gaming dollar elsewhere.
> 
> Thanks for asking, and listening.




Good point.  As one of the folks who wants to see a character generator, virtual tabletop, etc., I'd be willing to pay a little extra over the basic subscriber to get those tools.  Perhaps a compromise would work:  adjust the cost of entry based on levels of interest.  Something like a silver vs gold subscription option.


----------



## lkj (Apr 27, 2007)

Thanks for putting the interview together, Morrus. And thanks for the responses from Wizards folks (and Scott's presence in this thread). An interesting read. I'm mostly a lurker, but having you folks post keeps me reading. And, from time to time, gets me to check out products I wouldn't have otherwise. At any rate . . .

 Certainly, in and of itself, the interview isn't enough information to decide whether DI will be an adequate replacement for Dungeon and Dragon for me (emphasis on the 'for me'). But, in my opinion, of course it wasn't. I'll decide whether the DI is worth my dollar as they reveal info over the coming months. I'll decide, as a matter of idle curiousity, whether I think it was a good move to replace the mags or not after the DI has been in action for awhile. I suppose it's fine to speculate about whether they are totally unprepared or not or whether the DI will suck or not based on completely inadequate information (since we really have no idea what they have already planned or how far along it is-- and yes, I know it's cuz they didn't and probably can't say). I guess it can also be fun to argue about whether or not they blew a PR opportunity. It's an internet message board after all. But, hey, not really my bag. In the end, the proof will be in the pudding. I hope it's good pudding. 

My one thought/concern  (at this stage) has to do with the character generator. I'm a busy fellow these days. I don't have the time to prepare that I used to. I use Etools (and at times PCGen) heavily to do my prep. I'm really not jazzed about a character generator that is only accessible online. I too often find myself wanting to do a bit of D&D prep in odd moments where I don't have internet access. Or at least where I don't have to worry about accessing some site. I also like to tweak things a bit to fit particular house rules and such. I'm sure it's possible, but I find it hard to believe that an online-only generator will allow that sort of customizability. 

In truth, despite the setbacks, I'm really hoping the Codemonkey folks pull off the software they've been working on for so long. What they describe would serve a great deal of my needs-- from customizable npc generation to campaign management to world building. I mention this because these things are the sorts of tools that I'm interested in and have some online applicability. 

Perhaps there's a place for collaboration here? Probably not, but it's worth a mention. I also really like what Smiteworks has done with Fantasy Grounds. I use that fairly regularly to game remotely. WotC would have to offer something pretty special to have me reconsider the investments I've already made in that software. Perhaps, this is the downside in Wizards being late to the game (in the sense that I think something like the Mastertools concept and virtual gaming should have been better supported long ago). 

Blah, blah.

A few thoughts.

AD


----------



## megamania (Apr 27, 2007)

Too early to say much.

Regardless, my computer can not handle lots of images so this new direction looks disasterous for me still.  It takes 10+ minutes just to load up the WoTC home page.


It seems the potencial IS there however for a quality product.  I just wish they didn't feel they needed to kill off Dragon and Dungeon to do it.  I think they could have co-existed.

Looking forward to more news.


and again...thankyou folks for taking the time to deal with us and put together this interview.


----------



## helium3 (Apr 27, 2007)

Grimstaff said:
			
		

> Does this mean they have no idea what they are doing?




No, it means that for days upon days there's been nothing online but wailing, gnashing of teeth, rending of sackcloth and scattering of ashes. He's trying to get folks to think about and discuss what they DO want rather than what they DON'T want.


----------



## helium3 (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Logan is a newer member ofthe R&D team. He has worked on a few of the recent releases including the tables in the back of Magic Item Compendium




Those are some good tables. One of my favorite things about the MIC.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Apr 27, 2007)

I'm glad we got some info. Though I agree that it sounds a bit on the tight-lipped side, what does concern me is that it's been in development for a year and they're not able to really announce what's *going* to be in it. Even a little. Even what they're looking at. It might not be the case, but it makes WotC sound like they went in a little half-cocked, pre-emptively saying "no more Dungeon and Dragon mags!" before they had much of a clear idea of where to go from here.

Some of the side-concerns have been very well addressed, but I still don't know what this is going to *do* for me. What's it's selling point? Why do I want it? What's the core plan for this DI?

A lot of the stuff posted in the first page is stuff that would get me to want it. MySpace style campaign pages, online tabletop play (with voice chat or similar), the ability to pop in some weekend and join an e-game would be great. Character generators, online databases for my books, the ability to edit rules online so that I can easily set up (and see the effect of) house rules.

Part of the problem with that is that D&D's forays into software have been largely lackluster. I've got no real confidence from past successes, here. 

I guess what kind of unnerves me is that they decided to stop making a product people paid money for before we know what we're going to pay money for next. I have no idea what this next stage of D&D supplement will even resemble. I'd like to be excited for it already, but I've got nothing to be excited for, no reason to look at the horizon. There's just vague promises and no more Dungeon or Dragon. It's a bit freaky not knowing if those vague promises are going to pay off.

Tell me they're going to pay off, and give me reason to believe you, and I'll jump on your side, but saying "just trust us" doesn't really cut it. You just broke some hearts with these cancellations. I'm not just going to trust you. But I want to. Give me a reason to. Give me some content.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> I know a company that did exactly what you advocate. It was called Ion Storm. They made a game called Daikatana.



_Every_ major game company does what I advocated. Blizzard and Bioware do it too.



> 2. Gives competitors time (a lot of time) to come up with something comparable



HEY, COMPETITORS! WIZARDS IS DEVELOPING AN ONLINE MAGAZINE WITH INTERACTIVE FEATURES! YOU KNOW, LIKE PYRAMID + THE STUFF THEY'VE BEEN HINTING AT FOR ABOUT NINE MONTHS!

Disclosing that they plan to continue the Ecology and Demonomicon articles would hardly be earth-shattering, but it's exactly the sort of thing the upset fans want to hear to allay their fears.



> 3. May be considered communication of insider information



Not on this planet.



> Basically, if they're still in the scoping stages it would be irresponsible to speculate. Not only would that be a Bad Thing for us ravenous fans, it may be a Bad Thing for Hasbro shareholders.



If you think a logo, a piece of art and a list of non-committed bullet point items constitutes a major disclosure, I have to wonder why the NSA is letting you post on this board during the work day. 



> It's unfair to ask for a full and accurate feature list for a product that is still being scoped.



Didn't ask for that. Repeated what I was asking for more than once.


----------



## Obergnom (Apr 27, 2007)

Well,

I think I will just post what I want the DI to be 

I have never been a regular consumer of Dragon/Dungeon Mag as they are hard to get by where I live... somewhere in Germany  I own a lot of Dungeon Mags, but I got those by buying a whole bunch of them at a time...

Basically there re three things I think would makethe DI great, a way of enhancing D&D:

1. Tools! I DM, and I tend to only use core content plus a very few non content feats for my monsters and npcs... why? Cause I only ue PCGen to create those! I want a fully featured generator for PCs, NPCs, Monsters, Treasure etc. (Or many small generators...) It would make my DM life easier.

2. Patches. I have the feeling balance in D&D today is considered to be as important as in Blizzards most famous games (WoW, War3, SC)... what did Blizzard do to get finely balanced games? They patch. Thats more than errata, you could provide "alternate" versions of spells, classes etc. to fix the games balance. That would not be everyones cup of tea, but those who want would be able to get a finely balanced version of D&D. (Might be a local tick, I don't know about that. What I know is, there are many many DMs and Players here thinking as much about balance as about anything else...)

3. Content. The Most important content to me would be adventures. Players like the obious crunch, but I think you need o be carefull with that, as many DMs do not like to be suprised by the newest Feat. And making DMs read all the new stuff is a way of hightening the DM load, something no sane person wants, I think. 

What I would also like to see would be some kind of nerver ending Unearthed Arcana. (Rules, Races and Classes Variants that can be used to create a different campaign from time to time.)


----------



## helium3 (Apr 27, 2007)

Eric Anondson said:
			
		

> I wouldn't say that, but I would say that , in my opinion, 90% of the invective wouldn't have been typed if people were not hidden behind the veil of anonymity and pseudonymity. Attach one's name to one's words and it is amazing how much craziness gets toned down... usually.




I'm just glad that people are finally starting to calm down and admit that maybe they over-reacted just a wee bit.

If I had a dime for every time someone felt punched stomach in the stomach last week . . . .


----------



## CanadienneBacon (Apr 27, 2007)

I want to be able to load it onto my iPod so I can take it to the playground where I meet with my stay-at-home mom friends so we can game at the picnic bench while the children romp on the jungle gym.  Don't laugh.  I'm quite serious.  If I could load it onto my iPod and use that instead of lugging 20 lbs of books and 20 lbs of kid gear for a park outing, I'd happy.  Could users each get access to a dice roller, the SRD, and a wiki storage area for accessing personal tabletop campaign information?

And if the other moms weren't available to game on park day, then at least I could have something to while away a few minutes over and aboard simply listening to the music I already stash on my iPod or reading the newspaper.  I could see sitting at the playground for a few minutes checking out what's online at the subscription site, as long as I could do it with my portable handheld device.

Heck, I'm not even that high-tech a mom.  Mid-30's w/ four kids.


----------



## CanadienneBacon (Apr 27, 2007)

Incidentally, would someone please enlighten me as to what DRM means?  Been seeing it flung left and right of late and I'd really like to know!


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

Now that iPods run small apps (downloadable games), that's certainly doable. Not necessarily easy -- iPods aren't really meant as ebooks -- but it's a pretty good idea and likely would be a lot more used than scaling the content for smartphones. (And we smartphone users have had years to get cracking on it, and so far we've got ... uh ... a few dice rollers.)


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

CanadienneBacon said:
			
		

> Incidentally, would someone please enlighten me as to what DRM means?  Been seeing it flung left and right of late and I'd really like to know!



Digital Rights Management. It basically is a form of copy protection that prevents you taking downloaded materials (songs from iTunes, PDFs from DriveThruRPG back in the day) and handing them out to all your buddies. (And, at the same time, preventing you from moving them between devices you own and might want to use them on.)


----------



## Jdvn1 (Apr 27, 2007)

My thoughts (I'm still reading the thread. Great stuff! And I'm happy to see Scott post here--I certainly didn't expect that. We'll get his post count up in no time...  ):


> Our understanding at present is that the online content is set to replace the magazines. What factors were involved in the decision to replace one with the other, rather than to allow the two media - the online platform and the magazines - to co-exist?
> 
> Chris: Our online content plans will replace the printed magazines. That aside, we are still very much in the business of producing printed products.
> 
> Bill: I also want to take a moment to quell some related rumors. D&D is not going away. In no way do our plans call for the end of face-to-face tabletop gaming. We are not making an MMORPG. We will continue to produce printed, for-sale, published products.



I don't think they really answered the question here. The question isn't about the books and printed content in general, it's about the magazines. Why kill off the magazines? Why can't we have both? If they can't answer the question, I'd have appreciated if they said so.


> Scott: While WotC staff may not be as responsive on the boards as we were in the past, everyone on the product development and business teams reads the boards regularly, and we often discuss the postings and suggestions in various team meetings.
> 
> Chris: That said, we’re working to make WotC R&D and Brand team members more accessible and visible online, and this interview is a beginning step toward that long-term goal. We’re excited by this opportunity and look forward to participating more fully in the future.



This is very good to hear, IMO.


> What can an online platform offer to the customer that a magazine cannot?
> 
> Chris: We have a lot of ideas that we’re happy with, but let me turn the question around. What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that? If this new incarnation of the magazines could encompass anything you could want, what would that be?



Isn't this exactly the type of information Paizo would have collected? They'd be good people to ask...


> Would it be fair to say that the new platform will contain enough content to replace both DRAGON and DUNGEON magazines?
> 
> Bill: Yes, and more. The constraints of the printed page go away when we transfer this particular kind of content to an online platform.



And _more_? Either that'd take a bunch of writers and editors, or very little of the content will be balanced, I think. I wonder which.

EDIT: Someone pointed out the writing staff is already pretty big. And it is, but if WotC plans on releasing books with the same vigor as before as well as frequent online material, they may yet need more (or ask for a lot of submissions).


> Chris:  We expect some of the columns and features to continue, some to evolve, and new features to appear as well.



Gah! You can't tell us this and then not tell us whether or not our most favorite columns are going to die! I'm really anxious about Core Beliefs.


> The big question: when can we expect to see the new online content?
> 
> Bill: Soon. As stated, Paizo keeps publishing until issue #150 and #359. We don’t want to get in the way of that. Keep an eye on our website for more details.



This is nice to know. September/October should be interesting.


> Chris:  We don’t foresee any lack of “previewability.” There will be ways to preview content and we will be testing a couple preview different options. It would be great to hear how customers would like to preview content. We have not come up with a solution for “portability” of content after your subscription has ended but we are discussing ideas with in our development team. We do not have a DRM solution yet but have a range of options available to us.



The best idea I can think of is a client (it may be an online client, maybe almost like a quasi-email thing) that updates itself with information.

Essentially, you make an account. For free, you can go to a "Previews" tab/folder and see all the content marked as previews. You may also have access to tables of contents. From there, you can choose specific features for, say $1 each, which gives you access to all current and archived documents in a feature. Say, you pay $1 for a month of Class Acts. For that price, you get all the Class Acts from that year and all archives. When the month runs out, your account just stops updating your Class Acts tab/folder. You can still access the information you had, but you can't get new information until you pay another $1. And, for 25 cents, you can get an individual article.

Then, say, there are 15 different features/tabs/folders available, and each works that way. You can pay $1 for any one feature or $10 for everything in a month.

For online tools (such as a dice roller or character generator, etc), those may be a bundle for $1/month, free with signing up, or free with any periodic (monthly or longer) purchase such that when the time period ends so does access to the tools.

EDIT: There may also be a distinction between submitted material and WotC material--maybe a price different or a separate bundle or something.


> It has been said, both by fans and by those in the industry (including some ex-WotC staffers) that the magazines were an invaluable marketing tool during the run-up to 3E. Given that 4E is going to come sometime, how does this affect WotC plans to successfully market the new edition - or, for that matter, any other large product launches on the horizon.



This question, and its answer implicitly ignore the effect on third-party companies. That is, my follow-up question would be, "_Dragon_ and _Dungeon_ magazines were important not just to Paizo and fans, but to the RPG industry as a whole as a means to advertise smaller companies and their products. Does WotC have any plans to allow or provide advertising for other companies?" I see this as a _highly_ important question. Again, I don't know if WotC can answer it, if they can't, I'd appreciate an acknowledgment of such. This question also doesn't answer someone else's question of, "What about prisoners, who don't have internet access?"

Regardless, I appreciate the time of the WotC employees involved and of Morrus. This interview did answer some of my questions.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 27, 2007)

I am sorry, I have been in the public service for 20+ years...I have seen events can shake people to the core and  when it comes unexpectedly(myself included).

'Not surprised'? And who 'we'?


> Morrus-First of all, *were you surprised by the amount of emotion pouring out from fans in the last few days?* What was the expected reaction from the online community?






> Scott: *No, we weren’t surprised by the reaction*. We understand the emotions rippling through the community. In fact, there are a lot of people here at WotC that share those same emotions. Many of the people working on Bill’s team started their careers on the magazines, and it’s tough for some of them to accept the news. For those working on the online versions there is also a high level of excitement. We know that fans will have mixed reactions to this new format, but we hope that people will get excited as we begin to fully share the details of our plans.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 27, 2007)

At that point...that becomes useless to me.


			
				Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> Digital Rights Management. It basically is a form of copy protection that prevents you taking downloaded materials (songs from iTunes, PDFs from DriveThruRPG back in the day) and handing them out to all your buddies. (And, at the same time, preventing you from moving them between devices you own and might want to use them on.)


----------



## Jdvn1 (Apr 27, 2007)

Frukathka said:
			
		

> I'd still like to know how the Digital Initiative is going to affect gamers w/o internet access.



My _guess_ is that they'll have to rely on the compilation books that were mentioned.


----------



## Agamon (Apr 27, 2007)

I gotta say, if this is true:


> _
> What is the likelihood of seeing new online material being compiled in hardcopy format - perhaps an annual magazine, book or compendium?_
> 
> *Bill: Sounds like a great idea! In fact, it’s been part of our plans all along.*




...then my anger at WotC for what has happened is pretty much fizzled away.  A print collection of the best stuff?  Sounds pretty cool to me.


----------



## Lanefan (Apr 27, 2007)

First, I'll add my voice to the chorus of thanks to Russ/Morrus for his work, and Scott-Chris-Bill for the answers.

Second, the answers given were, to me anyway, a good start...we now know there'll be hard-copy compilations, for example...but with one glaring exception: the answer given  to "why can't the DI and print magazines exist side by side?" had nothing to do with the question.  Russ, guys: want to try that one again? 

Third, what would I like to see (and be willing to pay for, provided that once I'd paid for it it was mine to keep) in the DI:
 - support for older editions as well as 3e and-or 4e when it comes...make adventures etc. easily convertible, for example;
 - conversion information to allow material from any D+D edition to relatively easily be converted into any other edition (or ::dreaming here:: a conversion program???);
 - tables for everything, that include everything but are sortable...for example, a table of magic items that includes every "official" item ever created but that can be asked to give any subset of items e.g. all weapons, or all items under 3,000 g.p., or all items official to Forgotten Realms; some such tables could be magic items, spells, feats, prestige classes, etc. - *this* is the "heavy lifting" that the DI could do best;
 - adventure ideas, plots, and hooks (I'd prefer adventure *modules* still be hard-printed, preferably in the 1e format of the hard-card outside with the inside-cover map and the separate booklet);
 - a random dungeon generator.

Fourth, what I'd ignore if it appeared in the DI: 
 - online gaming of any kind;
 - character generation program (even if I were running 3e I'd houserule too much for this anyway);
 - anything that wasn't mine to keep once paid for;
 - anything that required payment by paypal.

A suggestion, too: if feasible, you might want to run low-bandwidth and high-bandwidth versions of the DI site; not everyone has high-speed access...

Lane-"one small voice in the chorus"-fan


----------



## jujutsunerd (Apr 27, 2007)

As for me, if there's any DRM beyond watermarking I'm not buying into it. I don't appreciate being treated as a potential thief rather than a customer.

Also, when I buy something I *buy* it, I don't license it. So, I want content to be downloadable so I can use it after I've ended my subscription. (Excepting online services, obviously. Though, the *results* of those services (such as filled-in character sheets or whatever) should be downloadable.

As for the actual content, I was pretty happy with Dungeon and Dragon, so if it was in the mags, I want it online.

On the services side, I *might* be interested in tools to help me as a DM. I don't know what services I want, but I'm sure there are some I'd like.

Character creation is covered by pcgen for me, so I'm not interested in online tools for that unless they are:
a) easily expandable with my own custom classes/feats/etc
b) have pretty much unlimited storage
c) unbelievably much better than any of the current offerings

*edit* Forgot one thing. What I actually want the most out of DI is actual physical printed copies of Dungeon and Dragon delivered to me every month, or, possibly, available for purchase at every decent newsstand, comic shop, bookstore and game store...

/Jonas


----------



## BadMojo (Apr 27, 2007)

Truth Seeker said:
			
		

> At that point...that becomes useless to me.




Yeah.  Not happy about the possibility of annoying DRM.  The sad fact of DRM for any media is that the people who want to copy and distribute it illegally are going to be able to do so quite easily.  It could easily turn in to a hassle for honest users of the content and a complete joke as far as deterring piracy.  It seems like people are cracking DRM within hours of it being released.

I'm also not crazy about the idea of "renting" content unless the price is *very* low.

I know the information that can be released is limited, but it's really silly to say "we've been planning this for a year" and then turn around and answer "We don't know" to a series of really  basic questions about the product.  I would have felt better if they said "there are quite a few things we're working on, but we're not ready to share the details yet".

At any rate, It's nice to see some kind of acknowledgment of the concerns of a very large online community dedicated to WotC's products.


----------



## Alnag (Apr 27, 2007)

What would make me subsrcibe (if I'd have credit card, which I have not... so no subscription here).

- Robin Laws. Make him write the column as there used to be in the Dragon at the beginning of 3e. Or some stuff like in DMG II. That is the true gem of gamemastering advices. Other stuff is important, but nothing which I would desperately need and wasn't able to create myself.


----------



## Obergnom (Apr 27, 2007)

Lanefan said:
			
		

> - anything that required payment by paypal.




Why? Is there anything especially bad about that payment method? I do not own a credit card (Not as common in Germany/my personal environment as in the US, as far as I know) and paypal provided me with a good method to pay for "credit card only" stuff like rpgnow pdfs...


----------



## Hussar (Apr 27, 2007)

> ("You! Yes, you behind the copy of Synibarr! Get that material cut from Races of Eberron in printable form by 7 am! Stand STILL laddie!" <whipcrack>)




Sorry, but that line just made me giggle like a schoolgirl.  

Thanks to everyone for getting this together.  Something to not forget here is that this is the _first_ release of information.  I'm fairly sure more is forthcoming.  I'm fairly sure that they are letting Dragon do much of the heavy lifting here since they are releasing information on the DI in Dungeon and Dragon.  We' ll just have to wait for that I think.


----------



## Maggan (Apr 27, 2007)

What I found most interesting is the bit about Dragonlance.

All the rest was much as I expected.

For WotC, take a look at this as an example of a site I find very well put together:

http://www.malleus.dk/

Take a good look at the character generator:

http://www.malleus.dk/NpcGenerator/Default.aspx

It's a bit awkward, but really useful as it uses the character sheet as the interaction model.

/M


----------



## blargney the second (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott, I'm glad to see you posting on here! 

I've just come back from our weekly game, and my back burner's been simmering things all the while.  There have also been some posters making great points in here:

*1) Quarterly Print Compilations*: this is a fantastic idea.  It's infrequent enough that there will be some wicked content and less monthly hassle to assemble.  It's frequent enough that it's not too far from the monthly magazines we all love.  People without credit cards or net access will still be able to buy your product.
*2) Leverage Online Format*: rironin mentioned this and it's what I've been thinking about tonight.  I love Dungeon's Scale This Adventure sidebar, and it'd be even better as a fully automated web feature that outputs a customized adventure.  Updates monsters, treasures, tactics, and story development.  A saveable, printable, watermarked PDF that makes strong use of hyperlinking would be damn fine. 
*3) Experiment with Adventure Format*: another rironin topic, and another thing I've been pondering.  If you're freed of the restrictions of paper, you can design less linear adventures.  I would *love* to see adventure synopses as flowcharts with branching outcomes and cascading consequences.  Having encounters more thematically grouped would also be helpful (as opposed to squooshed together on a few pages with ads in between).
*4) Digital versions of maps*: mentioned by The Lorax, I get all quivery when I think of how useful printable maps would be!  Print & Go.  Mmmm.

-blarg

ps - Congratulations to Logan on the incredibly useful MIC tables!  They're a lifesaver.


----------



## daemonslye (Apr 27, 2007)

Kudos Morris. WOTC guys, thanks for the responses so far.

A few points, then to some suggestions:



> The decision to make the announcement at this time was worked out with Paizo, and at their request.




OK - Thanks for the clarification. It helps to know that.



> More than a year ago, after much discussion, WotC and Paizo mutually agreed to let the contract expire




Let's just be clear on this. I cannot imagine Paizo (Erik) would ever agree to this unless 1) You did not give him a choice or 2) You changed the fee structure or terms so that Paizo could not continue under it's existing model.  Either way, I can't see how this was at all a "mutual" decision.  (We won't know the terms offered so there's no point debating this)



> Morrus: What can an online platform offer to the customer that a magazine cannot?
> 
> Chris: We have a lot of ideas that we’re happy with, but let me turn the question around. What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that?




The basic fact is that WOTC decided to shut down the print magazines to drive users to an "online model".  WOTC will continue with other printed content - for now.  The answer above seems to seek rationale. e.g. "*Those magazines were filled with content you didn't actively use? Right? Hey - on a unit basis, that is negative value for the producer and consumer.*"

You're missing the point. I *read* EVERYTHING  in those magazines. Erik/James' openings, forums, ads (yeah, even the ads), comics and all other content.  It would take me a few days.  Where did I read it?  Primarily two places - *Neither were at my desk*. One was in bed before I went to sleep, images of running and screaming adventurers in my head.

*Online has *nothing* to do with that experience.*

So what, wait a year to get the content in digestible form?  Will it come with the subscription? I can answer for you - Of course not.  Online is about tools with as little "words" as you can get away with.  Why?  Because you are sitting in front of a computer when you get to it.  *Printing is not an option *  - even for me (..and I have some great printers: HP Color Laserjet 3700dn duplex, Canon i9900 for large format/maps, and an Epson multi-function). Problems I see with printing: Either you are graphics rich, with the problems around color printing costs foisted on the consumer. Or you print "just the words" in which case, the experience is rather dull.

So - What do I want?  A *print periodical * (every other month or, worse case quarterly) that engages my imagination to help me be a better DM.  No amount of "online calculators" will help me get there.  My discussion/messaging needs are taken of here and in other boards, thanks very much.  *I don't need you to become another ENWorld for pay.*

The above is why I think you guys are losing touch.  I could be proven wrong of course. Nothing would make me happier actually.

OK - now to the "*Digital Initiative*" (change the name - please. Ugh. And you're in marketing?)

If my guess is right, your current thinking probably includes the following (from your survey):



> D&D Insider Magazine: Product Previews, Dungeon Master's Tower, Class Features, Strategy and Tactics, Design and Development, Behind the Arcane Curtain, D&D Humor, D&D Product Enhancements
> Campaign Content: Eberron and Forgotten Realms ongoing content, Interactive maps, World events and adventure hooks, D&D University, Course message boards
> MyCampaign.Com: Online campaign tools
> Online Groups and Message Boards feature
> ...




Wow. So you asked "How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign?". Well, same question for the above.  Seems like a rather expensive list without customers absolutely banging down the door for it.  Just seems a little risky knowing how much maintenance is going to be required to keep the tools relevant.  I rather think that’s what the debate internally is about, eh?

I DM with my computer.  My adventures are pdf'ed, I add my own content, write descriptions, dialogs, etc. search for the best artwork and compile.  I write up my own monsters using Dungeon mag format.  I use PDF bookmarks to jump to where I want to go.  I have the SRD for rules look ups, but frankly, I outsource rule lookups to a player because it is a waste of DM time with five+ other players in front of you.  I use a large iMac (though all my other machines are PCs), because it's self contained, one cord, and has great resolution.  When I turn that big screen around and the players get a look at the "Bilewretch" in all it's leggy glory while I describe it's hideousness (..or a look at the Countess as she speaks to them) - Well, that's the experience you are going for.  Immersion.

Notice, none of that was "online" (using a local copy of the SRD).  Could it be?  Sure.  At my place, I've got great wireless and tons of bandwidth.  When we play somewhere else? Not so much.  So why create two processes?  I use one wherever we play.

What would help me?  Well, a "*creature builder*" would help alot.  That said, I think it is too difficult to build and maintain.  Even the folks at Dungeon, who do this stuff for a living, manually edited the monsters.  Too many variables in play (half-this, elite-that, spells, power attack bonuses, raging, etc.).

Downloadable adventures? Taking advantage of HTML or Adobe? Sure... But, the problem is, I need to be "sold" on the adventure first - You know, pictures, read it, "grok" the why of it.  And that means not sitting at my desk.  *I don't "dream" at my desk.  I "do".*

Player gen stuff is cool, but not for creating character sheets (that stuff is free anyway; Fans of D&D rock), more for understanding class combo opportunities for certain situations, etc.  Just know that much of that content is found within the halls of these message boards as well.

Online maps with online figs?  Tempting, but nah.  The "experience" is having everyone able to see the action all the time and if a player cant move his own fig, it will feel like playing "battleship" (no, no square e-144!).

For me that leaves MMOs - But with a twist.  There is an opportunity for an online DM to multiple player experience that has not been done yet with the right tools.  Internet voice, bandwidth is getting there.  Note I said tools not "game".  The game is where it always has been - in the heads of the folks involved – maybe this is what you mean by “virtual tabletop”.  I've tried NWN (and Ultima, and D&DO, etc.) but something is sitting between the players and the DM to achieve the experience you need.  So, that's it I suppose, an online game experience with tools so remote players can game with a DM or set of co-DMs.  It would not be my "primary" game for the near term (I like the PnP, Pizza and Dew - and the physicality of DICE; How else do you get excited because you rolled a "20"?).

So Scott, et al. Thanks for the responses so far.  I'll give you one persons input.  Perhaps it will find it's way into a database of "requests" or "ideas" somewhere.  I hope you get a glimpse into why I think you guys have missed the mark on this call.

~D


----------



## Hussar (Apr 27, 2007)

> Online maps with online figs? Tempting, but nah. The "experience" is having everyone able to see the action all the time and if a player cant move his own fig, it will feel like playing "battleship" (no, no square e-144!).




As someone who's been gaming regularly on OpenRPG for years now, I can honestly say that online can be every bit as entertaining and rewarding as tabletop.


----------



## Winterthorn (Apr 27, 2007)

*Okaaaaay....*

Morrus: Thank you very much for your efforts at compiling our concerns and delivering them to the folks at WotC. It must have been a challenge. Well done on your part 

Scott Rouse: Thank you for dropping by the _*lion's den*_! I am glad you have to courage to post and I hope you will interact with people here on a regular basis (although I imagine it cannot be very frequent - how about every Friday? Um, Fridays are usually days of last-minute-hell for everyone, so how about Mondays then?  ).

[lion's roar]
While I do not level any personal blame at Scott, Bill, Chris or their subordinates for the Dragon/Dungeon PR debacle, I _do_ cast an vile eye at their nameless superiors - it is those heartless corporate hacks who have created this situation and it is their hive-mind corp-speak culture (that's sooooo Walmart) that tainted the answers to our concerns. I agree we received some information, but it is, as the expression goes, "too little, too late". I ain't buyin' no DI/DRM content. Period. (What? One year foreknowledge and not so much as a simple webpage preview? Dudes, you folks at WotC are waaaaaaaaay behind the eight-ball!)
[/lion's roar]

I do like the idea of hardcopy compendiums of best material - that works for me. Part of the joy of this hobby for me stems from _not_ using a computer but reading when I want to, by the the most convenient medium, doing things buy hand, and applying my mind to synthesize an efficient way to run entertaining game sessions as a DM. (IMO the digital age is not the be-all and end-all that some foolishly believe...)

Given that Dragon and Dungeon are wrapped up print-wise - which is the same as dead as far as I'm concerned - I would love Dragon #360 to be a special final hardcopy by WotC, extra thick, few adds if any (I'd pay $20 for it), that is part retrospective of the very best ideas over the last 359 issues (including some old crunch converted to d20), and part new material (perhaps somethings that have been overlooked for a long time) by the best team of writers available. A very special farewell-see-you-on-the-online-side issue. A turning point where some of us can say good-bye to a great icon of our gaming era, and others can leap into something new - so everyone is happy and there is some closure too. I think this is quite feasible and a classy way to let things "evolve".

Please consider our concerns by deeds and not words, and I bet many of us customers will become appeased if not pleased.

Thank you 

PS: It's 5:00 a.m. E.D.T and I'm in no shape to polish my post  Nighty-night!


----------



## Mr. Wilson (Apr 27, 2007)

Meh.  While I'm glad on one hand WoTC is at least talking to us, they really didn't say much new or informative.

I think the most important parts I read were the brands were living on, they were still taking submissions (thanks), and Dragonlance may or may not be dead.


----------



## jasin (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> First Post.
> 
> I just want to say thanks for all the responses so far. I am only at about 50 into the thread and so far but so far it's been a great read.  I appreciate the comments and suggestions.



Hey, Dragonslayer.  

Thanks to you WotC folks for answering the questions, and thanks to Morrus for taking the effort to do this. And thanks for joining us on the boards.

At first glance, I was kind of disappointed with all the non-committal answers. But some interesting stuff was revealed (or confirmed): DI will accept submissions, it was at Paizo's request that the announcement was made now, and while countering "what can we expect?" with "what do you want?" could be interpreted as clueless and/or evasive, it's a encouraging to see that WotC is interested in our input.

And just seeing the interview, and even more, seeing you personally post here means a lot. Even if it's just Eeevil Corporate Psych Warfare in action, it's much nicer to actually be talking to people rather than being faced with a passive voice company announcement at the website.

As to what I'd want:

First, I want _something_ to get excited about. Not revealing too much is fine, and asking for input is great, but as Lovecraft would tell you, nothing is scarier than the unknown. So, some tidbit of what's to come as soon as possible, rather than months off.

A way to keep the content you paid for even when your subscription ends. Many RPG fans are by nature packrats, and WotC should be aware of this. Why else would they expect us to buy shelves of books and buckets of minis? If I see something I like on the site, I want to keep it for all time, even if I never use it. And people will always find a way to circumvent any copy protections, so the will be able to archive stuff eventually, so why not make the paying customers happy, and let them do so legitimately?


----------



## jasin (Apr 27, 2007)

Obergnom said:
			
		

> 2. Patches.



I think this is a really bad idea. Occasional errata and rebalancing overhauls of a bunch of content like the Spell Compendium are cool, but coming out 

In computer games, the computer tracks the changes for you, and you have no choice in the matters, so you just shrug and move along. But in P&P, having a patch come out every month means that every third session or so, there's going to be a discussion whether we'll using the new or the old version of divine power, the new one is more balanced, but if I had known we're using the new one, I wouldn't have taken Power Attack instead of Improved Initiative and also we're already using the new version of righteous might but we aren't using the paladin patch since we don't like it so maybe this will make clerics a bit weak compared to paladins...? Ugh. No, thanks.


----------



## daemonslye (Apr 27, 2007)

Hussar said:
			
		

> As someone who's been gaming regularly on OpenRPG for years now, I can honestly say that online can be every bit as entertaining and rewarding as tabletop.




Hey - Hussar, thanks for the link.  Looks interesting.  That specific item referred to actually running a miniature/map on my computer we the players actually there at the table (and they dont all have laptops).  If done right, it could be cool but, as I said, if the players don't have a PC they rely on the DM to move their fig for them.  Which can be time consuming (Here? Here? Here? AOO! Oh, you meant here?).  

For a virtual tabletop, it might work.  Does it have Internet voice?  Where do folks join games?  Do they have a license from..(nevermind; sorry for that..).

Thanks again!

~D


----------



## Alnag (Apr 27, 2007)

I am also more intrested in the possible "annual magazine" or different way of distribution of the online content. If the quality of the stuff is high enough I don't mind to by it in printed form. (If the distributor will buy it of course...).

I also appreciate the response, despite its "we actually can't tell much" character. Still better than nothing. I firmly believe in the information flow and communication with customers. I hope that you meant that seriously and we will see you here or on WotC boards more often not only in times like this, when the community is teared appart.


----------



## (contact) (Apr 27, 2007)

Thanks for handling this, Morris!

I have to say, I was surprised and a little dissapointed with the general flatness of the interview and lack of information.  You really don't have things worked out yet, which explains the silence, heh.  Which brings me to my next point:

Yikes.

I think you guys rolled a 1 for your digital initiative.

I feel for you guys; you're kind of up against it now and it sounds like you don't know how you're going to do what it is you're going to do.  Four months is not a very long time.



			
				mxyzplk said:
			
		

> I'm a little worried myself.  I work with the Internet for a living, and creating a good online content strategy isn't easy.  And in general WotC's Internet presence, and most especially their forays into software development, in the past haven't inspired a huge amount of confidence that they have what it takes.




Quoted for truth.



			
				mxyzplk said:
			
		

> especially their forays into software development, in the past haven't inspired a huge amount of confidence that they have what it takes.




Quoted again, because it's just that true.  

Like everyone else here, I love the game, and I want very much for this to be a great idea and not a mistake, but . . .  I think it's a medium with gigantic potential, but so far, the handling of the announcement and the interview aren't filling me with confidence.  In some ways, the web is much harder than print.  It's not a known thing, it's not . . . hashed out.  There isn't very often a traditional way to do things, or crusty old shop foremen who has done nearly every job in the industry over the last 45 years you can ask.

Worse yet, while a magazine is always a magazine no matter who is reading it, websites just aren't the same.  The more complicated the delivery, the more complicated that question becomes.  The less completely you answer that question, the more you whittle at your potential user-base.  It can be a real suck-spiral.

You, me and Wired magazine all think that the future of computing is online applications. But unless you're Google (and even still), they're freaking tough.   Aaaand, they take years to make.

So yeah, it doesn't look good for our heroes.  A friend of mine recently described an aspect of his business as "fighting the dragon, no spells left, one alchemist's fire and single-digit hit-points."  I'm starting to think that's the position you're in on this 'digital initative' as well.  

Of course, as a player, I really do hope I'm as wrong as John Terry's training shorts.

-----

Here's my top suggestions/wish list:

1.  Keep it focused on the PnP game.  Use the site to make my weekly game better, exclusively.

2.  Keep your ambitions very simple.  Do your core goal (deliver content) and do it as perfectly as you can.  Do not chase down the candy-strewn path of "pushing the digital envelope."  You've got to show me that your envelope doesn't suck before you try to push it.

2a.  Get it right.  Just get it right.  Seriously.  The content is going to be very good-- you guys have good game designers out the wazoo, but you have GOT to get the delivery right.  Show us the love.  There really is web production value.

2b.  Please avoid Flash.  I know it's tempting, but making it look like your sweetest Photoshop mockup is ultimately missing the point.  That's the candy-strewn path to massively increased development times (a.k.a. less attention paid to function), increased uneccesary load times and all  this loss for essentially no user payoff past the first few "cool, rust texture!" impressions.   Flash has its place, yeah, but remember our interaction with the site is really the point.  "If it ain't go, nobody'll get in."

2c.  UI design and IA will be much more critical  than an over-the-top look and feel as far as our use of the site goes.  Make it smooth, light, fast and intuitive.  <french accent> Lak a bootiful 'ooman.</french accent>

3.  I would expect to see the site fully searchable by terms  and phrases but would love to see it searchable by categories-- think about the kinds of things DMs and players need and allow your content to be sorted *and filtered* by those categories:  Authors (natch), monsters, traps, encounters, tricks, descriptive text, DM advice, etc.  Just being able to filter down to encounters and stat blocks would be huge for me.  That right there would make the site worth it for me, provided it didn't suck to navigate.

4.  Make the content portable.  No heavy DRM, please!  Don't do us like that.  PDF output of issues or compliations would be fine, but I have a better idea . . .

5.  What I would love to see is the content broken into much smaller modules that can be pulled out of their context and sent into a "shopping cart" . . . so if the article on Orcus had Orcus' stats, a description of his demense, flavor text about his cult, a prestige class and stats for his high-priest, I could pull just that high preist into my cart without taking the rest of the article.  Then I could pull a location map from the sweet map gallery, a trap from the trap section and print it all for my game later that evening.  THAT would be sweet.

I know you guys will put cool stuff on the site.  That's really not the concern.  You've got cool stuff coming out the wazoo, and Chris' comment that word count is no longer a constraining issue is music to our ears.

I just feel like the production end might be under-staffed or under-smarted or under-fed, or maybe culled from under the bridge or just under-capable.  Prove me wrong, would ya?


----------



## Wye (Apr 27, 2007)

Not surprisingly, no real meat to the answers given. And what is with that "what would YOU like to see?" I'm all for customer feedback and suggestions, but this is not the time.

Imagine going to an ice-cream shop for your favorite cone:
"Can I have vanilla and chocolate please?"
"We just discontinued those flavors, but we have others, and new ones!"
"Hrrm... Ok, show me what you've got."
"What would YOU like on your ice-cream?"
"Are you kidding me?"

Bringing it back to context: I already told you what I wanted. YOU should be selling me your new flavors (online product), this is not the time for my suggestions.

Having said that, I have to say something just to weight in against some ideas I see expressed here, if I'm to pay for anything at all.

I will NOT pay for "tools": dice rollers, character generators, NPC generators, dungeon generators (oh gawd no!), encounter generators, rumor generators, or any kind of run-my-game-tool-because-I-can't-be-bothered-to-learn-the-rules. Nor any tool that points in the direction of me running a NeverWinterNights game (it doesn't matter how beautiful the interface).

I will not give you my money if I'm going to lose everything the moment I stop paying either.

I wanted to end with something positive, but really I can't think of anything. As others have said, the joy of the magazine was that I could read it anywhere, and it would inspire me on my couch or by the pool. What did I use? Again, as other have said, ALL OF IT, if anything just to inspire my imagination. I'm not going to get inspired sitting at the same screen that I work on and, if your current website is any indication, with a myriad of information crammed on the screen.

I already have a replacement for Dungeon, so only Dragon content would be enticing. But I don't see how I'd be enticed if I can't let my imagination fly by the pool, or comfortable on my couch falling asleep with dreams of fantasy worlds.

Ok, something positive! Scott Rouse, I held you at a very low esteem, being a new gamer trying to dictate what I want; but coming to the boards and establishing a channel of communication with the same people that wanted your head on a platter takes some big cojones. I respect that, I'm willing to listen to what you have to say.


----------



## Hussar (Apr 27, 2007)

daemonslye said:
			
		

> Hey - Hussar, thanks for the link.  Looks interesting.  That specific item referred to actually running a miniature/map on my computer we the players actually there at the table (and they dont all have laptops).  If done right, it could be cool but, as I said, if the players don't have a PC they rely on the DM to move their fig for them.  Which can be time consuming (Here? Here? Here? AOO! Oh, you meant here?).
> 
> For a virtual tabletop, it might work.  Does it have Internet voice?  Where do folks join games?  Do they have a license from..(nevermind; sorry for that..).
> 
> ...




No worries.  Hey, I don't want to spam　this thread, so, let's go here


----------



## Ry (Apr 27, 2007)

Wye said:
			
		

> Imagine going to an ice-cream shop for your favorite cone:
> "Can I have vanilla and chocolate please?"
> "We just discontinued those flavors, but we have others, and new ones!"
> "Hrrm... Ok, show me what you've got."
> ...




Thanks Wye - that nails it for me.


----------



## Mark Hope (Apr 27, 2007)

Interesting read.  Thanks to Morrus for taking the time to put this together and to the folks from WotC for taking the time to reply.

I'll clarify up-front that what I have read hasn't altered my initial position that an online subscription service is not for me.  I step away from the DI on that basic concept alone.

However...

The fact that there will be print compilations of the online material is a draw for me.  I like books.  So having this material made available in print later is a big plus.  Good show, chaps .

Good to hear that freelancers will be able to make inroads into the DI as well - some great talent has been discovered that way.

(I would like to hear more about the Dragonlance situation, actually.  That bit was just confusing).

Downsides for the interview?  Well, this...


> Morrus: What can an online platform offer to the customer that a magazine cannot?
> 
> Chris: We have a lot of ideas that we’re happy with, but let me turn the question around. What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that?



...was just lame.  No xp for you!  Yes, ask us for our suggestions, of course.  But don't use that as an opportunity to dodge the question.  Do both!  Answer the question _and_ ask for suggestions.  As someone who is skeptical about the online nature of this whole enterprise, this was the part where you could have mollified some of my concerns and maybe had a shot at winning me over with your awesome ideas.  A missed opportunity, guys!


----------



## Eytan Bernstein (Apr 27, 2007)

OStephens said:
			
		

> When Wotc says it's going to include something or even suggest it's looking at including something in a product, and then doesn't include it, people get upset. Not "you killed my childhood" upset, but unhappy enough to talk about how WotC "lied" to them and suggest the product is not worthy buying.
> 
> I've seen this before. This is one of the big reasons we authors often don't say much about our books until they're in print. Even if the book is written, developed and edited, something may get cut at the last moment for all sorts of reasons. I've had whole sections cut from books days before it gets printed because layout didn't quite manage to squeeze it in, or another book turned out to be a better match for the information, or a license changed, or a late playtest report discovered a serious problem, or a piece of art failed to arrive in useable condition, or someone came up with a better idea at the last moment, or because it turned out to overlap or contradict information from another book in production I never got to see. So I try not to talk about what's going to be in any book until I at least have a preview.
> 
> ...




This is one of the better explanations I've heard for why the timing of this announcement was necessary the way it was done. I hadn't thought about it, but the format definitely impacts a lot on why Paizo needed this time and Wizards doesn't have as much information yet.


----------



## Twowolves (Apr 27, 2007)

helium3 said:
			
		

> I'm just glad that people are finally starting to calm down and admit that maybe they over-reacted just a wee bit.
> 
> If I had a dime for every time someone felt punched stomach in the stomach last week . . . .





Thanks for making my point for me...



			
				Twowolves said:
			
		

> The loss of these magazines DOES hurt, some a lot more than others. No one can point at another person and say "your feelings are disingenuous" because we don't really know how they feel deep inside. I personally have hundreds of issues of these magazines, bought almost entirely at the FLGS, at a higher price than I could have paid with a subscription, just to help support the community. I have been reading them continually for over 20 years. Who has the right to tell me that the loss I feel inside is unjustified? Who? No one, that's who.




Apparantly, Helium 3 does, that's who.


----------



## Nebulous (Apr 27, 2007)

Personally, I feel that a print compendium of the best stuff is one of the few saving graces that i've seen here. Give me a 200+ page of the most popular articles and rules and artwork once a year and that will be spectacular. And i can flip through it ahead of time too.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Apr 27, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Yay for you. So, what's better for you is better for me?  :\




Well, no, I wouldn't say so, but any company will tend to go where the customers are - and WoTC thinks the customers will go to the internet over magazines, and that the magazines in print form would detract from the online format.  All of that is absolutely up in the air as to whether it is right or not.  All I'm saying is that the new format may well be better - for me, as you point out.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Apr 27, 2007)

Grimstaff said:
			
		

> Yeah, but aren't those questions you ask before making a decision?



  Sure.  The thing is, going to the online format means that "decision day" is much, much closer to "publish day."  Paizo needed to have this out there NOW - because they're dealing with the print world where things need to be locked down months in advance.  On the other hand, there are significant portions of the DI that could probably be changed 24 hours before they go live - because its just going to the net.  No point in making your decisions 6 months ahead of time when you don't need to.

Although I'll grant that even a few specifics would have been nice.


----------



## lrsach01 (Apr 27, 2007)

Here is something that just occurred to me...and I don't think its been addressed yet. Of course I could be wrong given the metric crap load of posts in the wake the wake of the recent WotC actions.

One complaint about the magazines, books and adnventures is that only one person in a gaming group would by a particualr copy. This had the effect of lowering sales. What's to stop a gaminig group (for example, 6 in my group) from registering for the Digital Initiative and sharing access with the rest of the group?


----------



## D.Shaffer (Apr 27, 2007)

rycanada said:
			
		

> Thanks Wye - that nails it for me.



In my mind, it's more...

"We're changing brands of ice cream in a few months."
"Are they still going to have flavor X?"
"We dont know yet, but probably.  They did ask what flavors we'd like to see"

I think people are reading a bit to much into them asking for input.  Remember, there were a host of people that have been saying that what they'd like to see in a magazine and what they'd like ONLINE are different matters.  I'm sure they have a framework of what they're going to include, but it doesnt hurt to ask what else would 'sweeten the pot' for potential future customers.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 27, 2007)

lrsach01 said:
			
		

> Here is something that just occurred to me...and I don't think its been addressed yet. Of course I could be wrong given the metric crap load of posts in the wake the wake of the recent WotC actions.
> 
> One complaint about the magazines, books and adnventures is that only one person in a gaming group would by a particualr copy. This had the effect of lowering sales. What's to stop a gaminig group (for example, 6 in my group) from registering for the Digital Initiative and sharing access with the rest of the group?




I believe that is why they still are not able to talk about the format of the information or the delivery system.  They still haven't figured out a way to limit the content to only a single person.  DRM was mentioned, although only as an example of options they are looking at.

Should be an interesting tug-of-war between WotC striving to limit access versus players wanting the ability to download and manipulate the info to suit their needs.


----------



## DM_Jeff (Apr 27, 2007)

Thanks WotC for responding, and thanks Morrus for the work putting it together. I also appreciate that if WotC is now looking over these boards as was said, they will seriously take into consideration many of the wants and needs of the community.

I need very "little" from the DI, I suppose.

1) I want an NPC generator to help prepare for my games. I want one as easy and quick as the NPC Designer at rpgattitude.com. I want to be able to select 'minotaur', 'barbarian 3', 'warlock 7', and hit enter and have it generate everything else. I want to be able to assign it specific weapons from Complete Warrior, a feat from Book of Vile Darkness and a template from MM4. Books that are outside the SRD.

2) I want maps printed in 1-inch squares to use D&D miniatures on. I spend plenty of time alreaedy scanning, enlarging, erasing room numbers, and printing maps in 8x11 format and fit them together if necessary. WotC staffers at GenCon made it known they wish they had the time to do this for their games because of the obvious utility.

3) I want specific Forgotten Realms and Eberron adventures. Generic adventures to fit anywhere? If you must, but we're _swamped_. 3rd party publishers seem to be all over that just fine. I want specific stories and monsters tied to the campaign worlds others can't touch with a 10-meter cattleprod.

4) A real, true integrated index/glossary of D&D 3.5 gaming terms, items, and things. My wife, specifically, would like to be able to search for a term read in Eberron book #2, without having to literally hunt page by page for the item in books 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 etc. of Eberron for the actual definition and game terms of that item in question.

There, that's my grown-up Christmas wish.   

-DM Jeff


----------



## Driddle (Apr 27, 2007)

Tangent, which probably will be passed by fairly quickly on this thread:

In the front-page interview, the question was asked, "What is the likelihood of seeing new online material being compiled in hardcopy format - perhaps an annual magazine, book or compendium?" 

Bill answered, "Sounds like a great idea! In fact, it’s been part of our plans all along."

I'd suggest taking it one step further: Offer the consumer the opportunity to pick X number of pages of preexisting online content to bind into a unique, made-to-spec paperback. With today's micro-publishing tech, it's totally doable.

I would LOOOOOVE to see something like that.


----------



## freebfrost (Apr 27, 2007)

So we're mere months away from an online release that will change the face of D&D, and they haven't made any decisions about format, pricing, etc.  That doesn't sit well with me, coming from an IT background, nor does the empty platitudes make me feel any better that they will be providing a quality replacement for the magazines.

I enjoyed going back to the year 2000 WotC survey and seeing the numbers as to how much money the older crowd spends on gaming versus the younger gamers...  and I cannot help but to think how WotC is ignoring their own results in this decision and angering those who have supported Dragon/Dungeon for years.

NOTHING in this PR interview makes me want to spend any more money on WotC products - it's all vaporware at this point.


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 27, 2007)

Wye said:
			
		

> Imagine going to an ice-cream shop for your favorite cone:
> "Can I have vanilla and chocolate please?"
> "We just discontinued those flavors, but we have others, and new ones!"
> "Hrrm... Ok, show me what you've got."
> ...




That's a bit black and white. They said a lot of the content will continue and you'll get more then ever before. So I wouldn't say they discontinued vanilla and chocolate. You'll just have to get it somewhere else.


----------



## dpetroc (Apr 27, 2007)

Without a full court press from WotC and a sample of the new online content, I think WotC will have a hard time finding the numbers for their new DI.  A good number of Dragon/Dungeon subscribers are already moving to Pathfinder.  A good number of those who can't afford it are probably too ticked off because they were treated like lemmings to go with the DI.  A whole bunch sound interested but are wary of the D&D websites inherent crappiness (and with fair reason).  Sounds like they are starting off in a moderately deep hole with a very small shovel to dig themselves out with.  

For the sake of the hobby, I hope it does work and usher a new age of gaming in with a younger audience to support it. Otherwise...can you say model trains and slot cars?


----------



## Draumr (Apr 27, 2007)

Riley said:
			
		

> Thanks for turning up and having something to say, if only a very little.  You didn't in any way address the need to eliminate the printed magazines in order to make the online model work, but I understand that you are not allowed to give much if any ground in your official capacities.  I'm still *very* unhappy with the cancellation of the magazines, and I don't see a limited access, DRM-encoded DI with limited permanence or portability to be any kind of replacement for magazines like the 400 or so I've got on my shelves for ready access.  Fortunately, Paizo is willing to give me a partial replacement for what you've taken away, even if you aren't.
> 
> As for your DI, I want it to be great, and I want it to be something I would want to pay for.  I don't care about online character generators or other shiny gadgets.  What's important to me is to have pretty, printable articles and adventures with inspiring illustrations.  Also, if I'm going to pay for it, I want to be able to keep what I've bought.  Any DRM'ing beyond watermarking would be an absolute non-starter.  I own five computers, and I'll own new computers in the future.  I will not tolerate keys or licenses or any of that nonsense.
> 
> So good luck, I wish you the best in winning me as a customer for your new endeavor.  Keep coming around to visit, and I'll be glad to hear what you have to say.  Or, if you ever get your message board's search function working, I'll be happy to come over to your place to find what, if anything, you've posted.




Exactly my point of view.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 27, 2007)

One question that popped into my head that I hadn't seen was the following.

-Given that DI will be implemented with the 3.5 rule set,
-and given that within the next couple of years we are likely to see 4E ...

can you give us any assurances that 3.5 DI content will be maintained and that there will be a separate  4E DI?


----------



## danzig138 (Apr 27, 2007)

Frukathka said:
			
		

> I'd still like to know how the Digital Initiative is going to affect gamers w/o internet access.



I'm guessing that since they don't have internet access, it won't affect them much at all. 



			
				Twowolves said:
			
		

> Apparantly, Helium 3 does, that's who.



 Come on. That's not what he said and you know it. He didn't say you couldn't feel bad abot it. He said he was glad to see some people realize they had over-reacted (and don't even try to deny that people did) and some cop to it. In no way did he tell you the way you feel was unjustified. Come down off the cross. You're dripping on the carpet.


----------



## Jedi_Solo (Apr 27, 2007)

Add another huge Thank You to everyone involved in getting this together.

I'm not that worried (yet) about the lack of specifics.  I'm a computer programmer myself so I fully understand how if a program is 99% complete and working perfectly how that final 1% can cause the entire project to crash and burn and/or require 50% of the project to be rewritten.  

Even if they had an example article A ready to go 100% it may not play nicely with tool X and finally may be scrapped for the Grand Opening to give them more time on the interaction.  I've seen a lot of thoughts that the lack of answers is a "we don't have ANY ideas yet" but I view it more as "we don't have FINALIZED answers yet"

As far as what I am want from it:

Low/No DRM - Watermarking is fine.  At the very least I want it to not matter what computer is seeing it.  If I get a new computer I want that computer to see everything the old one sould see.  I don't want my content dependant on my computer not releasing the Magic Smoke. (You all know that computers run on Magic Smoke, correct?  Take it from a programmer.  If you see the Magic Smoke escape your computer will no longer work.)  I've lost a few DRM items because of this.  That is why I never purchase anything with stronger DRM than watermarking.

"Sidebars" Galore - I love seeing the sidebars.  I like reading the ideas of "Working X into Y Setting" and seeing why a designer worked it the way they did.  If we're playing in Forgotten Realms even a sidebar saying how to work something into Ebberon or Planescape may give us a new adventure or campaign idea.  If we see a wierd or seemingly-backwards way of doing something new, seeing WHY the designer did it that way may help us use it or may even let us sey 'we don't need to worry about that aspect' and let us use the more steamlined but buggy version of the new rule.  Without the concern of real-estate that printed materials has these Sidebars should be numerous.

Campaign Classics - Again on real-estate issue, now that the concern of page space isn't the issue that it once was I want to see the older settings get more love.  I loved (most of) Spelljammer but there is almost nothing for it in 3.X.  Others love Birthright and Dark Sun.  Giving space to one setting won't risk detracting from those that exclusively play in other settings; there is room enough for everybody.


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 27, 2007)

Devyn said:
			
		

> can you give us any assurances that 3.5 DI content will be maintained and that there will be a separate 4E DI?




I'd say that there is no chance at all of this happening. Its hard enough trying to support multiple campaign settings and there is no way they'll support two different editions. There will be a market for this in PDFs, but nothing official from Wizards once they roll over to 4e. And really, how can you expect them to support an old platform? Does Microsoft still release programs for Windows 3.11?


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 27, 2007)

danzig138 said:
			
		

> In no way did he tell you the way you feel was unjustified. Come down off the cross. You're dripping on the carpet.



*Twowolves and Danzig have both just won a free suspension for making personal shots in this thread. We're at zero tolerance, folks; you don't have to agree with one another, but we expect you to do it politely and without personal jabs.

If this is somehow a problem, feel free to email me.*


----------



## Waylander the Slayer (Apr 27, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I agree. It's one of the big flaws with the magazine format: portability.
> 
> Cheers!




I will always have the magazines to take with me whereever I go, be it on the bus, in the bathroom or anywhere else. Online content? I am not sure how it can be construed that online content is more portable. Also, once my subscription expires, what happens to the content I paid for? I will always have the magazines regardless of the subscription, but the same cannot be said of online content (unless I print everything out).


----------



## Thaumaturge (Apr 27, 2007)

Waylander the Slayer said:
			
		

> Online content? I am not sure how it can be construed that online content is more portable.




I think the idea is any *one * issue of Dragon or Dungeon is more portable, but the entire library is gargantuan.  A laptop becomes more portable than all, most, or even a handful of issues which you can then use anywhere you have an access point.

Having access to access points is another issue, but I agree the DI will be more portable than my entire library.

On a slightly different note, I have so many Dragon magazines that I barely use any of them.  It takes too long to sort through all of the issues.  I have to remember what was where and when.  Hopefully, the DI will have good searching or at least good indexing, so I can actually use the content for which I've paid.

Thaumaturge.


----------



## The_Gneech (Apr 27, 2007)

daemonslye said:
			
		

> The basic fact is that WOTC decided to shut down the print magazines to drive users to an "online model".  WOTC will continue with other printed content - for now.  The answer above seems to seek rationale. e.g. "*Those magazines were filled with content you didn't actively use? Right? Hey - on a unit basis, that is negative value for the producer and consumer.*"
> 
> You're missing the point. I *read* EVERYTHING  in those magazines. Erik/James' openings, forums, ads (yeah, even the ads), comics and all other content.  It would take me a few days.  Where did I read it?  Primarily two places - *Neither were at my desk*. One was in bed before I went to sleep, images of running and screaming adventurers in my head.
> 
> ...




This is pretty much where I am. WotC should *know* what I want, because I bought it every month like clockwork. I want print trade magazines. The online content might be great, in which case I'd want it *as well as* the magazines, not *instead of*.

-The Gneech


----------



## Khairn (Apr 27, 2007)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I'd say that there is no chance at all of this happening. Its hard enough trying to support multiple campaign settings and there is no way they'll support two different editions. There will be a market for this in PDFs, but nothing official from Wizards once they roll over to 4e. And really, how can you expect them to support an old platform? Does Microsoft still release programs for Windows 3.11?




That is what I am worried about.  Once WotC goes 4E all the 3E support on the DI will go away.  Basicaly a forced migration to the new system.  I was already leaning away from the DI before the interview.  Due to the lack of any real information or vision, the interview pushed me further out, but this point ...    Unless clarified by someone at wotC, this is a huge NO-GO for me.

If they are building the DI with a deliberate planned obsolescence of the launch of 4E ... I won't touch it unless its all free.


----------



## Rokes (Apr 27, 2007)

*What I want from the Digital Initiative*

Here's what I want from the Digital Initiative.

I want all my print D&D books to come with a unique serial number.  If I'm a member of the DI, I should be able to go online, type in the serial number of my freshly purchased book and download a watermarked pdf version of the book (bookmarked and searchable).  The serial number works for only the first account it's entered for, so there'll be no swapping of serial numbers. 

I love my books. (FWIW, I own all non-setting specific 3.5e books)  I love the tactile aspect.  I stare at a computer screen 10 hours a day, and like to get away from time to time.

I also love pdfs.  I love being able to search for key words and I love being able to copy/paste parts of the text or art for player hand-outs.  I want these features w/o short-changing WotC (i.e. downloading them illegally).  I want these features w/o having to pay for the same book twice.

Seems easy to implement and a no-brainer to me.


----------



## FreeXenon (Apr 27, 2007)

I, as others have done, would like to thank Morrus and Scott, Bill, and Chris for taking time to attempt to appease us. 

DRM beyond watermarking would irritate me as well. High quality content is a must to make it all worth paying for, and please do not stop the free content especially the previews which have been instrumental to me deciding to purchase quite a few products.

*High Quality E-Tools: *I have not used many electronic products, but the ones that I have have not been correct in their calculations or flexible enough. 

Having the ability to set what a character sheet looks like to us individually; to drag an drop portions of a character sheet organized the way that we prefer and have that as the default for all full character sheets viewed, as each person has their own preference established from years of gaming. Do something similar for magic items, monsters and pretty much everything else. 

Having the ability to add custom types for damage, magic and so and set its rules for stacking: like a new bonus called: _Uber_ that stacks with everything except for _competence_ bonuses.

*Campaign profiles*: being able to set up campaign profiles and associate specific players with it. To set campaign rules as well as character generation and have that set for all people generating characters for your campaign. 

Being able to set what books are acceptable sources and possible include all of the feats and magic items and so on from it. 

Having the ability to generate and print out to scale tactical encounter maps would rock as well as having encounters available for monsters and N/PC's.

*Linking* the crap out of everything link in the Hypertext SRD as well as having an extensive and flexible search. Types, Bonuses, monsters and so on. 

Being able to create monsters using the correct rules, as well as being able to add HD and have things auto calculated correctly and add class levels with ease.

Being able to have a searchable database of NPC's available to use as well as encounters using material available from all products. 

*TAG *things so that it will be easier to find. If I want to do research on dwarves I would like to be able to click on Dwarves and see everything available on them. The ability to set up TAGS of our own like GMail does would rock and make it flexible as well. 

When we pull up the rules on Grappling I would like to see the (errated) core rules for grappling (as well as alternate rules like UA) and then all links to online and offline articles about grappling from the edition that I am playing (possibly 3.0) and then possibly a section of links that list materials from older or newer editions that may be of interest. I may be researching some house rules and want to see some new ideas on this topic. 

*Downloadable and printable content *as everywhere I play I do not have a computer ready. Having the easy ability to order source books and magazines directly, or even better order a customized compilation in print or even in a PDF format (complete with reference links) that we can download and print out.

Access to other D20 WotC products as well, Star Wars, D20 modern.

This is a good start for now.  Hopefully I am not alone.


----------



## PoeticJustice (Apr 27, 2007)

*Pricing*

I have serious issues with their ambiguity regarding pricing.

More than 5 years ago WotC shut down their Magic magazine, the Duelist, and promptly revamped their website so that it puts out 2 or 3 professional quality articles every day. Knowing this, I was overjoyed to hear that Dragon content would enjoy a similar renaissance. Then I read this interview and they said DI might come with a price tag.

In order for me and my university expense account to continue buying Dungeons and Dragons material, the website must be kept 100% free of charge. No subscriptions. No premium content. Free material on the web or I walk.


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Apr 27, 2007)

I waited a few hours before I responded, as when I first read the interview I found it wanting.

But first thank you, for the attempt at appeasing your 'rabid' fans.    Big Kudos there.   

While some questions were answered, the harder ones were not.

So here's what I got from it and my suggestions.

 1. Ability for 'Subscriber' to access anywhere with connection.   

 2. DRM if more than Watermarking, it would be bad. You have to take into account persons like me who have multiple portable drives.  I have 4 computers in my house, 3 are mine the fourth is my wife's.

 3. Content must be downloadable in some form, if not it is useless for me unless I'm online during a game.

 4. Piecemail subscriptions = Bad Idea, I can see the Platinum / Gold / Silver split as a possiblity though.
    Platinum - Full access everything WOTC & willing 3rd Party Material
    Gold - Full access everything WOTC
    Silver - This can be your trial access, no downloads and any tools are OGL/SRD only.
    That I can see working as Silver would be for those wanting to test drive it or just want to keep up with stuff.  Your Gold offers the download capabilities and all.  Any tools would have all WOTC products as an option within them.  Your checklist of what you want to use can be saved as a alias profile within your account.  Think like what Dice.com uses for your job agents.  You can save several different ones under your account and choose which one to run at the time.
The Platinum level will allow 3rd party developers (Paizo/Green Ronin/Mongoose/Etc) to still provide some content.  As it is something your lawyers would have to do, most likely as a fee for 'yeah publish this for us'.  Much like OGL revolutionized the industry this could also help in 'bridging' the rift that losing those magazines has caused.  I'm sure some money would change hands between companies on that, so it is just a 'Hey did anyone think of this as a source of revenue that wouldn't squeeze our customer base, but might actually expand it.'  Cause really on EnWorld how many Core only games are being played?  Now compare that to how many of us use WOTC only, now compare to how many use 3rd Party.
All your Online Tools could take into account this as well.  Perhaps the Platinum version allows their download to offline tools.  In the offline version have it so only mechanics are in the data (i.e. 3rd level caster of magic missile is 2 1d4+1 missiles), if they want more there is a Book & Page reference to look it up.  Allow that tool to import 3rd party data, and I bet you have a lot going for it.

5. Pricing - If you use the tiered pricing for something like I mentioned in #4 (Platinum/Gold/Silver), something like $3 / $5 / $10 per month would work easily.  The Platinum jump is based on the 3rd party contributions at that level (i.e. less work on WOTC) and the fact downloadable tools will be a huge selling point.  (Just make sure patches are readily available as errata is made.)  Another thing I would say is allow only Silver to be a 'month to month' one.  Gold available on 3/6/9/12 month basis, with Platinum only being available on a Yearly subscription rate. 

6. If you do Compendiums, like you say are in the works for them, I would say twice a year would be best.  Any more than that, and would have to ask 'So why did you get rid of them.  Now on the twice a year thing, make one a 'Dragon'-like content and the other a 'Dungeon'-like content.  Do not have Adventure Paths in those, sell adventure path Hardcovers of the popular ones.

7. Access after subscription.  Kind of touchy there.  I bought it it's mine.  If you use the model in #4, Silver you can't do it.  Gold and Platinum allowed you to download any article already, and Platinum allowed the download of tools.  So if you kept that model and made sure people knew it, then this should be a non-issue then.
But the big thing is what about Archive access you ask.  Well reward longer term subscribers, i.e. you have been subscribing for 2 months now, so you have access to the last 4 months archives.  Wow you have stayed with us the year, have access to the last 2yrs archives.  Each month allows another month deeper into archives.  If you lapse say subscribe 2 months quit for 6 then subscribe again you start that over.

8. Content, I want all of Dragon/Dungeon and more.  Embrace those that left when 3E came out, those that were 'abandon' by their Setting being discontinued.
As part of Platinum Subscriptions, allow the publications of the Defuncts (OD&D / 1E / 2E / Planescape / Spelljammer / etc...) articles.  Embrace the past as well as the future, and I bet you might snag a few 'old-timers' into subscribing just for an article or two of cost each month.

Well if you got this far, thanks.  Below is just rants about it, figure you would prefer the suggestions first.
The interview sounded like corpspeech filtered by someone.  Sorry but it did.
The can't tell you the content, but what would you like to see reminded me of dealing with a used car dealer.  Feeling me out for what are you willing to pay, not the how much it is.  But I give ya a pass there, as you did ask.  I think it was just worded wrong.  (Least I hope you meant something like, we are keeping several lines of articles, but not all are finalized yet, from Dragon/Dungeon.  But we want your suggestions on other content we can provide other content that you want as well.)
The knowing about this a year in advance does make it seem like somewhere a ball was dropped on Public Relations part.

But let me say again, Scott Rouse; Bill Slavicsek; & Chris Perkins, thank you for taking time to answer those questions as best you could.
Morrus, thank you again for putting it all together.

Sincerly
Yeti


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Apr 27, 2007)

Devyn said:
			
		

> One question that popped into my head that I hadn't seen was the following.
> 
> -Given that DI will be implemented with the 3.5 rule set,
> -and given that within the next couple of years we are likely to see 4E ...
> ...




Good one, forgot to ask that as well.


----------



## ehren37 (Apr 27, 2007)

Simplicity said:
			
		

> Hmmm.  I'm not actually finding the interview to be very revealing...  At least none of the answers I really was interested in were answered directly.
> 
> Two points of interest:
> (1) The DRAGON and DUNGEON names will probably be used in the Digital Initiative somehow.
> ...





This in and of itself would cause me to never subscribe. I OWN my books and magazines. No one comes and deletes them if I dont pay my monthly fee.
Watermarks, sure. Limited timeframe licensing? No.

Make the product relatively inexpensive, and more people will choose to get it legit rather than illegally download it anyways.


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Apr 27, 2007)

Rokes said:
			
		

> Here's what I want from the Digital Initiative.
> 
> I want all my print D&D books to come with a unique serial number.  If I'm a member of the DI, I should be able to go online, type in the serial number of my freshly purchased book and download a watermarked pdf version of the book (bookmarked and searchable).  The serial number works for only the first account it's entered for, so there'll be no swapping of serial numbers.
> 
> ...



The serial number is a great idea except for one fact.  Do you recall how many shoplifted the Thief's Handbook.  It was almost a badge of honor for some.  It would be to easy for another to browse the book and write the serial number down.  Also that serial numbering each book would drive the cost up of the already expensive books.


----------



## SavageRobby (Apr 27, 2007)

JeffB said:
			
		

> meh...lotsa corporate speak. i.e. little content, lots of words.




Yeah. One would hope their new online content has more meat than the interview.


----------



## Joël of the FoS (Apr 27, 2007)

Now, Scott, while I appreciate immensely that you registered here and ask for our input - which is very cool, it would be much better if you actually answered a few of the concerns or ideas put here (instead of laconic one liners  ). I do not say this to be nasty, mind you, I really wish an on going discussion with WotC on the subject. 

If you can't say what DI will be, at least tell us what it won't be  when you see fans suggesting directions you'll surely won't follow.

---

Considering the bad press and fan reaction, the best way to launch it IMHO would be a free period to hook people, i.e. to get people to see what it will be and decide if it's worth the ?$ you'll ask for it.

As for the price, indeed make it as low as possible, since we won't have anything in hand: you can't charge nowhere near as Dragon did since you do not have all the charges for printing / distribution. Also, as one poster said, cheap is the best way to make content piracy irrelevant or not worth it.

Joël


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 27, 2007)

Devyn said:
			
		

> That is what I am worried about.




When 3e came out the same thing happened to Dragon and Dungeon as far as 2e content. I'd expect it to be the same with the Digital Initiative.


----------



## sjmiller (Apr 27, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> I want to answer this question - the challenge for me in using Dragon's content is portability.  I can't bring 100 back-issues to my game.  It would be a huge hassle, and copying/scanning/re-typing it is a lot of time and effort.



I would like to answer this as well.  I find the internet content to be particularly challanging to use because of its lack of portability.  I can read a magazine at my leisure, anywhere I want, including outside.  I cannot do that with internet content as I can't take my desktop with me everywhere.  When I want to use something from a magazine I either bring the magazine with me or I make a copy.  If I want a friend to read it I can lend them my magazine.  If I want to read it while in the bathroom, I can easily take my magazine with me.

As for what content have I used, well, I've used a lot of Dragon content.  Material presented about new weapons and armor and assorted other equipment in issues since 3.0 came out have been used.  I cannot tell you the amount of material used from my collection of old Dragon magazines.  Let's just say I have copied a number of pages over the years to make a folder of "house extras".  The only online content I have used is errata and materials which I can print out.

Hard copy is your friend, or at least it is my friend.  Except for the postings I do while I am at work, I spend very little free time in front of a computer.  I do it for a living 8 hours a day, why add more?


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Apr 27, 2007)

sjmiller said:
			
		

> I would like to answer this as well.  I find the internet content to be particularly challanging to use because of its lack of portability.  I can read a magazine at my leisure, anywhere I want, including outside.  I cannot do that with internet content as I can't take my desktop with me everywhere.




Having the content on the 'net doesn't inherently make it better for me - though if its something I can copy-n-paste into word docs (which I would then print out as needed) that would be a minimal level of portability.  I've doen that with a lot of the current WoTC content on the page.

I think they'd need to work at making the content as portable as possible.  I'm not so concerned about reading in the same way as I'd read a magazine.  My concern is with making the content useable at the game table.  Everything revolves around that - for me.


----------



## Shroomy (Apr 27, 2007)

I appreciate the interview, but I'm still going to take a wait and see approach to the actual DI.  However, I do like that they are going to continue some of the articles that we see today and that the tradition of freelance submissions will continue.  My one big worry is who will be in charge of the DI content from an editorial standpoint?  Filling the shoes of the Paizo editorial staff is going to be a big challenge, right up there with pricing and format, IMO.  Those three issues are going to be the deciding factor for me when decision time comes up in a few months.


----------



## Hjorimir (Apr 27, 2007)

Scott/WotC-

I'd like to echo the idea that some others have put forward to online VOIP play complete with wiki access to rules, dierollers, character generation, etc. It's really the only thing I can think of that gives me more than what Dragon and Dungeon gave to me in the past.

Morrus-

Thanks for driving the herd.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 27, 2007)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> When 3e came out the same thing happened to Dragon and Dungeon as far as 2e content. I'd expect it to be the same with the Digital Initiative.




When WotC switched from AD&D to 3E, all the new content changed, but all the hard copies of your old content stayed the same.  (obviously)  Some gamers were upset with the switch but they still had all their campaign details at their home.

The difference I'm worried about in the future is that many of the features that are being requested for the DI will mean that your campaign detail, access to character sheets, access to monster stats etc etc will be hosted at WotC.   If you have been using WotC's DI to run your 3.5E game and dont want to switch to 4E what happens to all that information you accessed from the WotC site?


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 27, 2007)

The_Gneech said:
			
		

> This is pretty much where I am. WotC should *know* what I want, because I bought it every month like clockwork. I want print trade magazines. The online content might be great, in which case I'd want it *as well as* the magazines, not *instead of*.
> 
> -The Gneech




Pretty much where I stand as well.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Apr 27, 2007)

Joël of the FoS said:
			
		

> Now, Scott, while I appreciate immensely that you registered here and ask for our input - which is very cool, it would be much better if you actually answered a few of the concerns or ideas put here (instead of laconic one liners  ). I do not say this to be nasty, mind you, I really wish an on going discussion with WotC on the subject.



Hey, give him a chance! His first post here was last night at 10pm. He's a busy guy, I wouldn't be surprised if he could only post here (some) nights. Considering he stayed past midnight and likely had to be at work early today, I'd say he's definitely giving an effort to follow the discussion.

Just because you can post in the middle of the day doesn't mean he can.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Apr 27, 2007)

PoeticJustice said:
			
		

> I have serious issues with their ambiguity regarding pricing.
> 
> More than 5 years ago WotC shut down their Magic magazine, the Duelist, and promptly revamped their website so that it puts out 2 or 3 professional quality articles every day. Knowing this, I was overjoyed to hear that Dragon content would enjoy a similar renaissance. Then I read this interview and they said DI might come with a price tag.
> 
> In order for me and my university expense account to continue buying Dungeons and Dragons material, the website must be kept 100% free of charge. No subscriptions. No premium content. Free material on the web or I walk.




Just curious: Did you have a subscription to Dragon and/or Dungeon?  If yes, and the online subscription were the same price, or maybe even less, would you still walk?  Why would you be willing to pay for the mags, but not for online content (DRM issues aside for the moment, since they are unresolved - assume you can download and keep everything).

If they offer content that is better for you than a single WotC splatbook, for a price lower than a single splatbook, would you consider not buying one less physical book and get a subscription instead?  

I've found that some people have an attitude that just because it is on the web, it should be free.  I've never quite understood that.


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 27, 2007)

blargney the second said:
			
		

> By the way, I'm taking this to mean that the WotC guys are listening in this thread to what we want them to do.  Empowerment to shape the future of a product doesn't come every day.  I'm as sad as anybody at the loss of Dungeon, but that doesn't prevent me from letting them know what parts of it I want to see continued.



We are listening (but not in a Big Brother way!) so do please continue sharing your thoughts here.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Apr 27, 2007)

Thornir Alekeg said:
			
		

> Just curious: Did you have a subscription to Dragon and/or Dungeon?  If yes, and the online subscription were the same price, or maybe even less, would you still walk?



Assuming DI is the same amount of material as Dragon and Dungeon, I'd expect a lower price since publishing stuff online is way cheaper than printing it and distributing it.

They _are_ looking like they're going to add a bunch of other features, though. I can't imagine that DI is going to include the number of articles as two monthly magazines combined (much less more articles), so maybe it'll balance out.


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 27, 2007)

rycanada said:
			
		

> Sounds like the DI is behind schedule, nebulous, and could easily turn out to be a total disaster.  And for this, they cancelled my favorite magazines?  This is just dumb.  If the DI isn't up to snuff, all this anger they've created is going to get rekindled when they try to release it.  I am so bummed that I put as much money as I did into Wizards products in the last 2 years.  I feel like a sucker.




 :\ I submit this is an unfair assumption. Not revealing our plans should not be taken to mean we are floundering. We simply want to announce our specific plans at a time that maximizes impact (that's a lot of marketing speak for "we want to make our plans known when people are most open to hearing them").


----------



## Pyske (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> We simply want to announce our specific plans at a time that maximizes impact (that's a lot of marketing speak for "we want to make our plans known when people are most open to hearing them").




Seems to me that the "traditional" release date for this sort of thing is GenCon, with a couple months of hype leadup to the event.  That would seem to fit the timeline that we're talking about for the end of the magazines.  

It also seems to me that publishers as big as WotC have learned not to promise specific release dates until they have the material pretty much in hand.  I'm going to assume that's their timeframe, until I hear otherwise.


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> :\ I submit this is an unfair assumption. Not revealing our plans should not be taken to mean we are floundering. We simply want to announce our specific plans at a time that maximizes impact (that's a lot of marketing speak for "we want to make our plans known when people are most open to hearing them").




LL,
I think most reading this thread are very open to hearing them.  When you do the Corpspeak to most of us it will smell like a just fertilized field.

Though I do feel his remarks probably could have been worded a little better, there is a feeling of 'lack of direction' currently.  The internet/email leaves alot to be desired to read a person and what they intend to say.  

The quickest way to alieve alot of the angst would probably be an 'unofficial' bullet list of things that are going to be incorporated.
Something like:
- Class Acts
- Sage Advice
- FR World
- Greyhawk
- Ebberon

I bet you would get less 'flak' that way, though a few more pointed questions in those areas you do list.  Perhaps a bi-weekly update (i.e. PR) on the D.I. (Please get a better name for it.)  Let us know something a definite or simple polls of preference.

Thanks for posting, it is encouraging to know that they are 'paying attention' now (vice when you all just lurked).

Yeti


----------



## Sigma (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> :\ I submit this is an unfair assumption. Not revealing our plans should not be taken to mean we are floundering. We simply want to announce our specific plans at a time that maximizes impact (that's a lot of marketing speak for "we want to make our plans known when people are most open to hearing them").




I submit that you did a pretty poor job of communicating any plans to indicate that you are not, in fact, floundering.

I'm a regular on the Paizo boards, and have spent the past week or two defending WotC.  End of the day, I figure that you know what you're doing and that what you're doing is generally very cool.  But this "interview" made me very angry.  It made it sound like you don't have a plan, you're just now getting around to soliciting our input (without any indication that you will actually listen to said input), and, most importantly, completely failed to make any case that your new DI offers value that the magazines somehow lacked.

I appreciate the need to time announcements, but you're in damage control land now.  The cat is out of the bag, and it's up to you whether you continue dodging our questions and frustrating your fans or providing us with some indication that you do actually have a plan and it is actually worth the loss of these publications.


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> We are listening (but not in a Big Brother way!) so do please continue sharing your thoughts here.




I hope you (and the other staffers) will stick around and (hopefully) be able to have discussions on issues that are not so contentious as this one.

Your appearence here is appreciated (even though it might not always seem so in the current climate).

Thanks.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> :\ I submit this is an unfair assumption. Not revealing our plans should not be taken to mean we are floundering.



I agree with you that it's an unfair assumption, but we don't have a lot of information to go on. But, what we want, you can't give because the time to discussion DI isn't today, apparently.

I'm sure you understand the loss of the two magazines are significant. High emotions can lead to unfair assumptions. Unfortunately, there's little that can be done about it, though a little more tact by some posters would be nice...
(Hey guys, they're trying! What do you expect?)


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 27, 2007)

Sigma said:
			
		

> I submit that you did a pretty poor job of communicating any plans to indicate that you are not, in fact, floundering.
> 
> I appreciate the need to time announcements, but you're in damage control land now.  The cat is out of the bag, and it's up to you whether you continue dodging our questions and frustrating your fans or providing us with some indication that you do actually have a plan and it is actually worth the loss of these publications.




Point taken. To heart. We're sorta in a no-win situation right now. We do have a plan...we just aren't at liberty to reveal the details yet. That's an unacceptable answer, I'm totally aware, but we just can't talk details in, er..., detail just yet.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> :\ I submit this is an unfair assumption. Not revealing our plans should not be taken to mean we are floundering. We simply want to announce our specific plans at a time that maximizes impact (that's a lot of marketing speak for "we want to make our plans known when people are most open to hearing them").




I agree, but to that end, I'm wondering if we can get some clarification.  

I am not a computer tech person or web design person, but I have a background in project management.  Most of the classes I took were dominated by people in the IT industry, so I picked up a little from them.  To me the DI sounds like it will be more ambitious than just slapping a bunch of text articles onto a web page and then having an e-commerce solution to access it.  Unless I'm wrong and that is all it will be, I sincerely hope you are past the planning stage and are well into the design stage.  I am concerned that, if things are really as unsettled as they appear, the idea of providing this content shortly after the end of Dragon and Dungeon is unrealistic.  I think the last thing the DI needs is significant delays in roll-out, or a hasty effort to get it out, resulting in a lower quality product. 

So,a couple of questions for Scott or someone else in the know, if you don't mind:

Are there parts of the DI intended to replace the print magazaines that are past the planning stages?  

Are you at the point where you know certain content will be included and someone is actually working on that content, along with designs for pages to deliver that content?  

Is the plan for a phased roll-out where some content will be ready to go up shortly after the last publications of the magazines, but additional features added as time goes along, or are you going for the big, initial roll out with pretty much everything you plan on right away?

I would like to see this effort succeed.  I think, with good planning and execution the potential is there to have something of great value, but with the amount of skepticism that is already out there, you can't afford a half-baked effort.  You know what they say about first impressions.  

Last question: are there plans for a free trial period?


----------



## Maggan (Apr 27, 2007)

Sigma said:
			
		

> you're just now getting around to soliciting our input




It is my belief that they have gathered input from us before the announcement, through polls and questionaires and stuff like that.

The DI will be in constant development content wise, so even if our input does not register at launch, they can still use it to add to the site later.

/M


----------



## grrtigger (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> Point taken. To heart. We're sorta in a no-win situation right now. We do have a plan...we just aren't at liberty to reveal the details yet. That's an unacceptable answer, I'm totally aware, but we just can't talk details in, er..., detail just yet.




Disappointing, of course, but I do think it helps quite a lot that we're now seeing official WotC representation on the boards here and elsewhere.  Just feeling like we're being listened to by TPTB and that our concerns are being considered goes a long way, at least for me.  

I think a lot of the initial furor was less over the announcement of the change and more about how vague any future plans sound at this point, with all of it spun a little tighter by the fact that it took several days to start getting any kind of answer to our questions and concerns.

Thanks for showing up here!  It can't be easy seeing all of the criticism and not being able to respond (just yet) with much substance.

Well, at least you can feel secure that many of us are passionate about the hobby 

Edit: I think one thing that would be immensely helpful is if you (meaning the general you) could give us a definite idea of when we can expect more concrete info.  Right now it's just "we can't say anything right now" which is, well ... sigh.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Apr 27, 2007)

Sigma said:
			
		

> you're just now getting around to soliciting our input



Except for, y'know, the survey they did six months ago. I don't know if they've done anything else other than that, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was other (sneakier) stuff I just didn't notice or see.


			
				Sigma said:
			
		

> (without any indication that you will actually listen to said input)



Asking for input is _usually_ an indication that they're going to listen to input.

If they ask for input, you'll think they don't know what they're doing. If they don't ask for input, they risk not giving you exactly what consumers want. So, they have to be mind-readers. Bring in the Telepaths!


----------



## PoeticJustice (Apr 27, 2007)

Thornir Alekeg said:
			
		

> Just curious: Did you have a subscription to Dragon and/or Dungeon?  If yes, and the online subscription were the same price, or maybe even less, would you still walk?  Why would you be willing to pay for the mags, but not for online content (DRM issues aside for the moment, since they are unresolved - assume you can download and keep everything).




I was not, nor ever have been a subscriber. I preferred to buy from my FLGS.

I would walk for the following reasons.

1. There's a lot of awesome web material already available for free the usually surpasses or meets Dragon Magazine. Asking fans to pay when equivalent material is already being produced by fans is absurd.

2. I don't buy Dragon for the game product. I buy Dragon for a) toilet reading, b) visiting One Eyed Jacques, my FLGS, 3) giving newbs (I train at least 5 a year) something interesting to read and borrow. Online content doesn't meet any of these needs so I will not purchase it.

3. I don't think I could enjoy pdfs in the same way I enjoy reading a magazine. Web articles are fine, but they are not a format I enjoy consuming enough to pay money.

4. Disgust. Canceling a periodical to offer fans more content is not the same as launching a pay website. Magic gets 3 or 4 new articles a day, updated like clockwork, on a good looking site, for free. I like D&D, and I think my hobby deserves the exact same treatment. If wizards doesn't share that view, then they better make it up to me or next year I'm just going to buy $7000 worth of pizza and soda instead of the 70+ books and 100+ boxes of minis I purchased with VCU money.


----------



## Sigma (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> Point taken. To heart. We're sorta in a no-win situation right now. We do have a plan...we just aren't at liberty to reveal the details yet. That's an unacceptable answer, I'm totally aware, but we just can't talk details in, er..., detail just yet.




Well, thanks for taking the time to post here.  Even if you can't give answers, having a presence on the various online communities goes a long way to keeping us engaged.  The complete silence after the annoucement was painful, particularly given the rather sterile press release.  I guess I had hoped that the interview would fill in enough gaps to make up for that silence, but breaking the silence by actually starting a dialogue with us is also a good start.


----------



## Waylander the Slayer (Apr 27, 2007)

I know that polls, questionaires and other market research was mentioned as the basis for the online initiative. Is it possible to provide a bit more detail on what this research was (I am not asking for results which would be confidential and valuable to WoTC, but rather the research conducted - Polls on WoTC website, reply forms attached to products etc.)


----------



## Veander (Apr 27, 2007)

Fieari said:
			
		

> At least there's going to be print compilations alongside the online content.




If you re-read that, you'll find we have Morrus to thank for that.  He literally gave them the idea and they said, yeah... ah... it was in our plans.


----------



## Sigma (Apr 27, 2007)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Except for, y'know, the survey they did six months ago. I don't know if they've done anything else other than that, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was other (sneakier) stuff I just didn't notice or see.
> Asking for input is _usually_ an indication that they're going to listen to input.
> 
> If they ask for input, you'll think they don't know what they're doing. If they don't ask for input, they risk not giving you exactly what consumers want. So, they have to be mind-readers. Bring in the Telepaths!




If you're going to quote me, take the quote in context.  What I said was:



			
				Sigma said:
			
		

> It made *it sound like* you don't have a plan, you're just now getting around to soliciting our input (without any indication that you will actually listen to said input), and, most importantly, completely failed to make any case that your new DI offers value that the magazines somehow lacked.




I did not say they did not get input, I said their interview made it sound *as though they did not get input.*

Take your snarkiness regarding telepaths elsewhere.  Again, if you read my post, you would see that I have been and generally am a WotC supporter.  Their interview failed to instill the confidence in which I normally vest in them.  That was my point.


----------



## Veander (Apr 27, 2007)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I agree. It's one of the big flaws with the magazine format: portability.
> 
> Cheers!




We could argue the same about the plethora of books.  So maybe their next move will be to stop having books and move to a complete online initiative.  Well, they said they aren't doing that, but the logic follows.


----------



## Delgar (Apr 27, 2007)

Devyn said:
			
		

> One question that popped into my head that I hadn't seen was the following.
> 
> -Given that DI will be implemented with the 3.5 rule set,
> -and given that within the next couple of years we are likely to see 4E ...
> ...





Don't you think it would be just easier for them to just start the DI with 4E rather than have to convert over later.

Food for thought...


----------



## CaptainChaos (Apr 27, 2007)

The WotC folks keep asserting that they full expected the backlash. I got to say, I find that hard to believe. If so, surely they would have had a better response ready to go when the news broke. As it is there's been a week of scrambling and a lot of "trust us, we have a plan" protestations. If I were in charge of WotC, I'd get some new PR people.


----------



## Rokes (Apr 27, 2007)

TheYeti1775 said:
			
		

> The serial number is a great idea except for one fact.  Do you recall how many shoplifted the Thief's Handbook.  It was almost a badge of honor for some.  It would be to easy for another to browse the book and write the serial number down.  Also that serial numbering each book would drive the cost up of the already expensive books.




They could include it in a small sealed envelope w/in the book.  The original 3E PHB had a CD with it.  Adding something like that to a book is really not that expensive.

But regardless (as the "how's" don't need to be fleshed out), there needs to be a way to uniquely identify if a person has purchased a print copy of a book so that I can get a free (or discounted) electronic version.

The DI needs to satisfy the following:

1) The player who only likes print books and wants some free online content.
2) The player who prefers print books, but wants additional online support.
3) The player who prefers print books, but wants equal amounts of digital content w/o paying through the nose.  (ex. Buy print book at retail.  Then get digital copy free or heavily discounted.)
4) The person who prefers digital content, but if they decide to purchase the printed content, can do so w/ a discount.  (ex.  I "buy" an electronic copy of the PHB 4.0, and then decide I really like it and want the print version.  I shouldn't have to pay full price if the electronic copy was already full price, vs. person 3 who buys the book at full price, but gets a discounted electronic copy.)
5) The person who only wants digital content.  They want it all, now, easily sortable, easily accessible no matter where they are gaming.  (The hypertext idea is probably the best for this sort of person).


----------



## grrtigger (Apr 27, 2007)

CaptainChaos said:
			
		

> The WotC folks keep asserting that they full expected the backlash. I got to say, I find that hard to believe. If so, surely they would have had a better response ready to go when the news broke. As it is there's been a week of scrambling and a lot of "trust us, we have a plan" protestations. If I were in charge of WotC, I'd get some new PR people.




I thought that was really strange too.  I'd almost rather the reality was "we didn't expect this" instead of "we expected to just wait it out" - which is how it sounds now, to me.

ps, it's also kinda funny that (edit: someone with a user name of) CaptainChaos is making a point supporting planning things out in advance


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Apr 27, 2007)

Rokes said:
			
		

> *SNIP*
> They could include it in a small sealed envelope w/in the book.  The original 3E PHB had a CD with it.  Adding something like that to a book is really not that expensive.



Ok defeats my 'theft' arguement.  But still my arguement remains on the individual number.  Doesn't matter how it's in the book, They would have to track each of those numbers as well as.

Now to expand on that thought after a little more thinking.  How about using the very questionaire cards in each book.  You know like all the Mag subscription ones.
Have it so the person has to enter their contact info (email) and mail it in.
Current additional cost 39 cents to customer.
Then when received by WOTC, they email customer to direct them to their sign in page where you have to either a) sign in with your D.I. ID or b) fill out a complete form with required blocks to Watermark your PDF.

It could work, with some effort.


----------



## MojoGM (Apr 27, 2007)

TheYeti1775 said:
			
		

> Current additional cost 39 cents to customer.




Come on, you know how cheap some gamers can be!  You can't ask them to spend an EXTRA 39 CENTS!


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 27, 2007)

And that...is the first summoning point of denial, I have ever heard.

None of us here, were born yesterday.


			
				grrtigger said:
			
		

> I thought that was really strange too.  I'd almost rather the reality was "we didn't expect this" instead of "we expected to just wait it out" - which is how it sounds now, to me.
> 
> ps, it's also kinda funny that CaptainChaos is making a point supporting planning things out in advance


----------



## MonkeyPower (Apr 27, 2007)

I agree with a lot of what's been written here - a great many of the suggestions sound really exciting, particular the quarterly/annual compendium, and I'd really look forward to seeing them, but two things I think are worth reiterating (again):

*Limit the DRM.* That will be the make-or-break for me. I'm not averse to buying stuff online - I certainly don't have a problem with PDFs, but if I can't do what I want with the stuff I'm buying (like cutting & pasting the bits I want to use into my own campaign setting/adventures), I'm out. Completely.
*Let me keep the content.* Once my subscription ends, I still want to have the stuff I paid for.

Other than that, I have no doubt that there will be content that I'm interested in (but I'd *love* to see more stuff from the old settings, Dark Sun particularly), and I'm not so bothered about potential tools (I've either bought them or am writing my own). Quite keen on avoiding plugins too...


----------



## Thomas Percy (Apr 27, 2007)

Excelent information, thanks Morrus. 
Until now, trying to be out of forum flame war, I didn't know about end of Dungeon and Dragon. 
I didn't read them, so I'm not upset and I'm ready for new online project.


----------



## Simplicity (Apr 27, 2007)

If there's one thing I can get through to Wizard's, it would be this...

DRM will not help you, but it *will* hurt you.

I know that sounds counter-intuitive, but consider the following.  

Fact 1: The DI will not be successful unless the content can be printed.  DMs absolutely need the ability to have paper material in front of them to game with.

Fact 2: All Wizards source books can already be found online through illegal channels.  D&D fans are so hardcore that they are willing to go through books and scan every page.

I have had players show up at my table with binders of scanned pages for sourcebooks.  Multiple times.  It doesn't make me happy, but if you're willing to pirate, you can get this stuff.

Fact 3: Regardless of the DRM scheme you choose, it will be circumventable because all it takes is for one person to print the material, and then scan it all back in.  And those willing to do something illegal to get the content will continue to get it for free.

Fact 4: It's highly likely that any DRM scheme you choose will inconvenience LEGAL users in some way.  Either because they want to switch machines, they stop subscribing (and thus lose the info), or they experience simple technical glitches.


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 27, 2007)

Zaukrie said:
			
		

> I want WotC to be more involved with their fans on line.




'sup Zaukrie. I've been pretty active on other message boards since coming to the D&D Brand team, but have only recently started hanging out here. That's basically because my job revolves around DDM & RPG accessories so I spend my time at sites dedicated to minis & such. I'm happy to speak up here when applicable, but there simply are a number of projects I'm not involved in. I'm doing what I can to be more visible here and I do believe other WotC folks are about to make the same efforts.

FWIW, any time I spend on the boards is personal time. I post when my job allows...meaning during lunch break or while at home. I can't speak for the others, but I'm pretty busy Brand-ing during the standard 40+ hour work week. Bear with me if I can't respond to all queries fast enough!


----------



## Veander (Apr 27, 2007)

Hi lurkinglidda,

I doubt you could answer, but is it true you are being handed a lemon and are trying to make lemonade?  I'm not sure who's idea it was to cancel these mags, but it couldn't have been a group WotC decision.


----------



## Sammael (Apr 27, 2007)

I can certainly attest that both Linae and Stephen "Shoe" Schubert maintain a very nice presence on Hordelings, where they often discuss mini-related issues with fans. 

/me waves to Lidda


----------



## Rokes (Apr 27, 2007)

TheYeti1775 said:
			
		

> ...They would have to track each of those numbers as well as.
> 
> Now to expand on that thought after a little more thinking.  How about using the very questionaire cards in each book.  You know like all the Mag subscription ones.
> Have it so the person has to enter their contact info (email) and mail it in.
> Current additional cost 39 cents to customer...




Tracking serial numbers isn't that difficult.  It's just a database, it wouldn't be much different than video games.  

The mail in thing would definitely have to be prepaid postage!  I can't afford 39 cents when I'm spending $100 a month on books!   

As for stealing, they could seal the books (or just part of the book?).  My FLGS seals a lot of stuff, but if you want to browse anything in the store, they'll break the seal (and reseal it if you don't buy it).

Bottom line, I actually WANT WotC to know how much money I'm spending on their products, and in turn want to be treated like a valued customer.


----------



## mhensley (Apr 27, 2007)

rycanada said:
			
		

> Sounds like the DI is behind schedule, nebulous, and could easily turn out to be a total disaster.  And for this, they cancelled my favorite magazines?  This is just dumb.  If the DI isn't up to snuff, all this anger they've created is going to get rekindled when they try to release it.  I am so bummed that I put as much money as I did into Wizards products in the last 2 years.  I feel like a sucker.




I've been a web developer for the past ten or so years and in my experience if they don't know exactly what the DI is supposed to do and support by now, they are in serious trouble.  Four months is not a long time in software development cycles especially for something that's supposed to be this big.


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 27, 2007)

Veander said:
			
		

> Hi lurkinglidda,
> 
> I doubt you could answer, but is it true you are being handed a lemon and are trying to make lemonade?  I'm not sure who's idea it was to cancel these mags, but it couldn't have been a group WotC decision.




I can't speak on behalf of the corproation, but I personally am making lemonade. My understanding is that a number of folks were involved with the decision, and it wasn't hastily made, but as for who was involved I cannot say. I'm not privy to all those closed-door meetings  :\


----------



## KB9JMQ (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> 'sup Zaukrie. I've been pretty active on other message boards since coming to the D&D Brand team, but have only recently started hanging out here. That's basically because my job revolves around DDM & RPG accessories so I spend my time at sites dedicated to minis & such. I'm happy to speak up here when applicable, but there simply are a number of projects I'm not involved in. I'm doing what I can to be more visible here and I do believe other WotC folks are about to make the same efforts.
> 
> FWIW, any time I spend on the boards is personal time. I post when my job allows...meaning during lunch break or while at home. I can't speak for the others, but I'm pretty busy Brand-ing during the standard 40+ hour work week. Bear with me if I can't respond to all queries fast enough!




Feel free to comment in all the mini threads here or start some 
Thanks for what responses you can do.


----------



## Arnwyn (Apr 27, 2007)

Thanks to Morrus for compiling/summarizing/sending in the questions, and thanks to Scott, Bill, and Chris for taking the time to answer (and Linae for braving the messageboards).


For me, this particular statement:


> What is the likelihood of seeing new online material being compiled in hardcopy format - perhaps an annual magazine, book or compendium?
> 
> Bill: Sounds like a great idea! In fact, it’s been part of our plans all along.



pretty much removed most of my disappointment in the cancellation of Dungeon and Dragon magazines.

With this, I'm more than good.


----------



## LeaderDesslok (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> FWIW, any time I spend on the boards is personal time. I post when my job allows...meaning during lunch break or while at home. I can't speak for the others, but I'm pretty busy Brand-ing during the standard 40+ hour work week. Bear with me if I can't respond to all queries fast enough!



Hi Linae,
The fact that you're here at all makes a huge difference to me. Thanks for taking the time to give us your input. And BTW, doesn't it hurt the cows with all that brand-ing your doing?   

One point about the answers we have received/will receive, I much prefer the straightforward "We can't discuss that right now" over ambiguous responses or non-answers. Specifically I was thinking of the response to the question about factors involved with replacing Dungeon/Dragon with DI instead co-existing; the answer was "Our online content plans will replace the printed magazines. That aside, we are still very much in the business of producing printed products." That's not the answer to the question!

Thanks again, all this branding talk has me hankering for some steak.


----------



## ScotMartin (Apr 27, 2007)

*Di*

Here is what I'm looking for from the DI:

*Information Lookup*
I want to be able to search by subject (wiki-style) and get all relevant information for the subject.  

For example, if I search for ghoul, I want to see the following on the page:
- stats for the ghoul
- single illustration
- notes on what has been errata'd from the print version
- official rulings and clarifications on the ghoul and his abilities
- expanded rules added after the print version (for example, what you can learn about the ghoul using Knowledge Religion from the Know Your Enemy articles)

Essentially, everything on the main page should be the basics of what I need in order to use a ghoul as DM.  However, I also want links to the following:
- alternate illustrations of the ghoul
- expanded articles about the ghoul ("Ecology of the Ghoul")
- D&D Miniatures information such as which sets have ghoul figures and the downloadable cards for those figures
- related information to the ghoul (ghasts, undead in general, the turning rules...) 
- a link that imports the ghoul straight into a monster/character generator so I can advance him, add levels or templates, alter his feats or skills, and then print out the resulting character sheet.  

That's just a sample for a monster, but I'd want similar style things for classes, races, magic items, rules, etc...

*Character/Monster ToolKit*
I want a character generator that allows me to build my PCs/NPCs/Monsters.  This should be able to:
- create and level-up characters (obviously)
- equip those characters with weapons and magic items and see their stats change appropriately
- take monsters and alter them (add class levels, advance them, add a template, change feats or skills)
- create houserules for my campaign (maybe gnomes get +2 CHR in my world)
- allow any of this to be stored on-line and downloadable by those with access (like google docs)
- easily import characters and monsters from on-line adventures
- incorporate the magic item creation rules
- create new content such as monsters, spells, magic items, etc...
- allow me to create new, but very basic, classes, races and prestige classes
- print the resulting character or monster in a variety of formats
- [Bonus Feature] incorporate the rules for Alter Self, Polymorph, Alternate Form, Reincarnate, etc... so you can easily alter your character for these events

*Mapping Toolkit*
I want to be able to create maps for adventures.  Features:
- Create maps that are indoors/outdoors/underground
- add door, furniture, columns and other basic features
- add traps, secret doors or monsters that can be toggled on or off when showing the map to the PCs
- a "fog of war" that hides sections of the dungeon until you click on them
- easily import existing maps from on-line adventures
- build or break down the map with dungeon tiles (if possible)
- break out sections of the map so that they can be printed out at different scales, all the way up to a scale compatible with miniatures
- the ability to import the maps into an on-line game

*Adventures*
I want on-line adventures with these features:
- the ability to import maps, monsters and characters into the toolkits above
- the ability to automatically alter the adventure within 2-3 levels of the intended level
- the ability to automatically convert the adventure to different settings 
- included links to the Information Lookup pages described above
- artwork for new monsters, unusual rooms, etc...
- well formatted for the whole adventure to be printed out if necessary
- generate lists of all D&D Miniatures used in adventure 
- the ability to easily use the adventure in on-line play (see 2 sections down)

*Combat Tracker*
I want an on-line combat tracker I can use with on-line play or with a PnP game:
- enter all combat participants, either manually or from toolkits
- set initiative order, either by handling the die rolling itself or allowing the DM to set it manually
- reorder initiative when someone readies an action or delays
- track damage and current status of participants (dazed, sickened, sleep, bleeding, etc...)
- track spell and effect durations on participants 
- a dice roller than can display a result of any set of dice being rolled
- if the characters/monsters have all stats entered, allow the program to optionally handle dice rolls internally.  You could ask it to make a DC 20 Fort save for a monster, or see if a bleeding character stabilizes, or just have monster A attack character B and it would show the result and damage

*On-Line Play*
I'd like to be able to meet on the internet with other players and play live.  We would need:
- a central room the would contain a map of the current encounter (uploaded from Mapping Toolkit), links to characters (Character Toolkit), and a chat window 
- to chat privately with individual players
- move into the Combat Tracker for combats 
- allow players to move characters on the maps in the combat
- option to auto-handle attacks of opportunity, concealment calculations, grapple rules, and other similar things.  
- track changes to character sheets (XP, damage, loss of spells, used equipment)
- easily upload on-line adventures to be used in this arena
- be able to pause the adventure and store everything in its current state so that the game could be resumed later

*D&D Miniatures*
- quickly find miniatures by monster type for later purchase
- run skirmishes on-line
- have on-line tournaments 

This is all the functionality I'd want out of DI (that I can think of right now), although I would certainly not expect all of this on day 1, or heck, even year 1.  I would, however, like to see this be the roadmap for DI, so that I know these sort of things are coming down the pipe, and things that are planned for are easier to implement in the long run.  

For the content, I want to be able to access all the monsters, spells, feats, etc... that are out there.  I'd be disappointed if I were limited to only the core books.  I'm guessing this will be handled through micro-purchases or varying subscription levels, there's simply no way for you to know I own a Monster Manual III and allow me to digitally browse all the monsters in it.  Repaying for that content doesn't particularly excite me, but I have no alternative practical solution.  For the future though, I'd like the purchase of printed content to also allow access to digital content.  

Thanks for the chance to let me add my 2 cents.

-Scot


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 27, 2007)

Sammael said:
			
		

> I can certainly attest that both Linae and Stephen "Shoe" Schubert maintain a very nice presence on Hordelings, where they often discuss mini-related issues with fans.
> 
> /me waves to Lidda




 <waves @ sammael> yo


----------



## Owen K.C. Stephens (Apr 27, 2007)

Riley said:
			
		

> I haven't seen anyone actually compare this action to rape.  Maybe I missed it.  However, I do keep reading posts *claiming* that people have been comparing this to rape.




And, in fact, it's still happening.

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3484127&postcount=65

EDIT: And the moderators are very quickly reacting to it!

Everyone is entitled to feel however they like, believe whatever they like and (within the rules of the forum) *say* whatever they like. But I assure you, it does impact how seriously professionals take what else you say.

It can also color how likely it is someone who already spends 40 or more hours a week staring at a computer screen is going to come to that forum to chat.

EDIT: And, to be fair, how moderators handle it is going to impact people's opinion of a forum as well. Swift, even reactions help reduce the overall impact significantly.


----------



## grrtigger (Apr 27, 2007)

ScotMartin said:
			
		

> Here is what I'm looking for from the DI:
> 
> *Information Lookup*
> I want to be able to search by subject (wiki-style) and get all relevant information for the subject.
> ...




_If_ (and I do mean _if_) the new whatever the heck it's called did all of this, as well as the stuff in the original "D&D Insider" listing, _and_ the content was customizable (i.e., collecting/arranging/tagging whatever content you want in whatever and as many collections as you liked), _and_ your access to content is not dependent on being logged in all the time, _and_ custom collections could be downloaded/printed on demand, _and_ the quality and variety of content equalled or surpassed the existing magazines ... then I'm in.

Basically, it will need to be as content-rich and easy to use and accessible as something like XBox Live to sway a lot of us who are not inclined to jump onboard at first blush.


----------



## Roman (Apr 27, 2007)

Scot Martin, I absolutely love your suggestions, especially on the information compilation. That said, however, I think it is far too optimistic - I doubt it will be THAT good.


----------



## Henry (Apr 27, 2007)

OStephens said:
			
		

> And, in fact, it's still happening.




And so it is...

just a reminder folks, if anyone sees someone still throwing gasoline on the fire, let us know by reporting the post. The sooner we know about it, the better...


----------



## Khairn (Apr 27, 2007)

Delgar said:
			
		

> Don't you think it would be just easier for them to just start the DI with 4E rather than have to convert over later.
> 
> Food for thought...




For WotC it would not be a good idea to start DI with 4E.  Just consider the emotions that went wild when they decided to dump the magazines for online content.  That's nothing compared to the strife that will ensue when they introduce 4E.

That's why I think its important to WotC to have as many campaigns and players using the DI as possible.  That way when they convert the DI to 4E, you can either continue to receive the support you've depended on to help run your games by switching to the new system

Here are a few fun similarities between the new DI and the many MMORPG's that are raking in ooodles of money

monthly fee's ... check
regular updates, new quests & adventures ... check
developers / programmers who gather player info for future updates ... check
dependance / reliance on a central site to play the game ... check
vocal players who are upset at rule changes that "nerf" their character ? ... check
company / player co-operation in the development / playtest of new material? ... check
paid expansions / new systems .... check

The 2 are getting more and more similar every day.


----------



## ScotMartin (Apr 27, 2007)

Roman said:
			
		

> Scot Martin, I absolutely love your suggestions, especially on the information compilation. That said, however, I think it is far too optimistic - I doubt it will be THAT good.




Well, they asked us to tell them what we *wanted*, so I laid it out.  I certainly don't expect all of that will come to pass, but I think a lot of that is possible to some scale down the line.  Hey, at least I didn't ask to be able to play back combats as movies with realistically rendered 3D models of all the participants!    

The information being compiled properly on-line is particularly important to me.  The other day in our game, a player wanted to use his Knowledge Arcana to find out what he knew about a Stone Golem's abilities.  I knew they'd done a series of Know Your Enemy articles on-line, but there was no handy way on the Wizards site to quickly find which of the 16 articles in the archive had that info (answer: none of them!  They never did the stone golem).  

-Scot


----------



## Zaukrie (Apr 27, 2007)

I too would like to thank lurking lidda for being here. In addition to being busy at work, she's having a baby at Gen Con (ok, during Gen Con - she has not yet been talked into actually having it as part of the Con). 

She has been pretty good about posting on DDM sites, and will even drop a hint or make some cryptic remark that gives all us obsessed something to do for a few days. She also has asked for opinions on the WotC boards. Hopefully we also get to see more of her here. She is also just a little bigger than the real Lidda, though not by much (if my memory is correct from last year's Gen Con).


----------



## Mistwell (Apr 27, 2007)

The most telling thing to me in this interview is the timing of the announcement with relation to Paizo.



> The decision to make the announcement at this time was worked out with Paizo, and *at their request*. Paizo has subscribers, printers, advertisers and circulation partners who all needed to know what was going on. As for the WotC part of all this, *we never had any intention of launching our efforts before Paizo’s run with the magazines was complete.*




Some folks suspected earlier that WOTC was taking the hit for Paizo, and that sure seems to be the case from the implications in this interview.

I really do not think the plan, well in advance, was to announce this change at this time.  I think the original plan was to hold off on the announcement until the final magazines were out, just like was done with The Starategic Review magazine becoming Dragon Magazine.  Either that, or the issue before the last issue.

It then sounds like Paizo negotiated to make the annoucement earlier, because they wanted to get the jump on getting current subscribers educated on their new products.

WOTC agreed out of their stated friendship with Paizo.  But, that doesn't mean they were suddenly prepared a month or two early for this announcement.  So, they did what they thought was the next best thing and just let Paizo take the spotlight.  Which backfired.  And I also blame WOTC for agreeing to the early announcement if they were not prepared for it.  Friends or not, if Paizo didn't ask for this change in schedule early enough for WOTC to prepare for it, then WOTC should have just told Paizo no and to suck it up.

I wouldn't at all be surprised if the way I just laid it out is the way it went down.  In which case, if Paizo also knew well in advance that the license was being cancelled, then it really is at least partially their fault for pushing to run the announcement earlier than planned.

I know blamming Paizo for anything in this is extremely unpopular.  But, there it is.  My opinion - in all likelyhood the PR problems and lack of information on the new DI is because WOTC was pushed to make the announcement much earlier than expected by Paizo, who could have negotiated that part much earlier with WOTC so both parties were prepared at the same time.


----------



## The_Gneech (Apr 27, 2007)

ScotMartin said:
			
		

> Hey, at least I didn't ask to be able to play back combats as movies with realistically rendered 3D models of all the participants!




Wasn't that one of the things they were trying to do in the marketing version of Master Tools?

-The Gneech


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Apr 27, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> The most telling thing to me in this interview is the timing of the announcement with relation to Paizo.
> 
> snip...
> 
> I know blamming Paizo for anything in this is extremely unpopular.  But, there it is.  My opinion - in all likelyhood the PR problems and lack of information on the new DI is because WOTC was pushed to make the announcement much earlier than expected by Paizo, who could have negotiated that part much earlier with WOTC so both parties were prepared at the same time.




The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle and mistakes were made at both ends, but they have a enough tact not to drag it into public view.


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 27, 2007)

Zaukrie said:
			
		

> I too would like to thank lurking lidda for being here. In addition to being busy at work, she's having a baby at Gen Con (ok, during Gen Con - she has not yet been talked into actually having it as part of the Con).
> 
> She has been pretty good about posting on DDM sites, and will even drop a hint or make some cryptic remark that gives all us obsessed something to do for a few days. She also has asked for opinions on the WotC boards. Hopefully we also get to see more of her here. She is also just a little bigger than the real Lidda, though not by much (if my memory is correct from last year's Gen Con).




Tis true: I'm only slightly taller than the iconic Lidda. And there's no way I'll be having the baby at Gen Con...I'm all for PR stunts and stuff, but not on that level!


----------



## kadh2000 (Apr 27, 2007)

> Chris: We have a lot of ideas that we’re happy with, but let me turn the question around. What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that? If this new incarnation of the magazines could encompass anything you could want, what would that be?




I hope to be able to add to my dragon collection.
It would be exciting and useful if I could read with leisurely enjoyment. (say in the bathroom or on the bus)
I used too much to enumerate individually in my campaigns: the articles increased my base of knowledge, the subtle little ideas that percolate up from somewhere to make the game more fun, they added humor and good quotes, they gave us stuff to talk about.
All I had to do was read the magazine and remember. Sometimes I even copied the information. (There's where the idea of a virtual and print subscription would be awesome).
I'd want the magazine to be fully indexed with back issues, searchable, easy to print and manipulate what I wanted to, in a consistent format for related articles (every class would be written in such a way that I could drop it into a word or excel doc or something similar with exactly the same results in terms of format/style/ease of use.). I'd want reference links to real, verified sources when articles are based on historic ideas.
I'd most of all want for you guys to have told me what's next when you pulled the original format out from under me. I'd want an idea that I could get used to. I want you to tell me the cool stuff you have in mind so I can tell you what I think of it and tell you what else I want instead of duplicating your ideas in some cases because I'm making my suggestions from in the dark.

Kadh, who wants some faith and trust from them since they asked for faith and trust from me.


----------



## Sammael (Apr 27, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> <snip>



1. If you think that Hasbro corporate lawyers would have allowed WotC to pull a stunt like that just to help their "friends" out, than your view of corporate politics is a lot more rose-tinted than mine.

2. Paizo HAD to make the announcement, because of their obligations to advertisers. Furthermore, if they waited until the very last minute to make the announcement, they would have likely been forced to file for bankruptcy, which would have looked EVEN WORSE for WotC. This way, WotC can at least hope that most of the vitriol will be forgotten by the time DI is launched.

3. Speaking as an IT professional*, if WotC cannot provide any sort of information on the DI four-five months prior to its supposed launch, than the launch is either not going to happen, or the DI will be launched in a terribly unfinished and incomplete state. I can say this with 99% certainty.

*I work as a senior software engineer in a small IT company which has a 100% success rate on project delivery (not a single project was canceled since the company's founding in 1995, which is a rarity in IT), and we know a thing or two about project management and deadlines.


----------



## Henry (Apr 27, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> Tis true: I'm only slightly taller than the iconic Lidda. And there's no way I'll be having the baby at Gen Con...I'm all for PR stunts and stuff, but not on that level!




_"Growing the gamer pool... one munchkin at a time!"_  By the way, congrats.


----------



## blargney the second (Apr 27, 2007)

This: 







			
				(contact) said:
			
		

> 5.  What I would love to see is the content broken into much smaller modules that can be pulled out of their context and sent into a "shopping cart" . . . so if the article on Orcus had Orcus' stats, a description of his demense, flavor text about his cult, a prestige class and stats for his high-priest, I could pull just that high preist into my cart without taking the rest of the article.  Then I could pull a location map from the sweet map gallery, a trap from the trap section and print it all for my game later that evening.  THAT would be sweet.



plus these:



			
				DM_Jeff said:
			
		

> 1) I want an NPC generator to help prepare for my games. I want one as easy and quick as the NPC Designer at rpgattitude.com. I want to be able to select 'minotaur', 'barbarian 3', 'warlock 7', and hit enter and have it generate everything else. I want to be able to assign it specific weapons from Complete Warrior, a feat from Book of Vile Darkness and a template from MM4. Books that are outside the SRD.
> 
> 2) I want maps printed in 1-inch squares to use D&D miniatures on. I spend plenty of time alreaedy scanning, enlarging, erasing room numbers, and printing maps in 8x11 format and fit them together if necessary. WotC staffers at GenCon made it known they wish they had the time to do this for their games because of the obvious utility.
> 
> ...



equals HAWT.
-blarg


----------



## Mistwell (Apr 27, 2007)

Sammael said:
			
		

> 1. If you think that Hasbro corporate lawyers would have allowed WotC to pull a stunt like that just to help their "friends" out, than your view of corporate politics is a lot more rose-tinted than mine.




I am a corporate lawyer. I've been one for over a decade.  Corporate lawyers, in all likelyhood, played no part whatsoever in any of this.  I doubt they were consulted on any issue other than the contract itself, and some intellectual property issues.  "When to make an announcement, and preparation for it" would not be in the venue of a corporate lawyer.

WOTC said pretty much what I said by the way.  I quoted it.  And Paizo has also implied they wanted to announce earlier becuase of their end of things.



> 2. Paizo HAD to make the announcement, because of their obligations to advertisers.




They did not have to make it this early, which is the issue.



> Furthermore, if they waited until the very last minute to make the announcement, they would have likely been forced to file for bankruptcy, which would have looked EVEN WORSE for WotC. This way, WotC can at least hope that most of the vitriol will be forgotten by the time DI is launched.




I didn't say very last minute.  The second to last issue would have been better for WOTC, and wouldn't have been a disaster for Piazo I bet.  And if they needed to announce this early, they should have negotiated for that much earlier.  If decisions were made between WOTC and Paizo over a year ago, and WOTC is now saying they did not intend to announce now, and it was Paizo's request to annouce early, I think it's a small leap to assume Piazo never asked earlier about the annoucement date being early, and only asked recently, and that was a screw-up on Paizo's part (and WOTCs for agreeing).



> 3. Speaking as an IT professional*, if WotC cannot provide any sort of information on the DI four-five months prior to its supposed launch, than the launch is either not going to happen, or the DI will be launched in a terribly unfinished and incomplete state. I can say this with 99% certainty.




I don't think this has much to do with IT.  It's a matter of content, not process, right now.  And content is not set in stone, and often isn't four months in advance.  They obviously are still working on the DRM issue, but they didn't say "we have no idea how to do the IT part of this".


----------



## Zaruthustran (Apr 27, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> _Every_ major game company does what I advocated. Blizzard and Bioware do it too.




_Every_ game company is aware of the danger of overpromising on a feature set. Far more prudent to talk in generalities, then reveal specifics a few months before launch. That's why the most important feature--the release date--isn't announced until the last possible moment. To use your example, Blizzard was one of the pioneers of the "when it's done" release date. To continue your example, Blizzard has been working for *years* on the product they'll be announcing May 19. Yet we haven't heard them say word one about it in public. 

The value of buzz is highest right before and during launch; it's wise to keep the good stuff in your hand until you can play it for maximum effect. 



> HEY, COMPETITORS! WIZARDS IS DEVELOPING AN ONLINE MAGAZINE WITH INTERACTIVE FEATURES! YOU KNOW, LIKE PYRAMID + THE STUFF THEY'VE BEEN HINTING AT FOR ABOUT NINE MONTHS!
> 
> Disclosing that they plan to continue the Ecology and Demonomicon articles would hardly be earth-shattering, but it's exactly the sort of thing the upset fans want to hear to allay their fears.




Er, they already did announce their plan for those sorts of articles. While they didn't address those two specific features, they've revealed an awful lot about the Dragon and Dungeon components of the DI. The minutiae isn't really worth talking about; what if they chose to keep the feature but alter the name/roll two features together? People will complain that WotC "promised" one thing, delivered another. Far better--at this point--to not get into specifics. There's just no upside in going through the Dragon table of contents and declaring "this one particular article stays, this one goes".



> [in reference to comment on what may or may not be insider trading]Not on this planet.




For all I know, you in fact are an expert in securities law--I'm not; I just have a business degree and buddies who are partners in firms that do specialize in securities law. Given my ignorance, I'll let this point go. But honestly, weighing the value between "promising" features on product in development against the risk of fines and jail... I have to conclude that it's better to not get into specifics too prematurely when communicating with the public. The upside just isn't worth it.



> If you think a logo, a piece of art and a list of non-committed bullet point items constitutes a major disclosure, I have to wonder why the NSA is letting you post on this board during the work day.




Again, what's the upside? The logo could change, "a piece of art" is of questionable (negligible?) value, and there's no such thing as a "non-committed" bullet point list. We've all read the threads about Dragon. There are some reasonable responses, but there's also a scary amount of teeth-gnashing and hysteria. If WotC were to release a tentative feature list those same people would take the list as gospel, and cry bloody murder if WotC "broke their word" by changing or dropping a feature. Again, you've got to weigh the small potential value against the huge guaranteed risk. 

Regardless of what you or I would do if we were in charge of corporate communication for WotC, there's no objective right answer or ideal solution. There's no single PR strategy that is perfect or that WotC "should" do. They've got a lot of smart people over there, and they've communicated as much as they feel they can--and this interview by Morrus is a direct response to a set of questions posed by this particular community. Wizards certainly didn't have to drop everything and come here to answer questions. But they did. They replied as best they could, thanked Morrus for the opportunity, and even asked the community at large for feedback and suggestions. 

And still they catch flack. Good grief. I'm sure there's someone at Hasbro on the phone with WotC PR saying "What's the matter with you people? Every time you reach out, you get bit. Disengage and go quiet. It's just not worth it."

-z


----------



## w_earle_wheeler (Apr 27, 2007)

After reading other points in this thread, I want to add the following to my "want" list:

Anything I pay for or download, I want to keep. If I paid for it, it's mine to use. I didn't mention this before because I didn't even consider the possibility that it might not happen. 

Swift response to errors. If the DI community notices an error in a statblock, I want it checked and corrected. That's the beauty of online content: easy corrections.

Updating old material: I'd like to see updates to all 0e, 1e, 2e, and 3e materials (DUNGEON adventures, DRAGON articles, modules and splatbooks) to a comprehensive 3.5 bible. Again, with the DI, this should be easier, because without print costs it isn't nearly as dangerous. Also, I'm sure a DI community would be highly motivate to contribute to official updates, as evidence by the old Xe --> 3e stuff that was done on enworld at the beginning of 3e. Think of it as a fan-powered, WotC owned think-tank. Then, with all that material converted to 3.5e, making the conversions to 4e would happen much faster.


----------



## DonTadow (Apr 27, 2007)

w_earle_wheeler said:
			
		

> After reading other points in this thread, I want to add the following to my "want" list:
> 
> Anything I pay for or download, I want to keep. If I paid for it, it's mine to use. I didn't mention this before because I didn't even consider the possibility that it might not happen.
> 
> ...



'My comfortability with this online product has grown more with this interview.  The best answer was
"How much of this stuff could you use in your campaign". 

That's the key.  I love the idea of weekly new d and d stuff to read, products other than words to help me build a campaign.  Finally the sage questions will be up to date.


----------



## Thomas Percy (Apr 27, 2007)

ScotMartin - you have done great compilation works. Thanks. It's a good base for other ideas.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Apr 27, 2007)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> And still they catch flack. Good grief. I'm sure there's someone at Hasbro on the phone with WotC PR saying "What's the matter with you people? Every time you reach out, you get bit. Disengage and go quiet. It's just not worth it."



They catch flack because the overwhelming majority of people who have responded to the interview think they didn't say enough.

No one is asking for business models or anything that they'd get in real trouble for disclosing. The commodities example does not apply, period.

The only real downside to stating any plans is that some idiot nine months later will scream that they've been lied to because Article X or Article Y didn't make the final cut. I've been on the other side of having to listen to those sorts of complaints, even when I thought my company did a good job of explaining why Feature X or Feature Y didn't make it and I still think it's worth doing.

The majority of folks are pretty rational. They want a taste but appreciate that they won't hear everything and that things will change over time.

The irrational folks who will scream about being lied to are the ones who are going to scream _no matter what_.

You can't create a policy around irrational people who can never be pleased. You go with making the vast majority -- who are rational, who are reachable and who will understand if you deal with them honestly and proactively -- happy.

Again, I've done this exact job. I'm not criticizing them because I want to know every tiny detail of what they're doing. I'm saying that, when I've been in their shoes -- when Blizzard or Bioware or even the WotC in the days before the 3E launch was in their shoes -- they did a much better job of communicating with the public and it's not terribly difficult to do a lot better.

I'm happy that you're happy with the interview. I get that they apparently have one or more superiors who are preventing proactive and productive communcation. But none of that makes their communication over the past two weeks anything other than a complete mess.


----------



## Maggan (Apr 27, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> But none of that makes their communication over the past two weeks anything other than a complete mess.




Good grief, is it two weeks already? Time flies when you're having fun! But wait, I ain't having fun ... well, I guess time flies even still.

I must say that I think that the discussions here on EN World has landed on a level that should be comfortable enough for WotC to participate. It's going to be really, really interesting to see what people are saying in a month, and after summer.

Also ... the elusive Dragonlance issue ... that seems to be a whole other kind of nightmare for WotC at the moment. 

/M


----------



## Zaruthustran (Apr 27, 2007)

Whizbang, I agree with everything you just said. Except maybe the bit about it being easy to have done a better job. PR isn't easy.

It's demonstrably clear that the reaction was negative; it's not clear that the negative reaction could have been easily averted. I think no matter how WotC had broached the subject, the community would have howled. Moving Dragon and Dungeon completely online is simply a Big Deal. 

But, yeah, they could have been better prepared for the outrage, and I bet they themselves wish that the DI was more solidly defined/far enough along that they could talk in more detail about features. I agree with what you've been saying: those details would have undoubtedly helped.  I recall something in the interview about WotC wanting to make the announcement sooner rather than later as a favor to Paizo (and Paizo's advertisers and subscribers). If they were thinking only of themselves, WotC probably would have preferred to wait a couple more months. 

-z


----------



## mxyzplk (Apr 27, 2007)

*My thoughts on the DI*

OK, so I've been a Dragon subscriber since about #100 and a Dungeon subscriber since #1.  I also work in Web administration and have a lot of experience with content management, search, and collaboration tools.

First point, print vs online: For a magazine with a variety of content, I still like print better.  I can read it in bed, on the can, in a plane, in Iraq, in jail, etc.  If one of my players wants to play some new race/class/whatnot from a recent issue I have I can hand it to them to take home and read.  I seldom need to access my mags from somewhere else (work, a friend's house) and in most of the cases where I do I brought it along for that express reason.  
Surveys at our company (high tech manufacturing) indicate that the Web is the preferred means for people to get their information on our products, but only by a slight margin.  We are not considering discontinuing our print catalog anytime soon!  I would strongly suggest a dual print/online delivery, print on demand, or frequent (quarterly or more) print compilations to avoid subscriber loss in the 50% range.

Now, the online format does have advantages that can be leveraged.  Here's what I'd like to see in a Digital Initiative that would overcome the disadvantages of moving from print and convince me to pay an equivalent amount to what I am right now:

1.  A content management system can allow you to localize content more easily.  WotC could leverage all those eager MMORPGers in Korea, Germany, etc. by managing and localizing all D&D content.  For us, the European and Asian markets are quite large and are the fastest growing sectors in many consumer sectors.

2.  Offering online access to all the print products I purchase (for no additional charge).  This is a hurdle that so many tech and business book publishers have already figured out how to do securely, most books I buy come with an online PDF version now...  Unique code in the front, and the entry screen asks you for it and "the third word on page 12".  Or many similar schemes.  Not rocket science.

3.  Value.  The fact is, common wisdom is that a 2 page PDF is NOT worth the same as a 2 page print article, so don't charge as much, or even 75% as much.  50% is pushing it.  And there's a lot of difficulty in meaningfully previewing smaller bits of content.  I'd try to bundle content, if not in complete "issues", in at least chunks of relevantly themed stuff.  For example, all of the content that would normally be related to a Dragon theme issue, sell as a chunk of 3-4 articles on whatever it is.

4.  Advertising.  Use advertising!  It defrays cost and is one of the value adds people get from print magazines; it turns you on to stuff you may not have heard about.  However, don't use advertising then charge for content as if you don't.  Ubisoft and other computer game publishers learned about that the hard way this last year by including in-game advertising but still charging full normal price; PC Gamer (and the consumers) reamed them about it.

5.  Extended content.  We hear a lot about content that didn't make it into an issue or sourcebook because "there wasn't room."  Pay the author for it and put it in!  I'd never buy a PDF instead of a print sourcebook, although if the print version was 96 pages and the PDF was 128, that's a different thing entirely...

6.  Openness.  Don't move away from the OGL.  Let other publishers "into" your online tools.  If there's a character builder, let other companies supply openly defined "rules packs" or whatnot to add in feats, classes, etc. from their sourcebooks.  (The great Byakhee freeware CoC character generator has a nice open architecture of this sort.)  Heck, let other companies sell their content as part of the mix.

7.  Free stuff.  Don't take the current articles you're offering on wizards.com and suddenly make them pay, no one will appreciate that.  Besides, the best sales model is "everyone gets a free login", there's a batch of free content but many hooks to buy paid content as well.

8.  Archives.  Old Dragons, Dungeons, and other products are already in electronic format (I have the Dragon CD) and have little incremental value.  Provide access to that for people that are "subscribing".  Don't charge much for old product.  Note how for a long time people only made TV series available as expensive, 1-2 episode per purchase things.  Now suddenly entire seasons are on one affordable set or downloadable for $1.99 per ep - sales skyrocketed.

9.  Collaboration.   Let everyone rate, comment, and tag the content, free and paid.  Don't succumb to the temptation of saying "oh, they might rate some article bad then no one will buy it."  It's valuable feedback for you, and people with money to spend will get something else as long as there's enough content available.

10.  Updated content.  The current erratas and FAQ and whatever other rulings are lame in their consumability.  If there's something that needs to change, the beauty of online content is that it's eminently changeable.

11.  Super cross-referencing.  Another poster already mentioned this - if I look at "ghoul", I want to see its entry, its picture, updated errata, relevant rules and relevant rulings, references to ghouls in products I own (adventures prominently featuring ghouls, etc.) AND references in products I don't own.  That's your hook to cross-sell.  Discussions tagged with "ghoul" from the forums.  Pictures tagged with "ghoul".

12.  Search.  Everything searchable using a good engine, ideally with custom dictionaries.  Faceted navigation.  Index all the products, print and online.

13.  User contributed content.  Let people contribute content!  If you "reject" an article you don't think's worth paying for, allow it to be published for free on the site.  Brand it differently (a value of the Dragon and Dungeon brand names is that many DMs make the default ruling that content from them is "official" and can be used without preauthorization in their campaigns, so you'll want a similar discriminator) but still put it there.  Right now people are forced to contribute content (monsters, classes, whatnot) inline on forum threads, a nonconsumable format.  If they could enter characters, monsters, etc. into custom wiki templates (that could of course be rated, commented on, searched, etc.) that would be very valuable.

14.  Try open sourcing stuff.  Pretty much all the previous attempts at "DM software" from TSR/WotC have been... less than ideal.  The Web doesn't make it any easier.  You've got a huge community of people that would be all about pitching in if you let them.  Heck, you could probably get volunteer content translation, editing, and other such.

15.  Long tail.  There's plenty of people out there that want Dark Sun, Greyhawk, etc. content.  If it's free/cheap to generate it, do so.  With the print format you had to say "Well, one Greyhawk article a year..."  

16.  True engagement with the user community.  Blizzard and WoW, for all its sales, is successful despite their customer service and forum moderation, which are among the worst in the industry.  Pushing content via blogs etc is good, but also engaging with the customers is invaluable.

17.  Oh yeah - no DRM.  If someone buys it, they buy it.  

So in closing, I would urge you to design the DI from the metaphor that these people are participants in the process of creating D&D, not simply "customers" or "players."    Learn from your mistakes and the mistakes of other companies in their online initiatives.

Sincerely,
Ernest


----------



## Dragonblade (Apr 28, 2007)

ScotMartin said:
			
		

> Here is what I'm looking for from the DI:
> 
> *Information Lookup*
> I want to be able to search by subject (wiki-style) and get all relevant information for the subject.
> ...




Brilliant!! I want everything on this list!! I'd just like to add one thing.

I like the Wiki model for information and rules lookups, but I'd also like a homepage that lists all the content in a table of contents format. That way I can browse topics without having to enter a specific search term.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Apr 28, 2007)

mxyzplk said:
			
		

> 16.  True engagement with the user community.  Blizzard and WoW, for all its sales, is successful despite their customer service and forum moderation, which are among the worst in the industry.  Pushing content via blogs etc is good, but also engaging with the customers is invaluable.




This is all good stuff, but I wanted to pull out this point. I'd like to see WotC come up with a "Major Nelson" style blog. A semi-independent public place for 1:1 engagement between WotC and the community. Mat Smith's monthly preview article is a step in the right direction; he should be given more visibility and leeway. 

-z


----------



## Arawen (Apr 28, 2007)

*Suggestions*

Regarding the digital initiative, there seem to be two sets of suggestions here.

1. On line equivalents to Dungeon and Dragon

The only advantage that I could see to a totally on-line format would be that it should be extremely cheap compared with a print magazine and completely searchable. Though I subscribe to Dungeon in print form, I would not pay money to subscribe to a web or pdf version. I believe most customers would want to keep whatever they paid for i.e. monthly content, not access.

Printing on line material costs money, takes up too much room to store, and loose sheets are inconvenient to flip through casually on the go. Computer print outs really do not last very well either. The ink fades and the paper is poor quality. In contrast, my old Dragon and Dungeon magazine issues are still in good shape after many years. 

I'd suggest that the bar for successful on-line content selling will be a considerably higher price/value ratio for content because the format is much less attractive and the product will be far more emphemeral.  Further, I would not want to waste my own paper and ink printing advertisements.

One way to address this partially might be to have a lot hyperlinked content, so that adventures can be scaled and stat blocks be printed with one click.

Still, my guess would be that hardcover compilations would sell better. I would hope that the variety of adventure styles and short adventures in Dungeon's existing issues would continue. Dungeon's mystery adventures especially appealed to me, and, generally I have found much more I can use to DM there by browsing the magazine than in WotC's combat heavy megadventures.

That said, I cannot imagine paying money to browse Dungeon and Dragon on my PC, even though I read my paper magazines cover to cover.  PDFs and web sites just do not have fun factor for me.

2. Computer aids to play D&D

This has also been mentioned by many users, but I really cannot see why offering web tools like a character generator would require cancelling these beloved magazines.

If I were to pay for a character generator instead of using a free one like PCGen, I would like to have it downloadable and usable without internet access.  It's hard to imagine renting a service to be like DMGenie when one could instead pay once. Similarly, there are many free virtual tabletops, dice rollers, chat programs, and VOIP programs like Skype. Charging monthly fees for these would not make much sense. There are quite a few mapping programs like Dundjinni as well out there, so again the question is what would a more expensive subscription package add.

The only way I could see charging more than once for these services working is if the on line service was so amazing in quality, in usability, simple elegant interface, and on-line community matching facility that it would take tabletop D&D, on-line virtual tabletop D&D and Neverwinter Nights to a new stage, while still providing good value at an extremely low price for users without laptop or internet at the gaming table. (For the record, at present I cannot imagine paying subscription fees for on-line tools that I really do not need or want).

To the designers of this so-called digital initiative, please think boldly and elegantly, is there the equivalent of an Apple IPod revolution for pen and paper RPGs? 

I really do not think so, but I think that's the kind of corporate model to follow for next generation step.

Whatever you do, please do not consider WotC's current web site a good model. It's cluttered, hard to navigate, and takes longer than it should to find what you want.


----------



## SemperJase (Apr 28, 2007)

mxyzplk said:
			
		

> I still like print better.  I can read it in bed, on the can, in a plane, in Iraq, in jail, etc.



And this is exactly why the online subscription model does not work. People do not like this type of content in an online format. 

I have my doubts about the advertising too. Online advertising doesn't seem to be comparable to print advertising. I don't believe that online advertising brings in the same revenue as print. Online advertising is highly perishable. Once the user clicks off the screen, it is gone. The print ad is there everytime the reader opens the magazine. Google makes it work through economies of scale. They are able to push a wide variety of ads to millions of people making a few cents per ad very profitable. An online Dragon wouldn't have that audience. I don't see it being add supported.

Personally, as much as I love D&D and the magazines, my online time is already spread out among too many sources. I read news online, I check out message boards, I read quite a few blogs, in addition to about 20 podcasts. I'm not going to increase my time online to read a subscription source. I kept subscribing to the magazines because I like to unplug. 

I've been wanting to subscribe to PC magazine but my wife convinced me I was already spending to much on other magazines. Apparently I don't have that problem now.


----------



## caudor (Apr 28, 2007)

Arawen said:
			
		

> Regarding the digital initiative, there seem to be two sets of suggestions here.
> 
> 1. On line equivalents to Dungeon and Dragon
> 
> 2. Computer aids to play D&D




I agree.  Maybe by providing a silver/gold subscription plan they can provide both.

The major problem with the current character generators (like pcgen, etc.) is that we are unable to use 'sources' since the CMP license was not renewed.  For me, having access to sources is the 'big deal' that WotC could provide with a character generator.

If I have to manually type in information from 15 + source books to play non-SRD options, then I might as well just do it on paper.  The Tome of Magic classes are a good example...I don't want to type all that in.  The whole appeal of the DI to me is making the game easier to prepare/play, not just seeing stuff on a computer screen.


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 28, 2007)

Maggan said:
			
		

> It is my belief that they have gathered input from us before the announcement, through polls and questionaires and stuff like that.



 ...stuff like, oh, say, lurking? I didn't get my screen name by chance!


----------



## Ghendar (Apr 28, 2007)

SemperJase said:
			
		

> And this is exactly why the online subscription model does not work. People do not like this type of content in an online format.





Unfortunately, those of us who feel that way are apparently in the minority. We don't matter to WotC anymore. My beef is not with the idea of DI, it's the idea of DI at the expense of print magazines. That's why Paizo still counts me as a customer (with Pathfinder) and WotC doesn't (with DI)


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 28, 2007)

LeaderDesslok said:
			
		

> Hi Linae,
> One point about the answers we have received/will receive, I much prefer the straightforward "We can't discuss that right now" over ambiguous responses or non-answers. Specifically I was thinking of the response to the question about factors involved with replacing Dungeon/Dragon with DI instead co-existing; the answer was "Our online content plans will replace the printed magazines. That aside, we are still very much in the business of producing printed products." That's not the answer to the question!



You're right: that really wasn't an answer. We can't discuss that right now.   

However, I think they wanted to find a way to tell folks that printed products are not going away because of the DI and this seemed like a good place to throw that in.


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Apr 28, 2007)

caudor said:
			
		

> I agree.  Maybe by providing a silver/gold subscription plan they can provide both.
> 
> The major problem with the current character generators (like pcgen, etc.) is that we are unable to use 'sources' since the CMP license was not renewed.  For me, having access to sources is the 'big deal' that WotC could provide with a character generator.




But now you're more boned than before.  At least with PCGen or ETools, you had (a) hobbyist programmers working on code and/or datasets (and even the source yourself, if you were so inclined), (b) the ability to create your own or tweak existing stuff, and most importantly (c) the ability to use third-party publishers' stuff.  No way will you see that in the DI. 

So, unless you're running a pure 100% WotC game (and granted, I'm sure a lot of people are) the on-line character generator is going to be a big step back from what we had 6 months ago.


----------



## ScotMartin (Apr 28, 2007)

Thanks to those who've said nice things about my previous post with the list of ideas.  I appreciate it.  

However, I definitely left something important out that a couple of other users have brought up since... feedback/collaboration from the user community.  

When it comes to the rules and stats of this game, there is no better editor for an article or adventure than the on-line community.  As evidence of this, I present this excellent review of Expedition to Castle Ravenloft posted by John Cooper (scroll a quarter of the way in to see his bullet point list of stat block errors):
http://www.enworld.org/reviews.php?do=review&reviewid=3221768

Obviously, I'd love everything to be accurate when first put up, but that's not realistic.  And, as others have said, a huge advantage of on-line content over print is the ability to correct and update the content later on.  There needs to be a way for users to leave this kind of feedback, and there has to be someone in WotC who will read it, double-check it and then act upon it.  

-Scot


----------



## freyar (Apr 28, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> ...stuff like, oh, say, lurking? I didn't get my screen name by chance!




Since you're posting now, do you have to change your screen name?    

I know other people have said this (and so have I even), but I don't think it can be stressed enough that the service should be inexpensive and that you should be able to keep what you've paid for.  And that what's free now shouldn't go away!  Thanks for listening!


----------



## LeaderDesslok (Apr 28, 2007)

Regarding my comment about direct answers and the lack thereof about the co-existence of Dragon/Dungeon and the DI...







			
				lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> You're right: that really wasn't an answer. We can't discuss that right now.
> 
> However, I think they wanted to find a way to tell folks that printed products are not going away because of the DI and this seemed like a good place to throw that in.



I like you.   

Seriously, that's cool with me. Business decisions can stay in-house, I'm more concerned with the lack of examples of upcoming content. Sure, there will be stuff that is like the content in Dungeon and Dragon, but what else? You (meaning WotC) say there'll be more than that in the DI, but give absolutely nothing as evidence of that.

Assuming that nothing can be revealed yet, I'd at least like a kind of framework for when new info and hints will be dropped to us. It's been a week now and we know nothing more about the content than we did last week.

Congrats on the future gamer. Watch how you play, you're gaming for two now.


----------



## Kerrick (Apr 28, 2007)

> 9. Collaboration. Let everyone rate, comment, and tag the content, free and paid. Don't succumb to the temptation of saying "oh, they might rate some article bad then no one will buy it." It's valuable feedback for you, and people with money to spend will get something else as long as there's enough content available.
> 
> ...
> 
> 11. Super cross-referencing. Another poster already mentioned this - if I look at "ghoul", I want to see its entry, its picture, updated errata, relevant rules and relevant rulings, references to ghouls in products I own (adventures prominently featuring ghouls, etc.) AND references in products I don't own. That's your hook to cross-sell. Discussions tagged with "ghoul" from the forums. Pictures tagged with "ghoul".



This sounds a lot like the OGC wiki idea people keep bringing up every six months or so. I think it'd be a great way to go, too - not the OGC part, but the wiki part. Our site is on a wiki, and while I HATE wikicode, I really like the ease of use - it's a lot easier to maintain than a normal website. Plus, wikis allow for comments to be posted on individual pages, so people can provide feedback.


----------



## Hussar (Apr 28, 2007)

Rokes said:
			
		

> Tracking serial numbers isn't that difficult.  It's just a database, it wouldn't be much different than video games.
> 
> The mail in thing would definitely have to be prepaid postage!  I can't afford 39 cents when I'm spending $100 a month on books!
> 
> ...




The problem with mail in cards is there are a large number of gamers that aren't in the USA.  It's not exactly 39 cents for me to mail a letter from Japan.  Agreed, not a big price difference, but, still more.  The big beef from me would be the lag time.  It takes about a month or so for mail to go from Japan to the States.  That would mean that I have to wait about a month after I bought any book to get online access.  That would annoy me.  

Plus, what would happen if the letter was undelivered?

As far as people pirating what's on the DI, I really don't think that's a huge problem.  Despite the fact that you can get any WOTC book for free about two days after it's released, they still continue to sell.  How likely is it that people will spend 10 bucks a month just to pirate it away for free when they can simply wait for the PtP  site of their chose?

A simple way would be to have a peelable sticker inside the cover of every book with the serial number printed underneath.  It certainly works for most online games like Counter Strike or Halo.  I can't imagine something like that would add much cost.


----------



## Wye (Apr 28, 2007)

Commenting about *lurkinglidda*...


			
				LeaderDesslok said:
			
		

> I like you.



I second that.

You are here, and you are just saying it as it is, or saying that you can't say it; no "excitement", "exciting", "really excited", "almost having an orgasm" PR pepper being sprinkled on a plate we cannot see.

At this point I don't think I'm part of WotC business plan anymore (and when I look at my shelves of books and magazines I don't understand why), but your vibe is nice to have around.


----------



## labyrinth (Apr 28, 2007)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> This was by no stretch of the imagination "astoundingly open" and nothing people are asking about is subject to scrutiny from regulators.
> 
> I've done _exactly this sort of interview before_ and I would have included what I said in my first post: A logo, a bullet point list of some intended (but not promised) features and a piece of art relating to one that's essentially a lock.
> 
> If they don't have those three items, they're in a lot of trouble. I am confident they have all those available and could -- and should --  have shown them.



WotC has some very bright people, so I find it very hard to believe that they would not have recognized exactly what you outlined they should have done. That means they should have done so. They didn't, which leads to me to believe they may very well be in the deep trouble you mention. Combine this with the fact that they are just now starting to hire people for the DI, and it's very difficult to share your confidence about the current state of things within WotC regarding a cohesive vision for DI and having made substantial progress towards that vision (i.e. progress that would enable even a preview release in 2007). I hope I'm wrong, but the evidence thus far suggests otherwise.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 28, 2007)

Drinking from the firehose.  

Wow I go a way for 24 hours and holy crap! Thanks for all the great comments. 

One observation: Gamers spend a lot of time reading on the bus and/or the toilet. Some may be in prison. :\  


Lidda and I are here, we are trying to read everything (as are a few WOTC lurkers). We can't say a hell of a lot right now. We are NDA'd 8 ways until Sunday and there are just things we can't discuss. We will try to answer when posible and avoid the using the vague jibba jabba. This is largely on our own time as we have a lot of day to day stuff to do (unless you want us to stop making games haha) so it may be sporadic and we likely wont get into indivual conversations. But we really like the interaction and will do our best pop a beer (just me not Lidda), sit on the couch, and come in, hang out, and chat.

So a few things i've thought about: 

Hasbro stays out of our day to day business of operating the D&D brand. We report up stuff like revenue but when it comes down to micro management (review of a book or miniature etc) that doesn't happen. They largely take the "if it's not broke don't fix it role". So why tell you this? They aren't selling D&D or worried that it isn't (and needs to be) WoW. D&D fills a very nice niche that very few other brands can deliver. D&D is stronger than ever. The success of D&D is due in large part to everyone on this site (and fans alike everywhere).

People ask "were you expecting the reaction you got about the Paizo announcement?" Yes we pretty much knew people would be PO'd although it is not always easy to gauge the level of an "expected" reaction. That being said, yeah it sucks to be getting your butt chewed off on the boards but at least people care enough to complain. Not to sound crass, but in certain respects the day fans stop complaining is the day I pack up my desk beacuse it means people no longer care. It's easy to armchair QB the PR but the only thing I would have changed not letting this situation be the thing that finally got me out of lurkerdom and into posterville.

Contrary to the popular belief I have seen on the boards, Hasbro is a great company to work for. I don't mean to sound like a corporate stooge but they treat their employees pretty darn well.  They are also really philanthropic, for example they do a ton for underprivledged kids and the troops (we just sent a huge package of games to Ziggurat con in Iraq).  This is not Enron or even Exxon, those companies don't make D&D.

Again NDA'd up the wazzo but the Paizo thing went down the way we called it in the inetrview, I was in most of the meetings. They asked us for a date, we discussed a bit, and mutually agreed to a plan. The timing was as we said, this planned well in advance. We knew they would slingshot off the announcement to promote a new product (Pathfinder) and our goal was to  stay out of the way for a while and pretty much be the silent meat shield. They needed the timing to be as it was to take advantage of GAMA and face to face discussions with retailers, notify their newsstand and other distributors , and give subscribers and readers a chance to decide what to do with any residual subscription money. I truely wish them all the success with Pathfinder and look forward to working with them in the future. Lisa, Erik, Jason, James, Wil, Pierce, Sean and the other folks there are awesome. 

Paper is not going away. We have a product plan that goes out years (look we've already announced products through the end of 2007) and we are working on '08 stuff right now. We plan a long way out.  We've got an idea of products that go out 5 years and further. There is a ton of paper products (and plastic) on the plan. Table top roleplaying is at the heart of the brand and as Bill said we are not changing that. 

As I've said we plan a long way out on everything. For example my team is already working on marketing plans for 2008. We've done most of the product development and initial sell in on all titles through the  end of '07. Unless an asteroid hits Renton we largely know how the year will turn out. That being said we have a plan for the online stuff. Work is in progress.  Based on what I am reading I think most will be very happy. That being said we still have enough fluidity to incorporate feedback so keep it coming

I like the fire hose.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 28, 2007)

Ghendar said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, those of us who feel that way are apparently in the minority. We don't matter to WotC anymore. My beef is not with the idea of DI, it's the idea of DI at the expense of print magazines. That's why Paizo still counts me as a customer (with Pathfinder) and WotC doesn't (with DI)




Ghendar, it looks like you, me, Wye and a bunch of others are all in the same boat.  Nothing WotC is saying shows that they are targeting us as part of their new marketing strategy.  Its a shame that it took all the yelling and screaming over the past week to finally get someone from WotC to tell us, but I'm glad they did.

Scott and lurkinglidda, I'm glad you guys are finally here.  I hope you stay and participate for a long time.  Don't let it take another fiasco to bring you out.


----------



## Dnjscott (Apr 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> I like the fire hose.





Heh. You should go see your WOTC board thread. 

It is nice of you to try to make the uphill slog, though. I must admit. I'm skeptical about this whole thing for a lot of reasons, but it's really nice to see you guys try.    Well, maybe  :\


----------



## Herremann the Wise (Apr 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Drinking from the firehose.
> 
> ...I like the fire hose.




Hello Scott,

I thought I'd just put in a quick word of thanks for going to the effort of posting here on EN World. If you could manage to have a presence here similar to those from Paizo, I think you'll find the majority of your PR pain evaporating. [Thanks to Linae as well acting as scout and top gal for the WotC troops]. I hope to read more of your comments here over the coming days, weeks and months.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 28, 2007)

Devyn said:
			
		

> Ghendar, it looks like you, me, Wye and a bunch of others are all in the same boat.  Nothing WotC is saying shows that they are targeting us as part of their new marketing strategy.  Its a shame that it took all the yelling and screaming over the past week to finally get someone from WotC to tell us, but I'm glad they did.
> 
> Scott and lurkinglidda, I'm glad you guys are finally here.  I hope you stay and participate for a long time.  Don't let it take another fiasco to bring you out.





Devyn if you still like D&D you are in my marketing plans and strategy.  There is no way in the 9 hells we are going to abandon you. 

I hear that online is not for you but if you have a pulse and can still role dice then do we have product for you my friend (in my best infomercial voice). Seriously, we know that online magazines etc are not going to be for everyone. We are not abandoning the table top, play in your kitchen, experience that is D&D. If getting together with your friends, telling great stories, kicking in the door, killing monsters, and having some laughs is the experience you want to have, we will continue to deliver that. Lots of books, maps, tiles, minis, dice, and online stuff too.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 28, 2007)

Dnjscott said:
			
		

> Heh. You should go see your WOTC board thread.
> 
> It is nice of you to try to make the uphill slog, though. I must admit. I'm skeptical about this whole thing for a lot of reasons, but it's really nice to see you guys try.    Well, maybe  :\




Fire Hose  flame thrower it's all the same


----------



## (contact) (Apr 28, 2007)

postinglidda said:
			
		

> Point taken. To heart. We're sorta in a no-win situation right now. We do have a plan...we just aren't at liberty to reveal the details yet. That's an unacceptable answer, I'm totally aware, but we just can't talk details in, er..., detail just yet.




I hope we all underdstand this: it's not your fault *personally* that you're stuck inside a model that isn't working.  

I can imagine how much it might suck to have job A that you really love and consumer base B that really loves A, and yet you can't connect the two. 

But of course, secrecy and "strategic timing" isn't the only marketing model out there, and at the very least the powers that be could recognize that the organization is rapidly missing its window and shift.  But yeah, good luck running that flag up the pole.  

I just want to put out there that transparency invites your customers to identify with you, whereas opacity creates suspicion.  Suspicion that becomes another unecessary hurdle that the product now has to jump.   So the practical down-side to secrecy is that it really puts the pressure on the DI to deliver, which means people like me will be judging it a bit more critically than we might have otherwise. 

At this point, the DI has got to be really good.  Paizo's already got my subscription for their new initiative, but the WotC DI is going to have to bring it before I'll sign up.  Not because of what it is, but because at this point I'm seeing red flags.

Anyway, you don't come to my job and bitch at me*, so I'll shut up now.  

Thanks for showing up, and oh yeah . . . it is just a game!





















*Because I work at the McDonalds in Maplewood instead of the one in Renton.


----------



## (contact) (Apr 28, 2007)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> Whizbang, I agree with everything you just said. Except maybe the bit about it being easy to have done a better job. PR isn't easy.




But it is very predictable.

Unfortunately PR is mostly repetitive. Which is why it bombs sometimes. It's hard to really care when you're in PR. If you're lucky, you work on a client or two that you like, but even then consumer PR is pretty numbing stuff.

I've worked for several agencies (although I'm a 'creative' and not a strategist). In fact, one of those agencies had Hasbro prior to the WotC buy. I used to talk to the Hasbro client all the time, she was funny. When WotC was purchased I tried to get my managing director to go balls out after WotC's business, because I love D&D, but he couldn't be arsed about it.

Later, I worked on a proposal to win some of WotC's business put together by a boutique firm staffed by my TOEE2 gaming group (Heydricus and Prisantha, Z), but I don't think we ever had a shot.  



> It's demonstrably clear that the reaction was negative; it's not clear that the negative reaction could have been easily averted. I think no matter how WotC had broached the subject, the community would have howled. Moving Dragon and Dungeon completely online is simply a Big Deal.





A Big Deal which you could capitalize on. So I disagree with you here, Z. If they engaged immediately with their thinking and vision, they invite collaboration (or more realistically, the impression of collaboration, which is just as good . . . see also this thread). The gamers get to feel involved, listened to and cared about, even if they disagree.

It's like your buddy's band. They may not be very good, but you'll go see them anyway, because, hey, that's Dave up there. And since you know Dave busts his ass, you'll pay the door instead of trying to weasel in on the list. Ultimately, that's the value of brand loyalty -- consumers don't look at the warts.

But hey, let's not leave this dead baby on PR's doorstep. Consumer PR is not often very reactive, except for the crisis guys who very few people keep around. Exxon and Nike need crisis teams, Hasbro just makes games.

I do appreciate that Scott and lurkinglidda have let us know their situations (NDA'd up). Now I can identify with their position instead of having to draw my own (cynical) conclusions.

(thinks about it)

Oh my god, I'm a market segment.

(thinks about it)

Oh my god, we're *all* market segments . . . SOYLENT GREEN IS MARKET SEGMENTS!


----------



## Khairn (Apr 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Devyn if you still like D&D you are in my marketing plans and strategy.  There is no way in the 9 hells we are going to abandon you.
> 
> I hear that online is not for you but if you can still role dice then do we have product for you my friend (in my best infomercial voice). Seriously, we know that online magazines etc are not going to be for everyone. We are not abandoning the table top, play in your kitchen, experience that is D&D. If getting together with your friends, kicking in the door, killing monsters, and having some laughs is the the experience you want to have, we will continue to deliver that.
> 
> Lots of books, maps, tiles, minis, dice, and some online stuff too.




Scott, I really do appreciate the words, especially as I have been very honest with my emotions over the pending loss of Dragon & Dungeon, the 8 days of silence from WotC while the player base chewed on itself, and the little information that was actually shared in the questions you answered on this site.  I really do want WotC, D&D and this hobby that I am passionate about, to thrive and grow.  

But I have seen precious little that gives me hope that the DI will be successful.   WotC's technical performance has been less than inspiring, with years of being unable to get a simple search function on a messageboard to work as just one example. IMHO the books that WotC has published over the last year have been less than "must-haves" and rarely been anything that I am interested in using.  Now the magazines that WotC has scheduled for cancellation have for the most part been superior in many respects.  So from my point of view I am losing two  resources with a proven track record of high quality, and I'm really uncertain what I'm gaining.  The new "Box, Crate and Sack Generator" that debuted today on the WotC site didn't really do anything for me.

On top of all that there is this nebulous vision of a new Digital Initiative ... a new business model that I have serious doubts will work with the RPG community.  But again without any actual facts from WotC, all I come up with is this image of the growing similarities between the MMORPG business model and DI.

So for me, I feel I'm losing not just 2 iconic pieces of gaming history, I'm also losing proven gaming resources and actual "ownership" of that content for a computer and internet focused business model comprised of an unknown format, with unknown features and an unknown subscription rate.

I understand that there are limitations to what you can share with us.  I'm disappointed that with a year to work on WotC's reaction to players when the announcements came out that this was the best that everyone came up with... but I do understand.

So with that being said, where do we stand?  I've listened to you and hopefully you've listened to me.  I still feel that I am no longer your target market, but you say that WotC is committed to providing me with the very best in gaming support and books for my game, even if I dont participate in DI.

OK then ... I'll wait and see what WotC comes up with.  You and the rest of the crew at WotC have a steep hill to climb, and I doubt I'll make it easy.  But I'll give you the chance to prove me wrong.  Hopefully I'll meet you at the top of the hill.  Maybe we can share an ale.



p.s.   Scott ... You might want to have someone check out that Crate, Barrell and Sack Generator ... apparently a sack full of carrots is worth a couple of thousand gp.    Perhaps the generator is not the best way to instill confidence in players already questioning WotC's ability to combine quality content and internet support.  Just a thought.


----------



## Mystical Forest (Apr 28, 2007)

*Launch dollars rewarded*

I know everything about _Pathfinder_ -- it even already has a *daily blog*. I know nothing about WotC's project -- I don't even know its _name_.

I felt I had to reward the company that had information about its products, so I became a charter subscriber to _Pathfinder_. If I were to behave otherwise, I would have rewarded silence and I couldn't abide that.


P.S. As I was writing this post I got an email from Paizo whose title is "What's Pathfinder All About?"

That behavior reinforces my choice.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Apr 28, 2007)

You know, I've got another theory to share. I'm sure some people will once again paint me with the "You're a freelancer, nothing you say can possibly be taken at face value brush," but the hell with 'em. I'm going to share it anyway.

(And again, my usual disclaimer: This is theory only, I have no inside knowledge, couldn't share it even if I did, blah, blah, blah.)

Is it possible that the reason WotC's web site and forums haven't been improved in the last year is because all their web-oriented resources are being devoted to the DI? Seems to me that would be the perfect time to launch the all-new, all-working, revamped web site, rather than trying to parcel it out a few bits at a time. And if I knew I was going to be putting out a brand new version of a web site, I seriously doubt I'd consider fixing problems on the old version--like, say, search function--to be a high priority.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 28, 2007)

By any chance, did you have short hair, last seen at Gen Con?


			
				lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> Tis true: I'm only slightly taller than the iconic Lidda. And there's no way I'll be having the baby at Gen Con...I'm all for PR stunts and stuff, but not on that level!


----------



## Wye (Apr 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Lidda and I are here, we are trying to read everything (as are a few WOTC lurkers). We can't say a hell of a lot right now. We are NDA'd 8 ways until Sunday and there are just things we can't discuss. We will try to answer when posible and avoid the using the vague jibba jabba. This is largely on our own time as we have a lot of day to day stuff to do (unless you want us to stop making games haha) so it may be sporadic and we likely wont get into indivual conversations. But we really like the interaction and will do our best pop a beer (just me not Lidda), sit on the couch, and come in, hang out, and chat.



That paragraph made me say "thank you" three times. So, thank you.  

All that bit about Hasbro is really interesting to me, thanks for sharing. And if anything, it made me breathe easier.



			
				Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Paper is not going away. We have a product plan that goes out years (look we've already announced products through the end of 2007) and we are working on '08 stuff right now. We plan a long way out.  We've got an idea of products that go out 5 years and further. There is a ton of paper products (and plastic) on the plan. Table top roleplaying is at the heart of the brand and as Bill said we are not changing that.



Now, that really lifts a weight off my shoulders. As a matter of fact, I just opened a beer!  I guess I was really worried about that.

In response to *Devyn* you said:


			
				Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> ...Seriously, we know that online magazines etc are not going to be for everyone. We are not abandoning the table top, play in your kitchen, experience that is D&D...



I'm glad you recognize that, but I'm still spectacularly pissed off by the halting of my beloved magazines in print, and I can't imagine anything that I'd like to have online instead. So it's a loss for me no matter how I look at it.  I'm more than happy with the magazines and in a few months they'll be gone for me... Maybe if you license Greyhawk to Paizo, that will definitely put you in my good books for eternity *nudge*nudge*wink*wink*

Thank you for your time Scott, I really appreciate it.

A final note for other posters who downplay the importance of this "game". I started playing when I was 13, I'll turn 33 this year. I've been through highschool, college, jobs, moving (across countries), friends and girlfriends intermingled there, and marriage. Life is a rollercoaster, and the only constant throughout my life has been my weekly D&D game. It didn't matter if I was having trouble with my girlfriend, or if I had problems at my job, or if I had a little or a lot of money. D&D is my only constant. I enjoy getting together with my friends, disconnecting from reality, and using my brain and imagination; and though I probably have material for decades, I, like any kid at heart, love new toys. So, the well being of this "game" is important to me.


----------



## Sammael (Apr 28, 2007)

Ari, I think your theory may be quite right. However, it's also a really, really bad PR strategy, particularly when coupled with no announcements regarding the DI's timing. Their boards have been search-less for YEARS. Their site has been suffering from problems ever since it was revamped. Either you fix stuff, or you say that you're not going to fix it because new stuff is forthcoming. What you don't do is leave it as is and keep quiet. That's horrible PR.


----------



## Echohawk (Apr 28, 2007)

Sammael said:
			
		

> 3. Speaking as an IT professional*, if WotC cannot provide any sort of information on the DI four-five months prior to its supposed launch, than the launch is either not going to happen, or the DI will be launched in a terribly unfinished and incomplete state.



I don't think there is much evidence that WotC *cannot* provide information on the DI right now. It seems (to me at least) that they have rather *chosen* to limit the release information on the DI for strategic reasons. And while many folks might disagree with this strategy, I'm struggling to see how this proves that the DI project is unfinished/incomplete/behind schedule.

And now I have a question for Scott and Lidda: Will you be having an external beta testing phase for the Digital Initiative? And if you are, please tell me how I can become part of that   .


----------



## labyrinth (Apr 28, 2007)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I'd say that there is no chance at all of this happening. Its hard enough trying to support multiple campaign settings and there is no way they'll support two different editions. There will be a market for this in PDFs, but nothing official from Wizards once they roll over to 4e. And really, how can you expect them to support an old platform? Does Microsoft still release programs for Windows 3.11?



It's standard practice in the software industry to continue support for an outdated version for between 5 and 7 years. And the last time I checked, the DI sure looked like software to me. The definition of "support" does NOT mean that new content should continue to be created - new content would logically be focused on 4e. However, continued access to all the old 3.5e material should be provided for many years after the cut-over. Providing continued access to existing web content is pretty much a no-brainer, so there's no good excuse for not providing this. If that can't be provided, it would be inappropriate to launch the DI until 4e comes out. 

The more I think about it, it's actually quite likely that the roll-out of DI will coincide with the launch of 4e. While that might seem like a good idea to WotC right now (i.e. much easier in concept), this approach is fraught with peril. A coordinated release has the nasty liability of linking the success of the 4e launch to the DI to a meaningful extent. Instead of the DI being a wholly independent venture that succeeds or fails on its own, a poor job with the DI in a coordinated release will be an anchor on the launch of 4e. The impact would not be huge, but it would be a blemish on 4e's launch that would tarnish the luster of the new edition and give 3.5e players yet another reason to hold off on making the transition.

Granted, a successful launch of DI would benefit the 4e launch, but the risks outweigh benefits from my perspective. WotC's track record with new software launches has not exactly been something I'd want to link my launch success to as the D&D brand manager. And the implied scope of the DI is significantly larger than WotC's previous software efforts, so the likelihood of success right out of the gate (let alone hitting a coordinated launch date) seems pretty slim. For D&D's sake, I sure hope the two are substantively decoupled, since the DI will likely be an anchor out of the gate and require months (or years?) to get its footing and become a robust, reliable resource.


----------



## Hussar (Apr 28, 2007)

Echohawk said:
			
		

> I don't think there is much evidence that WotC *cannot* provide information on the DI right now. It seems (to me at least) that they have rather *chosen* to limit the release information on the DI for strategic reasons. And while many folks might disagree with this strategy, I'm struggling to see how this proves that the DI project is unfinished/incomplete/behind schedule.
> 
> And now I have a question for Scott and Lidda: Will you be having an external beta testing phase for the Digital Initiative? And if you are, please tell me how I can become part of that   .




ooo, ooo, oooo!  Me too please.    Fuggin' fantastic idea!  You, yoo hoo!  Over here!  Yeah me!  Pick me!  C'mon, Ya know ya wanna!


----------



## Echohawk (Apr 28, 2007)

Hussar said:
			
		

> ooo, ooo, oooo!  Me too please.    Fuggin' fantastic idea!  You, yoo hoo!  Over here!  Yeah me!  Pick me!  C'mon, Ya know ya wanna!



Hey -- no pushing. I put my hand up first, dammit .


----------



## TitanGames (Apr 28, 2007)

*DragonLance*

Part of the discussion in this article speculates that WotC may be in negotiation with someone other than Margaret Wies for the DragonLance license.

Which, I think is about the scummiest thing I have ever heard.

But, you know, maybe it's just me.  But, Dragonlance without Margaret is like Frosted Flakes without Milk.  Sure, you can still eat it - but, why would you?

Marcus King
Titan Games


----------



## grrtigger (Apr 28, 2007)

Dnjscott said:
			
		

> Heh. You should go see your WOTC board thread.
> 
> It is nice of you to try to make the uphill slog, though. I must admit. I'm skeptical about this whole thing for a lot of reasons, but it's really nice to see you guys try.




Ditto.  I, too, am skeptical about digital content replacing the magazines we already know and are accustomed to, and the lack of many concrete details doesn't help.  However, I totally appreciate the interaction we're starting to get here and at the WotC boards with Scott and other WotC staff, because it clearly demonstrates they are listening to the fans and willing to engage us in a discussion about it.

So _thank you_ (!!!) for posting here and attempting to address our comments and concerns.  Even though we still won't have much in the way of actual details for a while yet, it's extremely helpful to get even this little peek behind the curtain.


----------



## grrtigger (Apr 28, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> I don't think this has much to do with IT.  It's a matter of content, not process, right now.  And content is not set in stone, and often isn't four months in advance.  They obviously are still working on the DRM issue, but they didn't say "we have no idea how to do the IT part of this".




I currently work as a web developer, building online applications, and I agree with the original poster that the IT planning for something like this needs to be completed well in advance.  Whatever the reason actually is behind not putting out much in the way of solid information, if they have not yet nailed down all of their business requirements, technical requirements, project plans, etc., for the new DI, then they won't be launching any time soon.  

There is an absolutely ridiculous amount of planning that has to go into anything as big as has been hinted at re: the new DI, so if WotC is planning to launch in September I hope they are at least ready to alpha test soon, and would imagine they ought be ready to beta before too much longer.


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 28, 2007)

Herremann the Wise said:
			
		

> Thanks to Linae as well acting as scout




My current character is a fighter but if she ever dies I'll play a rogue next!


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 28, 2007)

Echohawk said:
			
		

> And now I have a question for Scott and Lidda: Will you be having an external beta testing phase for the Digital Initiative? And if you are, please tell me how I can become part of that   .




My Magic NDA Ball says, "Chances good. Check again later."

Scotty, am I in trouble for saying that?


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 28, 2007)

TitanGames said:
			
		

> Part of the discussion in this article speculates that WotC may be in negotiation with someone other than Margaret Wies for the DragonLance license.
> 
> Which, I think is about the scummiest thing I have ever heard.
> 
> But, you know, maybe it's just me.  But, Dragonlance without Margaret is like Frosted Flakes without Milk.  Sure, you can still eat it - but, why would you?




We cannot discuss the dragonlance negotiations, including any speculations, at this point. Wish we could, but just simply cannot.  :\


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Wow I go a way for 24 hours and holy crap! Thanks for all the great comments.




Thanks for being the meat shield. I know you guys figured people would be upset about all this, but I doubt if you thought it would be this bad...

Anyhoo, one thing I wanted to ask about the DI is everyone has really been talking primarily about D&D here. Would the DI extend to other Wizards of the Coast brands that aren't D&D like Dreamblade and Magic?

Lastly, one more cool possibility with the DI is it would be a good portal from which to conduct a massive scale playtest for 4e. I doubt we'd ever see a playtest on such a grand scale, but figured I'd throw that into the pile as well. Personally, I'd love to give my feedback and help shape the game's next incarnation whenever it comes.


----------



## Le Noir Faineant (Apr 28, 2007)

Hi all,

This question might sound a bit naive, but nonetheless I want to ask it.  

In the interview, it was said:



> Everything produced by Paizo under the license agreement is owned by Wizards of the Coast, with the exception of some of the cartoons and certain articles that use other people’s trademarks or copyrights.




So, does that mean that WotC can publish compilations of the magazine material, in concrete that we might see Adventure Path Compendia of Age of Worms or Savage Tide from WotC?

Yours,

Rafael


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 28, 2007)

labyrinth said:
			
		

> It's standard practice in the software industry to continue support for an outdated version for between 5 and 7 years. And the last time I checked, the DI sure looked like software to me.




This is the D&D industry, not the software industry. And if you want to call the DI software, that's fine, but your comparing apples and oranges.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 28, 2007)

Please don't forget the peaches....


			
				JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> This is the D&D industry, not the software industry. And if you want to call the DI software, that's fine, but your comparing apples and oranges.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 28, 2007)

M(r)s Weiss answered that question, as clear cut as can be...




> Wizards chose not to renew our license. -Margaret



Posted at the Dragonlance.com Forums, on April 24.
That is the truth at best.



> 10) There is some suggestion that the Dragonlance issue isn't as clear cut as Margaret Weiss portrayed it -Morrus.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 28, 2007)

labyrinth said:
			
		

> It's standard practice in the software industry to continue support for an outdated version for between 5 and 7 years. And the last time I checked, the DI sure looked like software to me. The definition of "support" does NOT mean that new content should continue to be created - new content would logically be focused on 4e. However, continued access to all the old 3.5e material should be provided for many years after the cut-over. Providing continued access to existing web content is pretty much a no-brainer, so there's no good excuse for not providing this. If that can't be provided, it would be inappropriate to launch the DI until 4e comes out.




I agree that is what should happen when 4E is eventually unveiled.  But from a business standpoint I really don't see them maintaining the "old and out dated" 3.5 programs.  Simple word or pdf files ... sure.  But if there any Campaign, GM, Player or Combat tools they wouldn't have the incentive to keep them operating ... not when they're trying to get folks to switch over to 4E.

That's only my look into the cracked crystal ball in front of me, your crystal ball may show something different.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Apr 28, 2007)

I just have one thing to add to some of the great suggestions here:

*If you call it DragOnline, I will pimp slap the lot o' you*.

Seriously, gimmie something better than a pun. I'm sure there's a layer of the abyss specifically assigned to torment those who name products with puns.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 28, 2007)

I love the idea of Major Nelson. We have a guy on our staff who we've hired to be our "major nelson" and I think you'll be introduced to him next week


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 28, 2007)

Requirement:10 Years of Public Service Skills, please.


			
				Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> I love the idea of Major Nelson. We have a guy on our staff who we've hired to be our "major nelson" and I think you'll be introduced to him next week


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 28, 2007)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> I just have one thing to add to some of the great suggestions here:
> 
> *If you call it DragOnline, I will pimp slap the lot o' you*.
> 
> Seriously, gimmie something better than a pun. I'm sure there's a layer of the abyss specifically assigned to torment those who name products with puns.




Well, shoot.    Back to the drawing board.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 28, 2007)

I think you caught them, red-handed.


			
				Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> I just have one thing to add to some of the great suggestions here:
> 
> *If you call it DragOnline, I will pimp slap the lot o' you*.
> 
> Seriously, gimmie something better than a pun. I'm sure there's a layer of the abyss specifically assigned to torment those who name products with puns.


----------



## Alnag (Apr 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Drinking from the firehose.
> ...
> I like the fire hose.




Much better apporach I must say. I applaud you for hard trying to make it less corporate speach and more gamer. Now one more advice, I know you are probably lurking here in your free time and it is not part of you contract, but try to not emphasize it so often. We knew it now. It if fine. But repeating it, will make it sound less cool and more... well, more not so cool.

Anyway continue this way and you have a good chance to improve the company image. I hope for the good of the brand, game and myself, you will not leave this apporoach when the actual storm is over. It would be really pitty.

Feel free to folow the advice or not. I just say, what I in my point of view is good (and not so good) apporach to handle this flaming sphere of anger. (Oh, and don't think I have forgive you already. It would need much more work than that. I just acknowledge, I see you trying hard!!!)


----------



## Ghendar (Apr 28, 2007)

I think you guys will like lurkinglidda. She has posted quite a bit on Maxminis and will be as straight as she can be with folks. As seen on this thread, If she can't talk about something, she will say that. She won't give you non-answer answers.

She's a stand up gal. <thumbsup>


----------



## irdeggman (Apr 28, 2007)

Scott, Lidda,

Thanks for keeping in touch here.

I know that there are all kinds of legal issues why things can only e talkied about vaguely.

But would it be possible to have a timeline for when more detailed information would (or might) be made available. {Oh wait "timeline" that's unpatriotic, emboldens the enemy and defeatist   }

But seriously there are certain key events that wil correspond to the "planned" advertising plan {That is obvious even to the must dull of us.}  Could those be listed as times when more information would be forthcoming?

That type of thing might go a long way towards calming some people. Probably not those who like to say "the sky is falling" but most people in my opinion understand this type of thing they just like to be told when something is gong to happen (or at least when they might begin to learn more.).

Anyway thanks for showing up.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 28, 2007)

Where??? Point that out to me, so that I can shower her with gifts and positive rep.


			
				Ghendar said:
			
		

> I think you guys will like lurkinglidda. She has posted quite a bit on Maxminis and will be as straight as she can be with folks. As seen on this thread, If she can't talk about something, she will say that.
> 
> She's a stand up gal. <thumbsup>


----------



## Ghendar (Apr 28, 2007)

Truth Seeker said:
			
		

> Where??? Point that out to me, so that I can shower her with gifts and positive rep.





On Maxminis you mean?
Not too much recently unfortunately. In fact, the WotC presence their has been light for about 6-9 months now, but prior to that both Lidda and Shoe (Stephen Schubert) were fairly regular posters.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Apr 28, 2007)

Oh....  (saw the mistake I made...)


			
				Ghendar said:
			
		

> On Maxminis  you mean?
> Not too much recently unfortunately. In fact, the WotC presence their has been light for about 6-9 months now, but prior to that both Lidda and Shoe (Stephen Schubert) were fairly regular posters.


----------



## blargney the second (Apr 28, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> My Magic NDA Ball says, "Chances good. Check again later."
> 
> Scotty, am I in trouble for saying that?



I'll help!  (I assume you'll post an actual announcement if and when you open beta...)


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 28, 2007)

Ghendar said:
			
		

> I think you guys will like lurkinglidda. She has posted quite a bit on Maxminis and will be as straight as she can be with folks. As seen on this thread, If she can't talk about something, she will say that. She won't give you non-answer answers.
> 
> She's a stand up gal. <thumbsup>




<sniff> This means a lot to me, Ghendar. Thanks <sniff> I swear it isn't the pregnancy that's making me all verclempt (sp) at the moment...but thanks, man! <sniff>


----------



## Teflon Billy (Apr 28, 2007)

> =Bill Slaviscek]I also want to take a moment to quell some related rumors. D&D is not going away. In no way do our plans call for the end of face-to-face tabletop gaming. We are not making an MMORPG. We will continue to produce printed, for-sale, published products.




I do wonder why they specifically eliminated the concerns about MMORPG's, but made no comment similarly discounting the concerns about a "Collectible" model for D&D...despite it's appearance in the questions at about the same rate.

Actually, I don't have to wonder _too_ hard. :\


----------



## daemonslye (Apr 28, 2007)

Scott/Linae, appreciate the continued discourse.

I keep coming back to one pertinent fact.  *WOTC cancelled the magazines.* I'd love to see any info you'd like to share on the market data that shows your customers preferring online to print.  However, I suspect the decision had little to do with customer preference.

I also appreciate that you have been flexible with Paizo regarding the announcement date & extension.  *But, again, WOTC cancelled the magazines. *  If I'm wrong here, and the terms to Paizo to extend the license remained the same, please let us know or allow Erik to tell us why he "mutually agreed" to lapse the license.

So, am I interested in the new WOTC digital push? Moderately.  

*Am I MORE interested in your** Print Initiative? Heck yes!*

So - enough of this DI business.  You probably can't talk about it anyway ("jibbe jabba" indeed).  Let's hear about your *Print Initiative*.  Lets discuss what we want out of that:

- *Ongoing Print Periodical for Players and DM's* - could include adventures in it's format or adventures could be in a separate periodical.
- In some recurring form, *Print Adventures * with great artwork that includes content from long-time and new writers side-by-side;  Getting 1 to 3 large (and $$$) adventures per month does not meet the need.  (needless to say, neither does logging in, downloading, printing, and worrying about the digital format expiring)
- Better *tie in's across multiple adventures * - e.g. Make the adventures smaller, cheaper, quicker in release and give tie ins across multiple - Remember the "A" series?  The "G", "D", and "Q" (yes, I have "Demonweb Pits/2007" - Sorry, just not a fan of the Planescape/flavor of the planes; Things get treated a little too "day-to-day": Ho Hum, we are going to another plane. Again...)
- *Rigorous playtesting across all Complete books*.  The "power-level" has been climbing again.  We don't need a 4E to fix it.  We just need some good quality assurance.  Lots of folks around here can help!
- I might be a minority, but I would buy a few updated/errated books for *3.5 e.g. Savage Species * (updated to tone it down a bit), Fiend Folio, etc.
- *Greyhawk Hardcover (!!)*
- *Hardcover adventure-path * for Age of Worms, and later Savage-Tide (if you REALLY are friends with Paizo - Let them publish these).
- Lots more when I have more time.  Others - Jump in!

I'll keep my $$'s to going to other companies until then.  Getting my various groups right now looking at Iron Heroes (which seems fairly cool actually).

~D


----------



## caudor (Apr 28, 2007)

A thought...if I ask a very general question maybe you can answer without getting in NDA troubles.  Worth a try   (but don't even try to answer if you think it might get you in trouble)  

I like D&D and live in Texas.  My son likes D&D and lives in Ohio.  We sure wish we could play D&D together.  Might there be anything in the DI that I might get excited about?

Thanks.


----------



## Razz (Apr 28, 2007)

caudor said:
			
		

> A thought...if I ask a very general question maybe you can answer without getting in NDA troubles.  Worth a try   (but don't even try to answer if you think it might get you in trouble)
> 
> I like D&D and live in Texas.  My son likes D&D and lives in Ohio.  We sure wish we could play D&D together.  Might there be anything in the DI that I might get excited about?
> 
> Thanks.




Actually I DM my old gaming buddies using the Internet. There is a way to accomplish this for free and with minimal costs in gear. 

We use OPEN RPG at www.openrpg.com for the room server, chat, and real-time dice rolling (to prevent fudges, of course). Free program to use.

I use *Campaign Cartographer* to make the battlemaps, upload them onto my Geocities account as a JPG, then display the battlemap on OPEN RPG for all to see, because OPEN RPG has that cool feature (it also has a sound feature to play sounds or music for all in the room to hear and nice and clear, too). I do this every turn or every round. Doesn't take too much time if you leave a browser open on Geocities for quick and easy uploading. I suggest purchasing CC2 Pro along with Dungeon Designer and City Designer. Would cost about $70.

We use Teamspeak and headsets to talk to each other and, of course, RP through it. That's free. What's neat is no one can see anyone else's character sheet and private messages can be sent between a player and DM without anyone else knowing. Headsets are between $20 and $35.

There are disadvantages. Nothing beats personal tabletop RPing and nothing beats actually rolling the colorful dice in your hands, letting it go, and watching the suspense build up. But other than that, it works out great. Better than no D&D at all, I say.


----------



## Sledge (Apr 28, 2007)

Quick question, since the interview revealed that people at WotC are currently experiencing the same emotions as the community, how long have they known about it? Was this decision kept secret internally?

Regarding names, I'm assuming that WotC will be very careful to use them in such a way as to maintain the trademarks.


----------



## caudor (Apr 28, 2007)

Thanks Razz!


----------



## crazy_cat (Apr 28, 2007)

So I can't have print magazines then?  How about a pony?


----------



## SnowRaven (Apr 28, 2007)

Wye said:
			
		

> In response to *Devyn* you said:
> 
> I'm glad you recognize that, but I'm still spectacularly pissed off by the halting of my beloved magazines in print, and I can't imagine anything that I'd like to have online instead. So it's a loss for me no matter how I look at it.  I'm more than happy with the magazines and in a few months they'll be gone for me...



My read of it isn't that the DI is for everyone, but rather that for those that don't want internet stuff, there will still be plenty of D&D print products, including compilations of the online material.


----------



## daemonslye (Apr 28, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> So I can't have print magazines then?  How about a pony?




Oooh. Yeah - Maybe even a *So Soft Pinkie Pie Pony*!  (http://www.hasbro.com/default.cfm?page=ps_results&product_id=19045)

I'm actually quite serious regarding wanting to know what they have in store for Print.  If DI is in flux, I'm hoping we can at least get a better glimpse into the current print strategy.  That can't have changed that much (what with lead times and all).  

Hey, I'm not asking for an apology...  or a pony (maybe if it was blue though.  ..with spots. ...Ni!).

~D


----------



## Thomas Percy (Apr 28, 2007)

Sledge said:
			
		

> Quick question, since the interview revealed that people at WotC are currently experiencing the same emotions as the community, how long have they known about it?



1 year


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 28, 2007)

Alnag said:
			
		

> . (Oh, and don't think I have forgive you already. It would need much more work than that. I just acknowledge, I see you trying hard!!!)





Thank sfor the advice.

Can I send you some chocolates?


----------



## Sledge (Apr 28, 2007)

Thomas, the decision was made a year ago, but that doesn't mean staff were told about it. If it was general knowledge that means that nothing in the last year has made staff relax their emotions. That has bad implications for what people at WotC actually think of DI.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 28, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> So I can't have print magazines then?  How about a pony?




Would a  War Pony do?


----------



## Sledge (Apr 28, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Can I send you some chocolates?



Chocolates? What kind of cheap date do you think we are?
We're the kind of date that you take to the store and tell the clerk you are going to spend an obsene amount of money. Really offensive. We aren't cheap at all.


----------



## Thomas Percy (Apr 29, 2007)

Sledge said:
			
		

> Thomas, the decision was made a year ago, but that doesn't mean staff were told about it. If it was general knowledge that means that nothing in the last year has made staff relax their emotions. That has bad implications for what people at WotC actually think of DI.



They could sing: "(...) who am I to blow against the wind?" It helps.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 29, 2007)

Sledge said:
			
		

> Chocolates? What kind of cheap date do you think we are?
> We're the kind of date that you take to the store and tell the clerk you are going to spend an obsene amount of money. Really offensive. We aren't cheap at all.




Oh did I say chocolates? Silly me I meant a vacation house in the Alps with a jacuzii and fully stocked gaming room. My Bad


----------



## Sledge (Apr 29, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Oh did I say chocolates? Silly me I meant a vacation house in the Alps with a jacuzii and fully stocked gaming room. My Bad




*sigh* I think I'm in love!


----------



## Wye (Apr 29, 2007)

SnowRaven said:
			
		

> My read of it isn't that the DI is for everyone, but rather that for those that don't want internet stuff, there will still be plenty of D&D print products, including compilations of the online material.



If they are replacing the magazines with the digital initiative, it follows they are hoping (or have the certainty) that a majority of people liking the magazines would migrate to the digital initiative. But I don't see that; it certainly is not my case.

Saying that there are plenty of print products *DOES* alleviate my fear that the whole game is going online, but it *DOES NOT* fill in for the product lost. _"Do you miss Class Acts? Don't worry, there is a splat book for that. Core Believes? There is a splat book for that too."_ doesn't cut it (and I'm not bashing books here, I have a lot to say about that too (good ideas, bad ideas, etc), but this is not the post for it). Inspiration comes from the amalgamation of ideas presented in an easy to carry, and easy to read, format. Reading 200+ pages of a rulebook of the same theme doesn't inspire me. Having sections of different material leads my busy little brain to mix and match things (from other magazines or my own ideas) and create something bigger and interesting.

So, the way I see it, it's not a replacement of the magazines. It's something completely different, targeted at people with different needs. I still don't see why it has to be treated like a replacement. In fact, more and more I see this as two separate events that happen to coincide in timing:
(1) Dragon and Dungeon magazines will die.
(2) Some newfangled subscription based wesbite is coming up.

Please note that I'm not a hater. I'm trying to expose my impressions clearly with full realization that what is done is done... and was done many months before I knew anything about it. If I'm here is because I care, not to flame.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 29, 2007)

Please also keep in mind that we have no idea what the print initiative will have as content, how often it will be published, or what the price point will be.  So before everyone gets all "warm & fuzzy" over the commitment to print additional material aside from the standard books, just remember that we know next to nothing.

How long we'll know nothing is still unknown.


----------



## SnowRaven (Apr 29, 2007)

Wye said:
			
		

> If they are replacing the magazines with the digital initiative, it follows they are hoping (or have the certainty) that a majority of people liking the magazines would migrate to the digital initiative. But I don't see that; it certainly is not my case.<snip>
> Please note that I'm not a hater. I'm trying to expose my impressions clearly with full realization that what is done is done... and was done many months before I knew anything about it. If I'm here is because I care, not to flame.



I just meant that in that specific quote of "what about those of us that hate online stuff", it was probably referring to the books (especially the "online compendium") as products they're using to support folks that won't like online stuff.

From my point of view, I don't think it's a matter of "what will you replace Dragon with?" since to my view, the publications were ended and on a separate note, here's other stuff we're doing. The DI doesn't seem to be a year old IMO, but not sure. There are plenty of implications. It's possible that the decision to end the magazines is not as linked as it seems.

I mean, think of all the "Will they make an AoW hardcover?" topics over the last few months. Paizo obviously couldn't comment, but I can't imagine the topics aren't linked, and the Paizo statements are odd, knowing what happened a year ago.

It's obvious that a lot can't be said because of NDA's (though, a lot of these NDA's seem sort of silly, competition wise they don't have to be as stringent as other industries really...), but there is obviously lots more to the story.


----------



## SnowRaven (Apr 29, 2007)

Devyn said:
			
		

> Please also keep in mind that we have no idea what the print initiative will have as content, how often it will be published, or what the price point will be.  So before everyone gets all "warm & fuzzy" over the commitment to print additional material aside from the standard books, just remember that we know next to nothing.
> 
> How long we'll know nothing is still unknown.





I think an Unearthed Arcana style book twice a year would be good, as long as the material was good. But, yeah, we don't know. Lurking Lidda's Magic NDA Ball probably has "ask again in 3 months" come up a lot.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Apr 29, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Oh did I say chocolates? Silly me I meant a vacation house in the Alps with a jacuzii and fully stocked gaming room. My Bad




Since you are still around Scott (and I've noticed that confiming the absence of a move to an MMORPG plan wasn't a NDA problem for Mr. Slaviscek) can you confirm/deny whether tabletop D&D is going "collectible" or not?


----------



## ashockney (Apr 29, 2007)

Scott Rouse said:
			
		

> First of all, were you surprised by the amount of emotion pouring out from fans in the last few days? What was the expected reaction from the online community?
> 
> Scott: No, we weren’t surprised by the reaction. We understand the emotions rippling through the community. In fact, there are a lot of people here at WotC that share those same emotions. Many of the people working on Bill’s team started their careers on the magazines, and it’s tough for some of them to accept the news.




This part of the interview struck a chord with me as a manager.  It seems pretty clear that WOTC knew this was coming, and they knew it would suck (meaning the community reaction).  So I'm picturing planning meeting after planning meeting where someone like Scott says, "You know, someone's got to take the lead on our communication plan for the DI program that will be replacing Dungeon and Dragon magazines...anyone...Buhler?"  I've overseen these meetings, and there is NOTHING harder than asking people to drive significant change, when they BUILT the house the way it is because they liked it that way.   Total speculation on my part, but I thought it might be a worthwhile note from an outsider looking in on all this to help explain, in part, the WOTC reaction.  

Many, many thanks to Morrus (our hero!), Scott, Chris, Bill, Linnae, Ari, Owen, and any other insiders who've braved the lion's den to see what we have to say, and why we're saying it.  That's a very special thing, and I hope the many people (at least on this forum), never forget what a privilege it is to have direct interactions with those that shepherd our passion and our hobby.

To the rest of my fellow ENWorld community: I offer you a challenge.  We are all shocked.  We are all taken back by these decisions.  ENWorld is a safe place to share our feelings and opinions, work out our emotions, and fortunately for all of us, share our thoughts on how we hope to shape the future of our favorite passtime.  So, here's the challenge: TRUST - those that were chosen to shepherd the Dungeons and Dragons game, because its all we have, RESPECT - that everyone is entitled to there own opinion, SUPPORT - be there for those with the greatest responsibility and those who need your help, ENCOURAGE - use the energy you feel, that may initially be negativity, and invest it into making this game great, however best you can do it.  Many of you have, and continue to, live up to this challenge.  Thank you for making this a special place.



			
				Chris Perkins said:
			
		

> What can an online platform offer to the customer that a magazine cannot?
> 
> Chris: We have a lot of ideas that we’re happy with, but let me turn the question around. What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that? If this new incarnation of the magazines could encompass anything you could want, what would that be?




I would hope an online platform could offer portability (the ability to interact on my pda, my wireless laptop, while I'm in the can, while I'm on the bus, while I'm at work   , and most importantly while I'm at the gaming table), customization (significantly greater and more complex detail - think database management), storage (the ability to plan and store campaign, location, adventure, and character information), manipulation (the ability to pull together the pieces I need for my game, and use them how I desire), a broader spectrum of support (video, music, maps, art, cross-genre support, cross-game support, experimental content, playtest information, design notes, game mastering tips, samples of in-game use), and most importantly INTERACTION (to create a SHARED gaming experience, to be a part of the playtests, to be a contributor to new feats, spells, magic items, prestige classes, and adventures).  What?  Too much?   

What would make this exciting for me would be to see my name on a byline under something labelled "official content". 

What would make this useful to me would be to SAVE ME TIME.  I now have two children under the age of 6.  The biggest challenge to my gaming is TIME investment required.  Example: WOW vs. EQ.  I would not choose to play EQ because of the time investment required.  WOW figured that out and made a game that could be played in 20 minute bursts!  Yeah Blizzard!  My 60th level undead wizard is awesome.  It took me TWO YEARS to get there, but at least I'm in the game.

I have used an immeasurable amount of material from Dungeon and Dragon magazine over the past 20 years.  EVERY bit of it was tweaked to fit the campaign, my players, and the circumstances.  Any help that could be provided in doing that (ie, Dungeon adventures that can easily be customized for four, five, six, or seven players) would be huge.

If this new incarnation could encompass anything I would hope that it would provide CONSISTENT EXCLUSIVE content: Forgotten Realms information written by the authors that shape it - Ed Greenwood, Steven Schend, RA Salvatore, Elaine Cunningham, Sean Reynolds, et al.  

I would also love to see the "official" turned on it's interactive ear.  Maintain live/interactive errata to help maintain game balance and push the creative envelope.  My characters could put their characters into the "system" and it would highlight for them where errata has been addressed to help maintain balance (ie, no you can't multiclass into five different prestige classes).  Further, as a DM, I could pull together my adventure, and the system could rate the fairness of the adventure, along with a complexity and challenge rating.  In this way, characters could more easily be challenged.  Shared content could be playtested, tweaked, and DM'ing tips and tactics could be provided, particularly right from the people who wrote, tested, and edited the game, in an effort to make this "shared" play experience better for everyone who is a subscriber.

Good luck on this new endeavor and good gaming!


----------



## caudor (Apr 29, 2007)

ashockney said:
			
		

> So, here's the challenge: TRUST - those that were chosen to shepherd the Dungeons and Dragons game, because its all we have, RESPECT - that everyone is entitled to there own opinion, SUPPORT - be there for those with the greatest responsibility and those who need your help, ENCOURAGE - use the energy you feel, that may initially be negativity, and invest it into making this game great, however best you can do it.  Many of you have, and continue to, live up to this challenge.  Thank you for making this a special place.




Good suggestion   I'm happy to say that I have not wavered in my trust of our friends at WotC.  They are gamers; they share our affection for the game.  They _make_ our game rules and materials.  They want the game to be successful...that's how they bring home the beacon.  Have they made mistakes in the past?  Well yeah, but who here hasn't made mistakes?

I'm all for giving WotC and our fellow ENWorlders the trust, respect, and encouragement they deserve.

Group hug?


----------



## zoroaster100 (Apr 29, 2007)

If WOTC wants me to even possibly consider their digital initiative at all, they will offer as much Greyhawk adventures as Dungeon did in the last couple of years, and they will stay away from Eberron stuff, which I have no use for.  If WOTC killed off Dungeon, which was my last source of Greyhawk adventures, and does not suitably replace it with another reliable source of Greyhawk adventures, I'll continue to have very negative feelings towards WOTC, as I've had since the announcement of Dungeon's cancellation.


----------



## sjmiller (Apr 29, 2007)

Chris Perkins said:
			
		

> What can an online platform offer to the customer that a magazine cannot?
> 
> Chris: We have a lot of ideas that we’re happy with, but let me turn the question around. What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that? If this new incarnation of the magazines could encompass anything you could want, what would that be?



Chris, let me be perfectly honest with you, something I hope you will appreciate.  Here's what I hope for.  I want something that doesn't require me to sit in front of a computer to use it.  I want something I can hold in my hand and read while lounging in my backyard.  I want something that, once I purchase it is mine until *I* decide to get rid of it.  I want something that is easy to share with my other gamers.  Basically I want a magazine or a book.  I do not have a computer at my gaming table, they are not allowed.  I don't spend huge amounts of time online.  This evening, as I type this, is a rare after hours experience.  Most of the time when I am working on my games or reading game material I am reading a *book*.

Yes, before you ask, I do have a subscription to an online gaming publication.  That would be Pyramid magazine online.  For $20 a year I get articles posted weekly, ones I can read online, or print out and read wherever I want.  They also have a full and exhaustive search system for the entire online run of the magazine, and even some of the pre-digital magazines.

As for what did I use from the magazines, that's easy.  I used monsters, equipment, spells, and magic items.  I used the descriptions of the gods from the early issues of Dragon.  I used various articles with ideas on how to run games and create things on your own.  When I used something from the magazine  I used most of it with little or no preparation.  I would occasionally make special equipment cards to pass to my players, so they have a set of notes on the new piece of equipment.  The cards took a few minutes each to write up and would see all sorts of use.  I rarely used adventures, mostly because I prefer to write my own, but I would steal encounter ideas or sometimes whole encounters.  Again, it was with little or no effort.

In the new incarnation of the magazines, more than anything, I want to be able to use the material away from the computer.  If using this material for or in my game requires me to have a computer at the gaming table, then it is not usable to me.  If I have to print it out, that's fine.  If I can select a whole series of articles and have them printed, bound, and sent to me, that would be even better.  The _Core Beliefs_ series would be perfect candidates for that.  Of course, that would require that all the previous ones from the print editions of Dragon be available.

You asked, so I thought you should know.  Personally, if I had my choice, I would have a monthly print magazine containing all this stuff.  The magazine could also be available online with the same content, or maybe with just a bit more.  But, really, what I want is a magazine I can hold in my hands.


----------



## WampusCat43 (Apr 29, 2007)

ashockney said:
			
		

> ...snip...



Without repeating any of the post just above, I wanted to say this is one of the best, most intelligently thought out posts I've ever seen on this board.  Please pay attention, WotC.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Apr 29, 2007)

Teflon Billy said:
			
		

> Since you are still around Scott (and I've noticed that confiming the absence of a move to an MMORPG plan wasn't a NDA problem for Mr. Slaviscek) can you confirm/deny whether tabletop D&D is going "collectible" or not?





Anything is collectible from minis to dryer lint   . 

Do you mean like a trading card game or radomized minis? If so no. 

Yes minis are staying around and wil continue to be radomized (except for big dragons etc) but everytbing else is a non-blind version (books, tiles, etc). You can still collect I guess if you buy a book and never crack it, store it in a vault but that would be kind of silly.

Sorry can you please elaborate what you mean by collectible ?


----------



## William Ronald (Apr 29, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Anything is collectible from minis to dryer lint   .
> 
> Do you mean like a trading card game or radomized minis? If so no.
> 
> ...





Some of the books such as the Draconomicon, are nice to have around to look at, but are much better being used by gaming.

So, I think that this most recent comment is to indicate that the future of D&D is to be a tabletop role playing game.   Mind you, I can see some collectible elements being added.  For example, in the Living Greyhawk campaign in the RPGA, there were cards which could be used for various purposes -- such as temporarily simulating a feat or creating some sort of magical effect for a very limited duration.  (I have no idea if that is something that would be incorporated into print products or online content, but I suppose it is one direction to go. )

Perhaps it might be wise to ask in what ways Dungeones and Dragons will continue to be a tabetop game.  I imagine that while the miniatures will be popular, there will still be roleplaying supplements and products.

Here is a question:  How can we help the role playing game hobby grow?


----------



## Teflon Billy (Apr 29, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Anything is collectible from minis to dryer lint   .
> 
> Do you mean like a trading card game or radomized minis? If so no.
> 
> ...




I could, but your suspicions about what I meant were correct.

Thanks for answering


----------



## Maggan (Apr 29, 2007)

zoroaster100 said:
			
		

> and they will stay away from Eberron stuff, which I have no use for.




Then I'm sorry to say that you will have to brace yourself for disappointment. I don't think it is realistic to hope that WotC doesn't do material for one of its active, print published settings.

But ... having Eberron content doesn't automatically mean that there is less space for Greyhawk, since the platform is digital with theoretically endless pages, compared to Dungeon.

/M


----------



## Maggan (Apr 29, 2007)

ashockney said:
			
		

> To the rest of my fellow ENWorld community: I offer you a challenge.  We are all shocked.  We are all taken back by these decisions.  ENWorld is a safe place to share our feelings and opinions, work out our emotions, and fortunately for all of us, share our thoughts on how we hope to shape the future of our favorite passtime.  So, here's the challenge: TRUST - those that were chosen to shepherd the Dungeons and Dragons game, because its all we have, RESPECT - that everyone is entitled to there own opinion, SUPPORT - be there for those with the greatest responsibility and those who need your help, ENCOURAGE - use the energy you feel, that may initially be negativity, and invest it into making this game great, however best you can do it.  Many of you have, and continue to, live up to this challenge.  Thank you for making this a special place.




I wish there was a way to report really, really good posts. Cause then I'd report you twice! for this!

Morrus, something to post on the front page, perhaps?

Go ashockney, go!

/M


----------



## Sammael (Apr 29, 2007)

I am sorry, but I cannot blindly TRUST anyone, be it a person or a legal entity, who doesn't prove to be trustworthy to me. The other aspects of the challenge (initiative? ) are certainly something that I can agree with and support.

But the front page is for news, not pep-talk.


----------



## crazy_cat (Apr 29, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Would a  War Pony do?



Well, I was realy hoping for that My Little Pony RPG that WOTC were teasing us with last April.

But, since you replied so nicely OK then - could it be an Uncommon War Pony (or even a light War Horse) with a human spearman mount (maybe modelled on the Angelfire Caravan Guard - and maybe called the Caravan Outrider?) I'd really like to make a cavalry charge using DDMs and using the existing available rares just isn't going to cut it.... 

Oh yeah, and thanks for the updates. Nice to hear that the D&D I play at a table with books and friends isn't going online and isn't going collectable. I look forward to buying many more WOTC books, and many more WOTC minis in the years to come.

No DI for me I'm afraid - I don't want, or need, subscription online content. I'm going with a Pathfinder subscription to fill the Dungeon and Dragon shaped holes in my monthly gaming purchases.


----------



## Maggan (Apr 29, 2007)

Sammael said:
			
		

> But the front page is for news, not pep-talk.




I think that given the history of the front page being used for news, messages from Morrus, thread summaries, announcements and a laundry list of various other things Morrus and his gang feels are necessary to share with the community, some pep talk wouldn't be out of place.

I long ago stopped thinking of the front page as just a news page. 

/M


----------



## Sledge (Apr 29, 2007)

So, I just reread where Scott mentioned something about being NDA'd 8 ways till Sunday. Now that it is Sunday I expect some answers. 
Seriously though I'm still curious about the time frame internally about the announcement. I.E. did staff know about it before the public?


----------



## Zendragon (Apr 29, 2007)

having to work when you know inside information is tough. I went through a merger and found out about it before the general manager did, about 3 days ahead of time. I found out the decision had been in the works for over 9 months. They closed our entire center and effected about 150 people. It's tough knowing that friends and co-workers are going to lose their jobs.


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Apr 29, 2007)

Zendragon said:
			
		

> having to work when you know inside information is tough. I went through a merger and found out about it before the general manager did, about 3 days ahead of time. I found out the decision had been in the works for over 9 months. They closed our entire center and effected about 150 people. It's tough knowing that friends and co-workers are going to lose their jobs.




Only way to look out for them then is to keep an ear open for job openings.  Then when you do say to them, "Did you hear company x is hiring you would be perfect for it, you really should try for it."


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 29, 2007)

Teflon Billy said:
			
		

> I've noticed that confiming the absence of a move to an MMORPG plan wasn't a NDA problem for Mr. Slaviscek...




On the whole NDA, does Wizards as a company just make you guys sign NDAs on everything on a day to do basis? I find it weird that a lot of this can't be spoken about due to NDAs. 

Maybe I just don't know the business enough, but even with all of the legal stuff I've been involved with with Network Solutions, the Verisign Registry, and the future of a lot of internet practices, I've never once signed an NDA.


----------



## lurkinglidda (Apr 29, 2007)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> On the whole NDA, does Wizards as a company just make you guys sign NDAs on everything on a day to do basis? I find it weird that a lot of this can't be spoken about due to NDAs.
> 
> Maybe I just don't know the business enough, but even with all of the legal stuff I've been involved with with Network Solutions, the Verisign Registry, and the future of a lot of internet practices, I've never once signed an NDA.




We take confidentiality pretty seriously at WotC. NDA paperwork is part of the new-hire packet every employee receives. Besides that, we are reminded of our NDA from time to time. For example, it's not unusual for someone to start off a meeting saying something like, "I just want to remind everyone present that this discussion is confidential."


----------



## Papa-DRB (Apr 29, 2007)

Regarding Confidentiality, I have worked for a large computer corporation (HAL+1, if you understand the reference) for 32 years, 7+months in Mainframe support, so I understand the NDA or as we call it simply "Confidential Material". Those who have not worked (lived!) in such a culture just can not fathom the limits, so please just accept that Linae & Scott really are bound to what they can and cannot discuss.

As far as DI, there are several things that will sway me to plunk down my money, or not.

1) DRM - Electronic watermarks are fine, but if I cannot move it from computer to computer, or have it on a thumb drive and use it anywhere, and have the option of printing it out, then I probably won't sign up.
2) Some kind of preview power. I have *all* the Dungeon magazines, however few  Dragon magazines. A buddy of mine who has all the Dragon magazines will see an article that he thinks might interest me and lend me his magazine. If I like the article enough to use it (and that is few and far between), I will buy the issue. If DI won't let me do some kind of preview, then I won't buy it.


----------



## Razz (Apr 29, 2007)

Well, since April is at an end, that leaves 5 whole months before September is over.

Think it's possible for you guys to do a Countdown Previews for each month? Or is it still too early to be doing that?

One other question is, how confident are you guys that DI will begin after the September issues of Dragon and Dungeon are over? Will it begin October or November? Or later?

Oh, and for those constantly asking for previews of DI content so you can pick and choose what you want, why not hang around ENWorld and wait for a real subscriber to post what he/she's got as a preview? Plenty of people here open up threads on Dragon and Dungeon previews when they get their magazines in the mail


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Apr 29, 2007)

Preview content I would like to see:

Table of Contents - something akin to the front cover
from there develop little overviews of each.


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 29, 2007)

lurkinglidda said:
			
		

> We take confidentiality pretty seriously at WotC. NDA paperwork is part of the new-hire packet every employee receives. Besides that, we are reminded of our NDA from time to time. For example, it's not unusual for someone to start off a meeting saying something like, "I just want to remind everyone present that this discussion is confidential."




Thanks for responding. All of the documents I receive say Confidential: For Internal Use Only, but I guess we're just more laid back with it.


----------



## romp (Apr 29, 2007)

ohhh ok, i see now, WotC has been silent on the details of the DI, including its name because they are letting Paizo get some wind in Pathfinder's sails. 

That is what the "meat shield" comment meant and is part of the reason for the silence. That and NDA's.

What they have ready (content-wise if not tech-wise) they are holding off on so as to give Paizo sometime before overshadowing them with the announcements and PR deluge.

Why? Lifting the licenses kills Paizo's revenue stream and even its raison d' etre. Paizo used to be part of WotC and there was/continues to be relationships there.


----------



## MojoGM (Apr 29, 2007)

zoroaster100 said:
			
		

> If WOTC wants me to even possibly consider their digital initiative at all, they will offer as much Greyhawk adventures as Dungeon did in the last couple of years, and they will stay away from Eberron stuff, which I have no use for.  If WOTC killed off Dungeon, which was my last source of Greyhawk adventures, and does not suitably replace it with another reliable source of Greyhawk adventures, I'll continue to have very negative feelings towards WOTC, as I've had since the announcement of Dungeon's cancellation.




Why does it have to be one or the other?  I personally WANT more Eberron content and have no use whatsoever for Greyhawk stuff, but there is no reason that they can't keep us both happy.  With Digital there is no maximum pagecount...


----------



## caudor (Apr 29, 2007)

Sammael said:
			
		

> I am sorry, but I cannot blindly TRUST anyone, be it a person or a legal entity, who doesn't prove to be trustworthy to me. The other aspects of the challenge (initiative? ) are certainly something that I can agree with and support.
> 
> But the front page is for news, not pep-talk.




You are certainly entitled to your opinion.  It's just as valid as mine.

However, just because I'm looking forward to the DI, does not mean I'm putting 'blind faith' in WotC.  I have many products from WotC designers that I really enjoy.  I have a basis for my 'faith'.

On the other hand, I drive a narrow two-way road to get to work (at night).  People zoom right past me.  I don't know if they are drunk, night-blind, talking on the phone, or whatever.  I don't know them at all.  Why do I trust them enough to drive that road?  Well, I don't trust them entirely, but I have to go to work anyway.


----------



## Sammael (Apr 29, 2007)

caudor said:
			
		

> However, just because I'm looking forward to the DI, does not mean I'm putting 'blind faith' in WotC.



I didn't say you were. I also used "trust" rather than "faith," because, IMO, "faith" is never rational, whereas "trust" is.



> I have many products from WotC designers that I really enjoy.



So do I. The vast majority of those designers are no longer employed by WotC. At best, a few are freelancers.



> On the other hand, I drive a narrow two-way road to get to work (at night).  People zoom right past me.  I don't know if they are drunk, night-blind, talking on the phone, or whatever.  I don't know them at all.  Why do I trust them enough to drive that road?  Well, I don't trust them entirely, but I have to go to work anyway.



Eh, that's apples and oranges when compared to the situation we're discussing. You have no choice if you want to get to work. On the other hand, I have a choice when it comes to RPG materials - even if I don't buy them from WotC, I can get 3rd party products, create my own, or whatever... in other words, there are many roads I can take.

The key for WotC is to convince me to take _their_ road. In my case, that's not exactly easy, as I am fairly immune to most marketing techniques.


----------



## caudor (Apr 29, 2007)

Sammael,

Don't get me wrong, I do see your point.  I suppose we simply differ in views regarding trust.

I don't wear glasses, but would you believe I have rose colored eyes?  I do...really   

May, June, and August.  Hopefully Wotc will reveal more about the DI before August.  I also hope they will have a beta test of the DI starting soon.


----------



## nerfherder (Apr 30, 2007)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> Maybe I just don't know the business enough, but even with all of the legal stuff I've been involved with with Network Solutions, the Verisign Registry, and the future of a lot of internet practices, I've never once signed an NDA.



Think yourself lucky - I had to sign the Official Secrets Act when I started work for BT.  The threat of serious criminal charges is a good motivator not to discuss confidential work!


----------



## Thurbane (Apr 30, 2007)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> Being disappointed with the answer is not the same as the questions not being answered.
> 
> We know more than we did before. Their responses contained some real substance.



I'll also have to humbly disagree with this. For my mind, very little of real substance was present in the answers, and did basically zero to make me feel any better about the end of the magazines, or any more enthusiastic about the launch of the DI.

If anything, it only solidified many of my concerns about the DI...


----------



## Thurbane (Apr 30, 2007)

ScotMartin said:
			
		

> Obviously, I'd love everything to be accurate when first put up, but that's not realistic.



...sorry, but why?

I know we had a lengthy thread here a little while back about proofreading and errors, which went into great depth on the subject, but I am still not convinced that basic errors in products are "inevitable" or "inescapable".

With all due respect, glaring stat-block errors and contradictory text are NOT acceptable in a product you expect people to shell out hard earned money for (not to mention minor spelling and typographical errors). Errata is all fine and well, but it is no substitiion for catching errors in the first place. Such errors REALLY irk consumers, let me assure you.

My 2 cents anyway.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Apr 30, 2007)

It appears people are talking about two different things in this thread.  The problem is that they haven't told us WHICH one of the two things it is.  The DI is either:

1) An online "service" that offers articles, information, but also tools and interactive material.  Likely the information would come out in packets (for instance, an article on "Feats of the Shieldlands in Greyhawk" would come out on Wednesday and on Thursday there would be "Spells of the Ice Mage" and on Friday "DM Advice", etc).  Information could be printed out, but you'd be printing off these "packets".  Want a 10 page adventure that was just put up on the service?  Print it off if you want to use it offline.

2) An online "magazine".  This would mean that all the information would be compiled into one document that could be downloaded and read with a table of contents, a beginning and an end.  These could be printed off and read in "order".

All the evidence points to it being the first one as far as I can tell, however.  This makes the most sense to me and seems to make the most efficient use of the online medium:

-You don't have to print anything you don't NEED (Don't like Eberron then don't print off the article about Stormreach, don't like the new spells in an article then don't print them off, if you play D&D with a laptop with internet access in front of you you never have to print anything)

-Information is easily modifiable (Find out there is a misprint in a new PrC you printed you can correct it instead of having it in a physical book that can't be corrected, if you have more "Spells of the Frostmage" submitted to you you can just add it to the previous article)

-Interactivity (You can make a character creating program that is automatically updated when new books come out, a map making program that gets new art automatically, a treasure generating program that gets new magic items in it as new books come out)

-Personalization (You can save your settings since it is user based allowing you to log into the service from your friends house and have all your favorite articles saved or your characters all saved online ready to print out if you forgot your printout at home)

It has a couple of disadvantages to go with the benefits.  The biggest of which is that it no longer has physical copies which means no reading in the bathroom or on the bus without a print out.

However, it appears that they are counting on people who like physical copies just to buy the compilations when they come out.  I think it's a safe bet that for people who like physical copies, this should satisfy them.

It IS true, though, that it is likely that Dragon and Dungeon as magazines in the current format are dead.  We should mourn their passing.  Then we can move on.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Apr 30, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> ...sorry, but why?
> 
> I know we had a lengthy thread here a little while back about proofreading and errors, which went into great depth on the subject, but I am still not convinced that basic errors in products are "inevitable" or "inescapable".
> 
> ...



Nothing is inescapable, but it's a matter how much much money are you willing to spend for perfection.

As a rough example.  Say you pay someone...20 dollars an hour to write up a PrC.  After writing it(2 hours), playtesting it (5 hours), changing it based on playtesting (1 hour), playtesting again (5 hours), last minute edits based on more playtesting and having read through it (1 hour), having an editor go through it and check for errors and consulting with him (2 hours), last minute editing based on editors feedback (1 hour), and meetings discussing deadlines and progress (5 hours).

That's 22 hours there or 440 dollars for one PrC.  And that's just the one writer being paid.  Assume other people get paid to manage, play in the playtests, edit, market the book, etc....

Then the fact that there are a number of PrC, feats, spell, etc. per book.  It adds up.  At a certain point you just have to give up and say "We think it's good enough.  It might not be perfectly balanced.  During that last phase of editing, we may have changed something in the PrC that made the example invalid, but I don't think so.  Let's get it out before the deadline and just print it now."


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Apr 30, 2007)

J.R.R. Tolkien spent _decades_ trying to chase all the typos out of the LoTR books.  I get the impression that editing is much tougher than most people give credit for.

As for Majuro Oakheart's note about what people think the DI is - does anyone really think that #2 is what they have in mind?  I can't imagine that as a possibility.


----------



## deadDMwalking (Apr 30, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> J.R.R. Tolkien spent _decades_ trying to chase all the typos out of the LoTR books.  I get the impression that editing is much tougher than most people give credit for.




While a few typos are always possible, and extremely difficult to avoid completely, they are much easier to deal with now.  Before the advent of computers, a manuscript would be re-copied a few times, including with print setting.  Each time a copy was made an error could creep in that was not there before.

Now, the finished manuscript is essentially the final print product.  Thus, there should not be any 'new errors' added to a product after it is completed, which originally was an 'unavoidable error'.  

Even if that is the case, the number of errors and the type of errors can easily be unacceptable.  I don't play in the Forgotten Realms (at least, not usually), but I do look over the books for that product line.  I could not believe that the first page I opened to in Serpent Kingdoms had more than three easy to recognize typos.

I make mistakes with my spelling, and I've accidentally put one word in place of another, or left part of a sentence out.  My posts are usually better edited than the products that Wizards of the Coast has released.  If they don't release perfectly edited books, I won't hold it against them, but I will cringe each time I come across an obvious error (particularly if they use there or their instead of they're).


----------



## Vocenoctum (Apr 30, 2007)

caudor said:
			
		

> Sammael,
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I do see your point.  I suppose we simply differ in views regarding trust.
> 
> ...





Previews is only up to July now, as of the last one, so I'm figuring next month's (Junes) Previews will have info maybe.


----------



## DanFor (Apr 30, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Hasbro stays out of our day to day business of operating the D&D brand.




I know who to blame now, at least.



			
				ashockney said:
			
		

> To the rest of my fellow ENWorld community: I offer you a challenge. We are all shocked. We are all taken back by these decisions. ENWorld is a safe place to share our feelings and opinions, work out our emotions, and fortunately for all of us, share our thoughts on how we hope to shape the future of our favorite passtime. So, here's the challenge: TRUST - those that were chosen to shepherd the Dungeons and Dragons game, because its all we have, RESPECT - that everyone is entitled to there own opinion, SUPPORT - be there for those with the greatest responsibility and those who need your help, ENCOURAGE - use the energy you feel, that may initially be negativity, and invest it into making this game great, however best you can do it. Many of you have, and continue to, live up to this challenge. Thank you for making this a special place.




Why would I trust, respect, support, or encourage a company that makes bad (IMO) management decisions? How many people here trusted and encouraged T$R and Lorraine Williams back in the day?


----------



## caudor (Apr 30, 2007)

DanFor said:
			
		

> I know who to blame now, at least.
> 
> Why would I trust, respect, support, or encourage a company that makes bad (IMO) management decisions? How many people here trusted and encouraged T$R and Lorraine Williams back in the day?




Well, in my case, I trust them because I like their past and current products, and I don't think they have bad management.  I think the company is doing very well.


----------



## DanFor (Apr 30, 2007)

caudor said:
			
		

> Well, in my case, I trust them because I like their past and current products, and I don't think they have bad management.  I think the company is doing very well.




I respect your opinion. I hope the digital magazine works out for you.


----------



## Alnag (Apr 30, 2007)

OK. I have one question which as far as I know was not asked and I hope somebody can answer it. What is the current position of WotC/Hasbro to the question of d20 licence or OGL. I am reading lot of rumors about this usually accompanied with 4e will not be OGL.

So what is the real position of WotC?

Do you support OGL/d20? Will you publish parts of e.g. SW Saga rules as SRD?

Or do you leave it alone? Not support not destroy?

Or do you intent to pull it back (i mean d20 logo and such, because OGL can't be simply scratch)?

Also reading about D&D 4e all the time, one has inevitable feeling, that despite the horrible fear of it comming, most of the people is looking forward to it. At least a little bit. And they are hope it will trump even the success of D&D 3e. So I hope you have it prepared to come just in time when the expectations are in the highest


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Apr 30, 2007)

I wouldn't say I've lost trust in them.
Just very curious in the directions they are taking.  To me it all screams the release of 4E around the corner.  
So trust isn't an issue.
I think it more a case of lack of confidence.
No they haven't told us anything solid.  Personally I if I were Scott, Lidda, or any of the other lurking WOTC (mmm new monster anyone  ), I would print off a good number of these threads and take them to a board meeting.  And when they get that anything else question, ask them how do we handle these.  Tally the numbers up for them, tell them how many are going to leave how many are willing to stay with and possibly purchase 'whatever' item x will be.
We know you have NDA's, Lord knows I sign enough of them quite regularly for my job.  But nothing prevents you from 'Championing our voice' so to speak.  Sure you can toss the quick viral reactions from the very beginning, but pay attention to the ones that thought out their responses.  Especially ones that are willing to truely leave the game.  All companies fear loss of revenue, while the numbers might not be large if they even come close to representing a 1% of the WOTC gamer base, they will take notice.  

Case Example: it was what November when CMP lost the ability to continue publishing E-Tool & PC-Gen Datasets.  Your ONLINE crowd has been clamoring on that for what 6 months now.  All that is truly known is that it was for 'Future Considerations', well in that time you have lost a revenue stream that could have been incoming (i.e. datasets).  If the Digitial Initiative isn't taken place till after Sept/Oct '07 timeframe, why wasn't an extension in place for them as well?  

The community will eventually accept the D.I. plan, but a continious 'Wait & See' will add to the WOTC image of becoming to big for us.  (wanted to say alienate but didn't sound right)

Another thing when you read these posts is how many possible Revenue streams does each poster represent?  Someone like me, my group only 1 other has an account here or at WOTC's board and he only goes here or there when I send him a link to something interesting.  I currently have 4 in the group who each buy stuff semi-regularly.  Me I buy a good majority of the products.  Also I have a 6yr old that loves Star Wars minis, he also likes picking up 'Pokeman' like cards every now and then.  He also helps me pick out monster encounters when I planning out my DMing.   

So take that into account as you go through these replies, then take into account how many are computer challenged, I wonder if Paizo has an 'age demographic' on the subscribers they could share.  I would be willing to bet that a good majority of that 40k subscriber base is above age 30.

Ok I'm rambling again, but hope ya see the point I was making.

If you make it - they might not come but for a quick look
If you make it acceptable - they will come and try it.
If you make it right and appealing - they will come; try it; keep at it; and tell their friends.
If you make it and screw it up - they will come see it for what it is; and scream at the world.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Apr 30, 2007)

DanFor said:
			
		

> Why would I trust, respect, support, or encourage a company that makes bad (IMO) management decisions? How many people here trusted and encouraged T$R and Lorraine Williams back in the day?





Oddly enough, back in the day, I simply bought products I liked and didn't buy products I didn't like.When the latter became a lot more common than the former, I stopped looking at stuff from TSR. I will do the same with WotC, but since they're doing very well by me so far, I don't see why I should suddenly decide they're traitors to the brand.


----------



## DanFor (Apr 30, 2007)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> Oddly enough, back in the day, I simply bought products I liked and didn't buy products I didn't like.When the latter became a lot more common than the former, I stopped looking at stuff from TSR. I will do the same with WotC, but since they're doing very well by me so far, I don't see why I should suddenly decide they're traitors to the brand.




Traitors to the brand? Are you responding to my post or someone else's?

I respect that you have the opinion that WoTC is doing well by you. They aren't doing well by me. I'm more concerned about the recent decision to discontinue Dragon and Dungeon magazines than product quality, though.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Apr 30, 2007)

DanFor said:
			
		

> Traitors to the brand? Are you responding to my post or someone else's?
> 
> I respect that you have the opinion that WoTC is doing well by you. They aren't doing well by me. I'm more concerned about the recent decision to discontinue Dragon and Dungeon magazines than product quality, though.




Well, plenty of folks on ENWorld don't like WotC's stuff to start with, so to them the decision to cancel the magazines means a loss of product since they hate all WotC stuff anyway. In addition, some folks don't want electronic product anyway, so they're out unless they feel the print book compilations are a worthy replacement.

If you like the stuff WotC is doing, but won't have trust in their ability to make good product simply because it means the end of the magazines, then realistically WotC hasn't done wrong by you, as long as they follow through and a good product replaces a good product. Right now of course, it's hard to judge snce we don't have a lot of information, but since the magazines haven't ended yet either, you're still "getting" the stuff. 

My vantage is of course different, I enjoy WotC's books, and they see a lot more use for me than the magazines have in a year. My subscriptions were ending as the announcements were made, with no intention for me to renew. I found the magazines to have a feeling of "the same stuff, again" while the books were more various.

As for "traitors to the brand", if you feel that WotC is not handling the duties of "D&D" responsibly, then that's what I mean. I personally like their stuff, though my opinion obvously is no more valid than any other.


----------



## DanFor (Apr 30, 2007)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> If you like the stuff WotC is doing, but won't have trust in their ability to make good product simply because it means the end of the magazines, then realistically WotC hasn't done wrong by you, as long as they follow through and a good product replaces a good product.




I like some of things that WoTC has published, but not necessarily everything. I don't quite follow your logic, though. They are replacing Dragon and Dungeon magazines with an electronic service. I'm not the least bit happy about that.



			
				Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> As for "traitors to the brand", if you feel that WotC is not handling the duties of "D&D" responsibly, then that's what I mean.




Again, I'm not understanding how you are drawing this conclusion. I guess if you're saying that mismanagement of a product is traiterous somehow...?


----------



## Vocenoctum (Apr 30, 2007)

DanFor said:
			
		

> I like some of things that WoTC has published, but not necessarily everything. I don't quite follow your logic, though. They are replacing Dragon and Dungeon magazines with an electronic service. I'm not the least bit happy about that.




They have canceled Dragon and Dungeon, they are also debuting an electronic service. Assuming they do produce a book occasionally with the best of the articles, it'd sort of be like replacing Dragon with Best of Dragon, or... something. 

The actual electronic service, I don't, I'll wait and see.



> Again, I'm not understanding how you are drawing this conclusion. I guess if you're saying that mismanagement of a product is traiterous somehow...?




I'm not sure how else to explain the term. Perhaps you're overanalyzing the phrase. Simply put then, you refuse to put your trust in WotC because they did something you don't like, even though you do trust their product quality? You won't trust them because they canceled the magazines, even though you think the replacement might be as good?


----------



## DanFor (May 1, 2007)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> You won't trust them because they canceled the magazines, even though you think the replacement might be as good?




No, I certainly don't think the replacement will be as good.

Excuse me for seeming dense. In your original response, it seemed like you were putting words in my mouth and being dismissive of the view I was trying to present because you felt your opinion was more valid than mine. Based on your replies, perhaps I was just being over-sensitive.


----------



## Plane Sailing (May 1, 2007)

DanFor said:
			
		

> I know who to blame now, at least.




DanFor, this comment is out of order. Please remain very civil or your opportunity to participate here will be suspended. Please feel free to email me if this is unclear.

Thanks


----------



## daemonslye (May 1, 2007)

ashockney - excellent points.



> TRUST - those that were chosen to shepherd the Dungeons and Dragons game, because its all we have,




I believe that "those that were chosen" are actually chosen by "those that buy";  Being one of that number, I continue to have *HOPE* - that those that are chosen choose to hear those that *BUY*;  Only time will tell if I and my compatriots are the minority, or whether we can foment *CHANGE*.



> RESPECT - that everyone is entitled to there own opinion,




ENWorld rocks.



> SUPPORT - be there for those with the greatest responsibility and those who need your help,




I agree.  We, the fans, the consumers, the "players" - have the greatest responsibility to our hobby to keep it's flame alive.  If we feel this is rooted in the direction of the Print Initiative in the near-term, do not be silent.



> ENCOURAGE - use the energy you feel, that may initially be negativity, and invest it into making this game great, however best you can do it




I do so *EVERY WEEKEND*, my friend.

~D


----------



## Thurbane (May 1, 2007)

Majoru Oakheart said:
			
		

> Nothing is inescapable, but it's a matter how much much money are you willing to spend for perfection.
> 
> As a rough example.  Say you pay someone...20 dollars an hour to write up a PrC.  After writing it(2 hours), playtesting it (5 hours), changing it based on playtesting (1 hour), playtesting again (5 hours), last minute edits based on more playtesting and having read through it (1 hour), having an editor go through it and check for errors and consulting with him (2 hours), last minute editing based on editors feedback (1 hour), and meetings discussing deadlines and progress (5 hours).
> 
> ...



I appreciate what you're saying, but I refuse to believe that adequate prrofreading and playtesting cannot be incorporated into the price of a given WotC product. It's a basic fact that I don't want to pay good money for faulty merchandise, nor should I be expected to.

If I thought that raising the cover price of products by $5 each would eradicate 90% of errors that currently slip through, I'd be all for it. 

But I don't really believe it is a cost/time issue, but simply a matter of being lazy since the public will buy flawed product anyway.

...sorry, this is getting well offtopic, apologies...


----------



## gribble (May 1, 2007)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> As to Scott's questions of what I would like to see, here's my hopes (and yeah, some of this are pretty far fetched, but what the hell):
> 
> • HTML versions of all of the books I own that are all easily hyperlinked (see d20srd.org for an example). Online versions of the book are updated frequently with errata.
> 
> • A huge reservoir of NPCs, adventure hooks, character backgrounds, artwork, locations, for Players and DMs that is added to every month.




Quoted, because these will be the make or break things for me. The first would be the #1 thing that would make the digital initiative a must buy for me (worryingly though, I think this would also be the hardest thing to keep in a usable format and also to protect using DRM...). The second is what I would see as a viable alternative to Dungeon.

Either one in some form would make me seriously think about purchasing. Both would make it an almost sure-sell. 

Personally I couldn't care less about character/monster/adventure generators and tools for running games online (aka digital tabletops). But thats just me...


----------



## gribble (May 1, 2007)

ScotMartin said:
			
		

> Information Lookup
> I want to be able to search by subject (wiki-style) and get all relevant information for the subject.
> 
> For example, if I search for ghoul, I want to see the following on the page:
> ...




Ok, I take it back.


I *would* like a monster/character generator that was integrated with the "Information Lookup" as described. While I probably wouldn't get a whole lot of use out of a PC character generator, integration with one which allowed you to tinker with existing monsters/NPCs would be great! One feature I especially like (and also wish WotC would do more in their printed adventures) is the integration with D&D minis. Basically say which mini(s) are the chosen monster/character where available, and suggestions for which (if an exact match isn't available) would be a suitable stand-in.

The above I would purchase in a heartbeat (assuming a reasonable subscription rate)!


----------



## Kerrick (May 1, 2007)

> Originally Posted by Majoru Oakheart
> Nothing is inescapable, but it's a matter how much much money are you willing to spend for perfection.
> 
> As a rough example. Say you pay someone...20 dollars an hour to write up a PrC. After writing it(2 hours), playtesting it (5 hours), changing it based on playtesting (1 hour), playtesting again (5 hours), last minute edits based on more playtesting and having read through it (1 hour), having an editor go through it and check for errors and consulting with him (2 hours), last minute editing based on editors feedback (1 hour), and meetings discussing deadlines and progress (5 hours).
> ...



That example might work if writers and editors were actually paid by the hour, but they're not - they're paid by the word. And, being a writer and editor myself, I can tell you - while it IS hard to get every single typo and mistake, there's absolutely NO reason for the blatant and numerous errors that have been appearing in WotC's books lately. It takes about an hour to spellcheck a 200-page document, assuming the writer is a decent typist and doesn't make a lot of mistakes to begin with. There's no reason the writer can't do a quick spellcheck before sending it off to the editor - it doesn't require a lot of brainwork on the writer's part - all he has to do is look at the word being flagged and click "Change" or "don't change". 

Sure, things get changed before the final edit (over and over), and mistakes slip through. That's a pretty well inescapable fact of life. But... the writers should be marking which parts get changed so the editor knows which parts to look over, instead of reading through the entire book looking for changes/mistakes.


----------



## Ghendar (May 1, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Devyn if you still like D&D you are in my marketing plans and strategy.  There is no way in the 9 hells we are going to abandon you.
> 
> I hear that online is not for you but if you have a pulse and can still role dice then do we have product for you my friend (in my best infomercial voice). Seriously, we know that online magazines etc are not going to be for everyone. We are not abandoning the table top, play in your kitchen, experience that is D&D. If getting together with your friends, telling great stories, kicking in the door, killing monsters, and having some laughs is the experience you want to have, we will continue to deliver that. Lots of books, maps, tiles, minis, dice, and online stuff too.






It was never my personal fear that WotC was abandoning the table top for electronic play. Some seemed quite concerned about that possibility. I found such implications silly, to be honest. 

However, to those of us who want print magazines and not e-mags, it sure seems like abandonment or me and a entire segment of your customer base. I'm not suggesting that a minority should influence corporate decisions, but to be perfectly blunt, canceling Dragon and Dungeon as print mags and replacing them with e-content feels like abandonment to some of us. One very important aspect of print mags is the ability to own it and collect it. I can't "collect" a few pages of stuff I just printed off WotC's website, bit I can collect Dragon Magazine issues 50-the present. 

I'm not looking for sympathy here and if anyone feels the need to flame me go right ahead.


----------



## EATherrian (May 1, 2007)

My main concern with this change, aside from the portability issue, is what will happen to Greyhawk.  I'm a huge fan of Greyhawk.  If fact, the Paizo people brought me back to Dungeon and Dragon magazine with their love of the setting.  Without this connection to Paizo and people who actually care about that setting I foresee us getting nothing again.  And with so much of Greyhawk being trademarked I see us fans being especially left in the cold now that no allowable apparatus will exist.  Unlike most of the really hardcore, I still intend to purchase WoTC products (those that pass muster at least), but this DI service has too much to compete against, since Paizo stewardship was spectacular.  I'm giving WoTC the benefit of the doubt, and asking them to shock and surprise me with their skill and ingenuity.  I just doubt that the replacement will even be a tenth as good as what it's replacing.


----------



## Ghendar (May 1, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> So I can't have print magazines then?





Sure you can. It's called Pathfinder.


----------



## Ghendar (May 1, 2007)

SnowRaven said:
			
		

> My read of it isn't that the DI is for everyone, but rather that for those that don't want internet stuff, there will still be plenty of D&D print products, including compilations of the online material.




Perhaps.
But will print compilations contain everything released digitally? I honestly doubt it. If that's the case and I decide I want to purchase the compilations, I'll only be getting a fraction of what was released digitally.


----------



## Razz (May 1, 2007)

Heya, Scott? Could you guys also keep *Demonomicon*, update material from older settings, bring back *Oriental Adventures * material and *Epic* material, keep *Creature Catalog*, give *yugoloths* more love, bring back an article on the *Slaad Lords of Chaos*, give us more material on non-core stuff like *Psionics*, *Incarnum*, *Tome of Battle*, *Tome of Magic*, etc. and (most important of all) please revise and update all the *Hierarch Modrons* on your DI? 

Since you guys say you can do that (and MORE) and you're not limited by the disadvantages of print, this shouldn't be a hard task.

Thanks.


----------



## Mistwell (May 1, 2007)

Ghendar said:
			
		

> Sure you can. It's called Pathfinder.




He asked if there can be print *MAGAZINES*.  Not books, priced like books, with magazine-level content in them


----------



## Vocenoctum (May 1, 2007)

Ghendar said:
			
		

> Perhaps.
> But will print compilations contain everything released digitally? I honestly doubt it. If that's the case and I decide I want to purchase the compilations, I'll only be getting a fraction of what was released digitally.




I'm sure they won't be everything, but should be a good skimming of the better material for a good price.


----------



## crazy_cat (May 2, 2007)

Ghendar said:
			
		

> Sure you can. It's called Pathfinder.



I'm well aware of Pathfinder - and I've already subscribed.

The Question asked was what would I like from WOTC. And the answer is I'd like a magazine, on paper, with official D&D content similar to that we which we are losing with the demise of Dragon and Dungeon.


----------



## Ghendar (May 2, 2007)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> I'm well aware of Pathfinder - and I've already subscribed.
> 
> The Question asked was what would I like from WOTC. And the answer is I'd like a magazine, on paper, with official D&D content similar to that we which we are losing with the demise of Dragon and Dungeon.




I agree with you. I want a magazine as well. However, now the only alternative is Pathfinder.

It seems my sense of humor is frequently misunderstood or doesn't translate well on a message board.


----------



## kingpaul (May 2, 2007)

And here is an interview with Liz Schuh.


----------



## TheYeti1775 (May 2, 2007)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> And here is an interview with Liz Schuh.



Sorry Kingpaul and all others but this part of the article sums it all up.


> *Anything else you want to say?*
> Basically, we're excited about our plans for the future, we can't talk a whole lot about anything beyond the end of this year yet, but we will. So we're just asking everyone to be patient with us and to stay tuned for more information.




Told us pretty much word for word what Morrus's interview did.  Nothing at all cause they can't say now and just stay tuned.

It wears thin quickly.

Sorry lurking WOTC folk, but we definitely want more than this.

Yeti


----------



## Scott_Rouse (May 2, 2007)

Razz said:
			
		

> Heya, Scott? Could you guys also keep *Demonomicon*, update material from older settings, bring back *Oriental Adventures * material and *Epic* material, keep *Creature Catalog*, give *yugoloths* more love, bring back an article on the *Slaad Lords of Chaos*, give us more material on non-core stuff like *Psionics*, *Incarnum*, *Tome of Battle*, *Tome of Magic*, etc. and (most important of all) please revise and update all the *Hierarch Modrons* on your DI?
> 
> Since you guys say you can do that (and MORE) and you're not limited by the disadvantages of print, this shouldn't be a hard task.
> 
> Thanks.





Duly noted.


----------



## Jdvn1 (May 2, 2007)

As long as we're asking, can you keep (and continue) *Core Beliefs*? 

Those are invaluable roleplaying aids for my characters.


----------



## I'm A Banana (May 2, 2007)

Also, make a choice:

Keep it super-cheap and sell ad space

OR

Keep it affordable and nix ad space.

DON'T make me pay a nice chunk and then barrage me with ads. If you're charging $15-20/month, you best not also be trying to pump up the hype through marketing talk and/or flashing ads. If you're charging "pennies a day!" or nearly free, I can live with it a lot more comfortably.


----------



## TheYeti1775 (May 2, 2007)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> Also, make a choice:
> 
> Keep it super-cheap and sell ad space
> 
> ...




I would prefer no Ads at all.  But I will also say $15-20/month is would be an outrageous amount, that would firmly entrench Paizo's Pathfinder into first place for former subscription holders.  As their cost per issue/book will be lower or the same, but without risk of electronic loss.
If we do have to have advertisements, I would recommend allowing 3rd party ads as well.  But don't do those 'forcefull' ads where the user has to click to close, do something akin to a sidebar for ad placements.  One of the best things within the Dragon Magazine was other companies advertising things that might appeal to me.  I'm a website junkie, I would check out several other companies within those pages.

Reccomendation: 
*Consumer/Player Review Section*, Many on EnWorld use the reviews done up by various persons here on EnWorld quite often to decide on the purchase of a product.  Rarely have I been disappointed in most of their takes on it.  And don't censor them unless it is truly one that needs it.  A bad review of a WOTC book can only help you all improve the next one.


So it's May now, anything ya can tell us yet?   

Yeti


----------



## Vertexx69 (May 3, 2007)

I'd like to see updated 3.5 template info from MMII and manual of the planes (monster of legend, warbeast, creature of shadow etc.) a LA would make it so much easier to incorporate


----------



## FreeXenon (May 3, 2007)

Shadow is found in Lords of Madness. 
I do not know about the Warbeast.


----------



## Razz (May 3, 2007)

FreeXenon said:
			
		

> Shadow is found in Lords of Madness.
> I do not know about the Warbeast.





Warbeast is in *Monster Manual 2*


----------



## Thomas Percy (May 3, 2007)

EATherrian said:
			
		

> My main concern with this change, aside from the portability issue, is what will happen to Greyhawk.  I'm a huge fan of Greyhawk.



And I'm a fan of BIRTHRIGHT and there were almost none BIRTHRIGHT's content in Dungeon and Dragon. So, It can be better now, because WotC will use broader platform. 

*One question:
Is it possible to every fan who wrote interesting material, to contribute to this new platform?*


----------



## TheYeti1775 (May 3, 2007)

Thomas Percy said:
			
		

> *Snip*
> *One question:
> Is it possible to every fan who wrote interesting material, to contribute to this new platform?*




Why not post it here?


----------



## Swordsage (May 4, 2007)

*Removed by admin.*


----------



## Piratecat (May 4, 2007)

Hey, you know what the best thing is about passive-aggressive sniping? It's... umm...   you know, I've got nothing.

Conversation in this thread that furthers the discussion is absolutely welcome. Comments that make snide jabs at other members are not. Plan accordingly.

And as always, email me if this is somehow unclear.

~ Piratecat


----------



## SavageRobby (May 6, 2007)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> And here is an interview with Liz Schuh.




I smelled an awful lot of ifs and maybes from that article. Not much of substance. 

_Remainder removed by admin. Once again, it's really easy to discuss the content without making personal attacks on people. I'm a little surprised that I have to point this out yet again. 

If this is somehow unclear, please email me. Otherwise, I don't expect to see any further problems in this thread, please.

~ Piratecat_


----------



## Khairn (May 7, 2007)

Over the past few weeks Ive tried to articulate my doubts and worries about the DI (never mind my feelings about the cancellations) but now I have found an excellent post which summarizes them beautifully.  The post can be found http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=836212&page=4.  The salient points are the following ...



> 1. Portability. Whether I want to read my magazines on the john or not, a computer/laptop is *not* as portable as a magazine. I don't care what the gear-heads say, (and back in the 80's & 90's, I used to be one, but I guess I'm just getting too old to keep buying more crap just because its 'new' and 'digital') reading a PDF on a computer screen sucks, sucks SUCKS! It will *NEVER* replace having a good old printed magazine to read whenever, wherever I want to, whether that's on the throne, in my recliner, in bed, on a train/plane/automobile or even standing at the mailbox with the plastic cover already off, flipping through the articles even as I start to wander back to the house from the street. I *can't* read a PDF anywhere but at my computer. (Look how many people have said that even though they work on computers for a living, they don't want to read magazine-style content on a computer.) I'm sorry Chris, but digital might be cheaper, might even be more flexible in delivery and content, but it just *can't* replace magazines.
> 
> 2. Subscription elapse. I have subscribed, let expire and resubscribed to both Dungeon and Dragon several times over the last 25+ years. Every time I have let the subscription expire, (for a variety of reasons) I still have the magazines I bought. They haven't lost their utility for me. I still thumb through them on a regular basis, for ideas and just for the simple pleasure of reading about D&D. When my current subscription expires when WotC kills the magazine, I will still have my copies. They are mine, to do with them as I please, and unless I have a life-changing experience so radical that I become a different person, I will have them until the day they bury me and I pass them on to my kids, (and maybe grandkids.)
> 
> ...




My thanks to Caird over on the Wizard boards for this excellent summary.

Hey Chris or any of the other WotC folks who are lurking, please print it and keep it on hand.  Success or failure of the DI for me will depend in a large extent on how you answer these 6 points.


----------



## Hussar (May 8, 2007)

> 6. (finally) Bundling. If the DI includes games that I have no use for but I still have to pay a full subscription to get what I do want to see, you won't see me paying for it. On the magazine rack I see (or at least for a few more months will see) Dungeon, Dragon and then magazines for the other games put out by WotC that I couldn't have less interest in. I won't start insulting players or designers of other games with my reasons for why, but I play D&D/RPG's and I am NOT interested in paying any sort of money to see them combined with other games that I despise in many ways. I am sure that many of the players of those 'other' games feel the same way about my D&D and wouldn't want to pay to get access to their content mixed in with mine. If Wizards put out a general magazine with content for *all* of their games, I don't think it would have the success of their specialty mags.




Isn't it interesting that once upon a time, the much touted strength of Dragon was the fact that it covered a number of gaming systems and not just D&D?  How does an article about Magic detract from articles about D&D just because they appear in the same place?  This was done for many, many years and it wasn't until fairly recently that Dragon became a D&D only magazine.


----------



## deadDMwalking (May 8, 2007)

One aspect of Dragon that I think is noteworthy is the ability of the publishers to respond to feedback, both positive and negative.

I don't think it is possible to make a product that everybody will like.  Even if everyone does like it, there will still be people who think it can be improved.  I won't argue that point.

The magazines had subscribers and regular readers - enough that the magazine was making money.  So far I have not seen anything from Wizards of the Coast (including the letter I just received in the mail I posted on the wizards.com boards) that indicates that there is a reason they can't offer both print and electronic content, other than that they think the online content will be 'better'.  

I disagree.  

I've been hoping to see a clear explanation for how a strictly online format is better.  NDA notwithstanding, nobody seems willing to touch that issue.  

WotC has done a lot of good things for the game.  The magazines have also done a lot of good for the game.  WotC has garnered a lot of ill will by making sure fans know they're taking away the magazines and offering us a poor substitute AND taking away our choice in the matter.  

If the electronic content is truly superior, if they ran them side by side and the magazines ceased to be profitable, they'd have an undeniable excuse to cancel the magazines.  Very few people expect a business to keep doing something that loses money.  Those that do are unreasonable.

I'd say that WotC has ticked off a lot of reasonable people.  Now, maybe they 'know something that [we] don't know'.  Maybe not.  I know I'm pretty sick and tired of hearing that they know what customers want and yet, I keep getting really angry with them.  I've kept buying WotC products that I think could be vastly improved.  I can't believe that they release books without an index.  Still, I've bought them because WotC makes D&D, and I play D&D.  Well, I have enough books, so I won't keep buying from a company that cares so little for me as a customer.  

And while I'm still angry about the cancellation of the magazines, I'm starting to really become happy that I won't be buying any more of these books.  While it will be greatly disturbing not to have the magazines for a few months, I think they'll come back.  

This is a monumentally bad decision, but the 'powers that be' are determined not to see it.  Time will tell who is right and who is not.  I had hoped they would choose to avoid the mistake, rather than disregard the kind wishes from everybody who hoped they would change their mind before the mistake was 'unreversible'.  That won't happen.  

There is a fundamental disconnect somewhere between what customers want and what WotC thinks customers want.  I don't know where it comes from, but eventually they'll figure it out, or they'll spin D&D off and another company will pick it up, and maybe, just maybe, do it right.


----------



## Jim Hague (May 8, 2007)

deadDMwalking said:
			
		

> I've been hoping to see a clear explanation for how a strictly online format is better.  NDA notwithstanding, nobody seems willing to touch that issue.




That would be why it's called and NDA - Non Disclosure Agreement.  I'd imagine it's still in development and testing, which means no content provider doing things electronically is going to release information into the wild until it's ready or almost so.  Common in the electronic distribution business.



> WotC has done a lot of good things for the game.  The magazines have also done a lot of good for the game.  WotC has garnered a lot of ill will by making sure fans know they're taking away the magazines and offering us a poor substitute AND taking away our choice in the matter.




How do you know it's a poor substitute?  Have you seen what DI entails?



> If the electronic content is truly superior, if they ran them side by side and the magazines ceased to be profitable, they'd have an undeniable excuse to cancel the magazines.  Very few people expect a business to keep doing something that loses money.  Those that do are unreasonable.




See earlier comments in this thread and others about profit margins.  Obviously, WotC thinks DI will serve profit margins better.  Running both means that one will almost certainly fail due to unnecessary competition.



> I'd say that WotC has ticked off a lot of reasonable people.  Now, maybe they 'know something that [we] don't know'.  Maybe not.  I know I'm pretty sick and tired of hearing that they know what customers want and yet, I keep getting really angry with them.  I've kept buying WotC products that I think could be vastly improved.  I can't believe that they release books without an index.  Still, I've bought them because WotC makes D&D, and I play D&D.  Well, I have enough books, so I won't keep buying from a company that cares so little for me as a customer.
> 
> And while I'm still angry about the cancellation of the magazines, I'm starting to really become happy that I won't be buying any more of these books.  While it will be greatly disturbing not to have the magazines for a few months, I think they'll come back.
> 
> This is a monumentally bad decision, but the 'powers that be' are determined not to see it.  Time will tell who is right and who is not.  I had hoped they would choose to avoid the mistake, rather than disregard the kind wishes from everybody who hoped they would change their mind before the mistake was 'unreversible'.  That won't happen.




It doesn't sound like you're being reasonable at all - you're ascribing value-laden things like 'ticked off' and 'angry' when you talk about this, which is pretty much the opposite of rational and reasonable.  You're making conclusions based on what you think - unless you, again, have some inside line, in which case I'm sure we here at ENWorld would dearly love to get some information.  You've already decided, though, and that's not a reasonable reaction at all, it's emotional. 



> There is a fundamental disconnect somewhere between what customers want and what WotC thinks customers want.  I don't know where it comes from, but eventually they'll figure it out, or they'll spin D&D off and another company will pick it up, and maybe, just maybe, do it right.




Again, this is an entirely emotional statement.  It's understandable to be upset - I am, I like the magazines - but making sweeping statements, broad generalizations and veiled accusations helps no one, it just continues the atmosphere that necessitated Russ and company having to act as referees in what's become an increasingly insane-sounding debacle.


----------



## Hussar (May 8, 2007)

> WotC has garnered a lot of ill will by making sure fans know they're taking away the magazines and offering us a poor substitute AND taking away our choice in the matter.




I'm not sure if you can make that assumption.  You have not seen what the substitute is, so, calling it poor beforehand is difficult.  It might be a poor substitute or it might be better or it might be the same.  At the moment, we simply do not know.



> If the electronic content is truly superior, if they ran them side by side and the magazines ceased to be profitable, they'd have an undeniable excuse to cancel the magazines.




Actually, no they didn't.  They only hold the license, they did not publish Dungeon or Dragon.  What they could have done is hang Paizo out to dry by offering identical content online with additional content being added in.  Paizo could have been sunk by this.  Instead, they gave Paizo the out, let them have all the good publicity in the world at a time when they really needed it (just before GAMA) and took a pretty serious hit because of it.

It appears that you have already made up your mind that an online version of the magazine will be inherently inferior.  I suggest that perhaps waiting to see what is offered before engraving that into your psyche might be an idea.


----------



## Brown Jenkin (May 8, 2007)

Hussar said:
			
		

> Actually, no they didn't.  They only hold the license, they did not publish Dungeon or Dragon.  What they could have done is hang Paizo out to dry by offering identical content online with additional content being added in.  Paizo could have been sunk by this.  Instead, they gave Paizo the out, let them have all the good publicity in the world at a time when they really needed it (just before GAMA) and took a pretty serious hit because of it.




And yet Paizo has said that they would continue if they could. Paizo obviously thinks that the magazines can still be profitable even with the DI. It seems much more of a WotC descision than anything to do with making Paizo happy.


----------



## deadDMwalking (May 8, 2007)

To be upset, or even ticked off, does not imply that the reaction has not been reasoned.

After hearing the news, my initial reaction was to be upset.  But then I thought about it.  I read everything that had been posted on the subject officially.  I sent letters to WotC and Hasbro, and received a reply back.

Now, when I am upset, it is the end result as a rational and reasonable person.  Reasonable people have emotions.  It would be unreasonable to assume they don't.  The magazines are important to the hobby on an emotional and physical level.

As for myself, yes, I have decided that electronic content is, for me, inferior.  There are electronic versions of various books that I've been given for free.  I don't use them.  I buy the book if I want the material.  I open the book if I want to read the material.

As for NDAs, I'm quite familiar with them.  
The following link describes them in some detail, and was the quickest thing I could link to after a Google search.

Now, the NDA should be used to avoid releasing proprietary information.  The most important reason is to avoid creating undue competition.  The thing about the NDA is that it prevents talking about some things  and not others.  Now, those under the NDA could avoid talking about anything that isn't specifically detailed to avoid 'giving hints' about what is covered, but the 'cat is out of the bag'.  They're willing to say there is a DI, that the content will be electronic, that many of the features are not firmly decided, etc.  There is quite a bit of information.  

It is even possible that the NDA specifically prohibits explaining why an online only model is considered superior by WotC.  Still, I don't believe that is the case.  They have not said anything that DIRECTLY supports that statement.  Some people may want to give the company the benefit of the doubt - I don't.  It isn't because I'm never wrong.  It's because the company has already lost my trust before this issue in other ways.

I proudly subscribe to both magazines.  I know that puts me into a 'minority' category of gamers.  WotC has told me that my 'minority' doesn't matter to them.  While that may not have been their intended message, that's what I keep hearing.

So, I'm upset.  But not without reason.


----------



## Khairn (May 8, 2007)

I have to say it still boggles my mind that with over a year to plan for both the announcement of the cancellation, and the announcement of a new DI, that WotC is unprepared to provide their customers with no information regarding its content or format.  

/boggle


----------



## Nebulous (May 8, 2007)

Devyn said:
			
		

> I have to say it still boggles my mind that with over a year to plan for both the announcement of the cancellation, and the announcement of a new DI, that WotC is unprepared to provide their customers with no information regarding its content or format.
> 
> /boggle




Yes, that is somewhat odd. But i'm going to wait for my final opinion until i see what both Pathfinder and WotC has to offer. I won't even subscribe to Pathfinder yet, i'll pick an issue up when it goes on sale at the hobby shop. It does sound great, i'm just worried that such as huge Adventure Path will be more than is needed. And what will happen to all the people that also want to read the AP, but are also currently playing in it? It just remains to be seen how this will pan out.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 8, 2007)

> 6. (finally) Bundling. If the DI includes games that I have no use for but I still have to pay a full subscription to get what I do want to see, you won't see me paying for it. On the magazine rack I see (or at least for a few more months will see) Dungeon, Dragon and then magazines for the other games put out by WotC that I couldn't have less interest in. I won't start insulting players or designers of other games with my reasons for why, but I play D&D/RPG's and I am NOT interested in paying any sort of money to see them combined with other games that I despise in many ways. I am sure that many of the players of those 'other' games feel the same way about my D&D and wouldn't want to pay to get access to their content mixed in with mine. If Wizards put out a general magazine with content for *all* of their games, I don't think it would have the success of their specialty mags.




I don't understand this reasoning either.

Let's say that WotC includes D&D content equal in amount to what we currently have in both Dragon and Dungeon.  Then they also add a Polyhedron section for non-D&D d20 gaming, and maybe lots of space towards industry news and even non d20 games.

And it costs the same or less than a sub to Dragon and Dungeon.

Will people bitch about the non D&D content?  Oh yes they will.  It will make no sense, but they will.

When Dungeon included Polyhedron and non-D&D d20 games, I could understand people's complaints (to a point) that an article on d20 WWII takes up space that a D&D article or adventure could have filled.  I didn't agree with them, but at least I saw the reasoning.

But with an electronic format, magazine space is no longer an issue (no pun intended).

I am actively HOPING that the forthcoming "Digital Initiative" will include not only a "Dragon" section and a "Dungeon" section, but also a "Polyhedron" section and a "Star Wars" section.  Plus any other gaming goodness WotC decides to throw our way.

But of course, since we don't know the details yet, we'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## Hussar (May 8, 2007)

And, of course Dire Bear, even the current issues of Dragon have a small amount of non-D&D material in them as it is.  The First Watch section is around half d20 oriented, there's been a page of PC gaming goodies in most issues, and, then, of course, there have been articles like Silicon Sorcery and the book reviews as well.  Never mind that about one issue in three had fiction in it.

Right now, when I go to the WOTC site, I see links for a whole host of games that I don't play - DDM, Avalon Hill, Magic, etc.  But, since I don't play those games, I just don't click those links.  I'm really wondering what the problem is here.

As to the lack of information, well, again, they've got four MONTHS to go before this is even open.  Yes, we don't have information RIGHT NOW, but, then again, that doesn't mean anything other than the fact that they haven't given us information.


----------



## Jim Hague (May 8, 2007)

deadDMwalking said:
			
		

> To be upset, or even ticked off, does not imply that the reaction has not been reasoned.
> 
> After hearing the news, my initial reaction was to be upset.  But then I thought about it.  I read everything that had been posted on the subject officially.  I sent letters to WotC and Hasbro, and received a reply back.
> 
> Now, when I am upset, it is the end result as a rational and reasonable person.  Reasonable people have emotions.  It would be unreasonable to assume they don't.  The magazines are important to the hobby on an emotional and physical level.




Thing is, the way you're describing it _isn't_ rational - it's an emotional reaction.  I felt much the same way, honestly.  The importance of the magazines to the hobby as a whole is highly debateable - especially since their shift to a D&D-only format, or nearly so.



> As for myself, yes, I have decided that electronic content is, for me, inferior.  There are electronic versions of various books that I've been given for free.  I don't use them.  I buy the book if I want the material.  I open the book if I want to read the material.




And that's fine...as long as it's an admitted personal preference.  For me, I like having all my options open, electronic, print, whatever.  I dearly treasure my Dragons and Dungeons, right alongside my CD collection of Dragon back issues.



> As for NDAs, I'm quite familiar with them.
> The following link describes them in some detail, and was the quickest thing I could link to after a Google search.
> 
> Now, the NDA should be used to avoid releasing proprietary information.  The most important reason is to avoid creating undue competition.  The thing about the NDA is that it prevents talking about some things  and not others.  Now, those under the NDA could avoid talking about anything that isn't specifically detailed to avoid 'giving hints' about what is covered, but the 'cat is out of the bag'.  They're willing to say there is a DI, that the content will be electronic, that many of the features are not firmly decided, etc.  There is quite a bit of information.
> ...




I'm sorry you feel that way.  Being a freelancer and running my own company, I'm familiar with the kinds of NDAs the hobby/industry/whatever produces - and what's been released is consistent with a fairly restrictive NDA.  It's not unreasonable to think that WotC may be worried that someone could get the jump on them with the DI, since other companies have a bit of a leg up in Web and online presence.  You may not like it, but it's understandable on a corporate level. 

What well and truly bothers me is the attitude that, somehow, the folks at WotC doing D&D have somehow become 'the enemy'.  I think that pulling in the license and cancelling the magazines was a mistake...but assuming that there's some sort of evil corporatism afoot is at best naieve and at worse strays into sheer lunacy.  WotC is in the business of making money, and that means getting with the program to expand their online presence.  Whether the DI will or won't do this is something that remains to be seen.


----------



## Khairn (May 8, 2007)

Dire Bare said:
			
		

> I don't understand this reasoning either.
> 
> Let's say that WotC includes D&D content equal in amount to what we currently have in both Dragon and Dungeon.  Then they also add a Polyhedron section for non-D&D d20 gaming, and maybe lots of space towards industry news and even non d20 games.
> 
> ...




I believe the statement was written not to exclude D20 Modern, RPGA, Star Wars etc from the DI. But instead to question the relevance of including Neo-Pets, Duel Masters, Transformers, Magic the Gathering and other non-RPG's in any subscription price.  In everything that's been written by WotC about the DI, I haven't seen anything that said it would only be RPG material.

If there is an idea to include other WotC product lines in the DI I would like to know if I can opt out of those I have no interest in playing and only subscribe to the RPG material.


----------



## Khairn (May 8, 2007)

Jim Hague said:
			
		

> What well and truly bothers me is the attitude that, somehow, the folks at WotC doing D&D have somehow become 'the enemy'.  I think that pulling in the license and cancelling the magazines was a mistake...but assuming that there's some sort of evil corporatism afoot is at best naieve and at worse strays into sheer lunacy.  WotC is in the business of making money, and that means getting with the program to expand their online presence.  Whether the DI will or won't do this is something that remains to be seen.




Absoluetly correct.  WotC is not the enemy.  Just because I strongly disagree with the decisions they have made, for perfectly valid reasons, does not mean that I consider them an enemy.  They are doing what they feel is best for them as a company, and D&D as their product.  

They are the captains of the boat that we are sailing on, and they are taking us down an unknown river with the promise of a wonderful destination at the end of the voayage.  They can't tell us how long we'll be sailing or what we'll find when we get there, and they can't tell us how they are going to avoid the sandbars, rocks and debris along the way.  All they can tell us is that we shouldn't be worried.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (May 8, 2007)

People keep commenting that WotC won't say why they cannot support both print and digital formats.  I can come up with one reason, and the reason they won't some out and say it is fairly obvious given the reaction of some fans of the magazine: they don't want to.

WotC has a strong interest in developing a solid digital format brand.  If they put out both a print and digital format of the magazines, they know they will end up with some people buying print, and others digital, and will therefore have to pay the overhead to support both formats.  

I'm willing to bet that the print subscribers would outnumber the digital from the start.  That isn't what they want.  They want people going digital, but if you give people the print format, what incentive do they have to change?  Instead, they decide they will forego the print format, knowing full well that they will lose many old subscribers to the magazines.  They hope that there will be enough people subscribing to the digital format early on to make it worthwhile to continue, and that over time more people, including some of the old print subscribers, will hear about the content they are providing and will come around and subscribe.  

To be honest, that is exactly how I would look at it and present it if I was the one pitching the DI to Management.  There are greater risks (alientation of part of the fan base, loss of well known brand names in the magazine format), but the potential rewards are greater as well (ability to reach more people worldwide, greater flexibility, greater costs certainty).


----------



## Ghendar (May 8, 2007)

Jim Hague said:
			
		

> How do you know it's a poor substitute?  Have you seen what DI entails?





DI is a completely inferior product to me. I don't want e-content. I want a paper mag I can hold and read. I want to be able to bring it to my gaming table. I want to be able to read it at work during downtime. Additionally, I spend most of my work day looking at a computer screen and don't want to spend more time at home looking at e-content.

As someone who vehemently opposes this move, I actually think the content will be at least to the quality level that Paizo is currently doing in print. However, the delivery method is what I'm opposed to. I don't want e-content and I will not purchase e-content. That's why Paizo has my money with Pathfinder (for now and dependent on quality) and WotC does not with DI.


----------



## Ghendar (May 8, 2007)

Thornir Alekeg said:
			
		

> People keep commenting that WotC won't say why they cannot support both print and digital formats.  I can come up with one reason, and the reason they won't some out and say it is fairly obvious given the reaction of some fans of the magazine: they don't want to.
> 
> WotC has a strong interest in developing a solid digital format brand.  If they put out both a print and digital format of the magazines, they know they will end up with some people buying print, and others digital, and will therefore have to pay the overhead to support both formats.





I believe this to be totally true. WotC would be foolish to compete with themselves by releasing print mags and e-mags, unless the two featured entirely different content. This is all about maximizing profit and it would seem to me (assumption, granted) that they believe the e-model provides the most profit. As sad as that is for us print magazine fans.


----------



## Jim Hague (May 8, 2007)

Ghendar said:
			
		

> DI is a completely inferior product *to me.* I don't want e-content. I want a paper mag I can hold and read. I want to be able to bring it to my gaming table. I want to be able to read it at work during downtime. Additionally, I spend most of my work day looking at a computer screen and don't want to spend more time at home looking at e-content.




And there's something that's finally, thankfully coming out in thse various threads: it's not a good choice _for you_.  I could exhort the virtues of, for examples, my own products (buy buy buy!  ), but if you don't like PDFs, they won't work for you.  It's that simple.



> As someone who vehemently opposes this move, I actually think the content will be at least to the quality level that Paizo is currently doing in print. However, the delivery method is what I'm opposed to. I don't want e-content and I will not purchase e-content. That's why Paizo has my money with Pathfinder (for now and dependent on quality) and WotC does not with DI.




And thus the good of the hobby is served anyways, by keeping money flowing into content producers you wish to support. 

Protocol Zero Productions!  _Mooks Amok! #1_ and _The Vault of Dr. Mechaniaikal!_ available now!  _The Sampler of Dr. Mechaniaikal_ (FREE!) is available NOW!  And coming soon - _The Catacombs of Mistress Hecate!_

Protocol Zero Productions - Superlink PDFs through Ronin Arts and YourGamesNow!


----------



## Ghendar (May 8, 2007)

Jim Hague said:
			
		

> And thus the good of the hobby is served anyways, by keeping money flowing into content producers you wish to support.




The problem is that I want to support the content that I will no longer have the option of supporting, a paper Dragon and Dungeon.

It irritates me that they've taken that option from me, just as it would irritate me if any company stopped producing a product I regularly bought and enjoyed.


----------



## Jim Hague (May 8, 2007)

Ghendar said:
			
		

> The problem is that I want to support the content that I will no longer have the option of supporting, a paper Dragon and Dungeon.
> 
> It irritates me that they've taken that option from me, just as it would irritate me if any company stopped producing a product I regularly bought and enjoyed.




Unfortunately, as they say, them's the breaks.  :\ The magazines have several months of life left, there's Pathfinder, and there's also the oft-lauded paper back issues or Dragon on CD.  Given the sheer number of magazines available, there's plenty of content to last any number of campaigns for years to come, I'd think...


----------



## deadDMwalking (May 8, 2007)

It's true that there is a lot of content available for those who own the back issues.  Which I do have.  The loss of content is not the only thing that I decry.

The fact that electronic content is inferior, for me, personally, seems irrelevant.  I don't make purchasing decisions for people who prefer electronic content.  I make purchases for myself, and I purchase the things that I like.  I also purchase them for others, and I'm an 'opinion leader' for a number of people involved in D&D.  

Now, when I decide that I won't purchase a digital product, sight unseen, it is because I KNOW that the product won't satisfy my wants or desires.  So far, the debate on price has been immaterial.  I certainly won't pay for it.  I might peruse it if it were free on an occasional basis (though very infrequently).  There are a number of reasons why I prefer the physical content.

WotC doesn't care about what I prefer.  They've said that repeatedly.  Now, if you're right, they're doing this because they're motivated by profit.  If that is the case, it is my duty as someone who enjoys D&D to let them know that while they may increase profits, the very real threat of diminishing profits exists because of this business decision.  I don't know that they considered the negative response appropriately, despite their business acumen.

What I know.

1) The decision to non-renew the license was made a long time ago, and, in fact, the final issue would have already been delivered if an extension had not been granted for the purpose of completing the Adventure Path in Dungeon.

2) The decision to non-renew the license was made, at least for the most part, by WotC.  Paizo has indicated that they'd continue publishing the magazines if given the opportunity.

3) With the decision being made over a year ago, there has been plenty of time to begin developing the replacement product.  With the difficulties inherent in electronic content they must be either very close to completion (if it is to be released in September) and thus cannot really accept customer suggestions for change, or are not very close to release and there will be a gap after the magazines stop being produced and there will be 'lost content' for a period of time.

I'm upset about not being told anything.  I'm upset about being lied to.  I'm upset about receiving a form letter back to my clearly articulated complaints that failed to address any of the points I mentioned.  I'm upset about being told that I should be excited about the new direction the 'magazines' are taking.  I'm upset that people say this is an 'evolution' when by definition, a magazine is a paper periodical.  And I'm upset that some people think the world is a better place simply by putting an 'e-' in front of the things you love.

I don't want an e-cat despite the fact that it would mean no litter box to clean up, no scratches when a cat jumps off my shoulder unexpectedly.  I don't want an e-wife no matter how much less expensive that is.  I don't want e-kids.  I played the Sims.  Sure, it is fun for a while, but it isn't nearly as fulfilling.  

I don't want e-books, and I don't want e-zines.  

I do want to make sure I've clearly stated my preferences.  I do want to pay money to a company that provides the content that I want.  And one of the things I want is something I've had for a long time.  That is a monthly periodical for my D&D content (or two).  The first company that can provide that to me, assuming they produce a quality remotely close to that of Paizo, will be the company that I'll be most inclined to spend my money with.

And to the company that decided not to continue providing the products I want, I'm done with their new products.  I would expect them to be pretty eager to keep gamers like me (and I know I'm not alone) because we've been loyal customers for so long.  It will take a lot of effort to replace all these dissatisfied customers with new ones.  The cost to gain a new customer compared to the cost to keep one - well, it seems to me like it would be good business sense to try to please the largest number of people.  

However, I don't have a business degree.  I only represent one person directly.  And while I hope I've communicated my message clearly, I'm not adverse to repeating it many times to be sure that is the case.  

In the case of WotC I don't believe they've heard or understand.  I think they think I'll stop being upset after two or three months.  I know myself well enough that I can be upset about this for many years.  And no matter how long I withhold my financial support, once they give me what I want, I can always pick up the material I missed in the original release.


----------



## Ghendar (May 8, 2007)

deadDMwalking said:
			
		

> In the case of WotC I don't believe they've heard or understand.  I think they think I'll stop being upset after two or three months.  I know myself well enough that I can be upset about this for many years.  And no matter how long I withhold my financial support, once they give me what I want, I can always pick up the material I missed in the original release.





Nice post 
I think they are indeed hoping that we will stop being angry and then look at the e-content. Then, when we see it, we'll *want* to have it. 

Well, I won't.

It has nothing to do with being angry or not being angry. It has to do with a delivery method I have no interest in supporting.


----------



## Maggan (May 8, 2007)

deadDMwalking said:
			
		

> I only represent one person directly.  And while I hope I've communicated my message clearly, I'm not adverse to repeating it many times to be sure that is the case.




FWIW, you have communicated it clearly, and reasonably as well. I'm just curious as to why you feel that you have been lied to by WotC?

/M


----------



## Jim Hague (May 8, 2007)

deadDMwalking said:
			
		

> WotC doesn't care about what I prefer.  They've said that repeatedly.  Now, if you're right, they're doing this because they're motivated by profit.  If that is the case, it is my duty as someone who enjoys D&D to let them know that while they may increase profits, the very real threat of diminishing profits exists because of this business decision.  I don't know that they considered the negative response appropriately, despite their business acumen.




And that's the entire point - _you don't know_.  You have no special insight, no inside knowledge, nothing more than the rest of us.  So why do you keep trying to paint WotC as the villains here?  Is it to somehow satisfy the offense you feel at the print magazines being pulled?  I hate to tell you, but that's a long road to nowhere, friend.  There's better things to expend your time and energy on.



> What I know.
> 
> 1) The decision to non-renew the license was made a long time ago, and, in fact, the final issue would have already been delivered if an extension had not been granted for the purpose of completing the Adventure Path in Dungeon.
> 
> ...




Would you care to cite your sources on all this?  It's been said that most of what 'everyone knows' is wrong...and the rest is merely suspect.  Do you have experience in the publishing or software fields?  Again, you're making broad, meotionally-charged statements without backing them up, and it doesn't help your argument.



> I'm upset about not being told anything.  I'm upset about being lied to.  I'm upset about receiving a form letter back to my clearly articulated complaints that failed to address any of the points I mentioned.  I'm upset about being told that I should be excited about the new direction the 'magazines' are taking.  I'm upset that people say this is an 'evolution' when by definition, a magazine is a paper periodical.  And I'm upset that some people think the world is a better place simply by putting an 'e-' in front of the things you love.




And here we get to the heart of the matter - you're upset.  Upset people don't think or act rationally, by and large.  WotC doesn't have the staff or time to respond to you, personally, especially after the undoubtedly large amount of hate mail they got over this issue.  You're also getting your definitions wrong, or at least archaic - there have been online magazines, successful ones, for years.  It's about content and presentation, not paper or electrons.



> I don't want an e-cat despite the fact that it would mean no litter box to clean up, no scratches when a cat jumps off my shoulder unexpectedly.  I don't want an e-wife no matter how much less expensive that is.  I don't want e-kids.  I played the Sims.  Sure, it is fun for a while, but it isn't nearly as fulfilling.
> 
> I don't want e-books, and I don't want e-zines.




So take your gaming dollar elsewhere.  Seriously.  There's lots of print publishers that make excellent products, and even for PDF products there's Print on Demand.



> In the case of WotC I don't believe they've heard or understand.  I think they think I'll stop being upset after two or three months.  I know myself well enough that I can be upset about this for many years.  And no matter how long I withhold my financial support, once they give me what I want, I can always pick up the material I missed in the original release.




Again - take your gaming dollar to content producers that make what you want.  I really don't see the point in being upset about this and accusing WotC of lying, which they haven't done.


----------



## deadDMwalking (May 9, 2007)

Jim Hague said:
			
		

> Would you care to cite your sources on all this?




Most of it can be found at http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizo/customerService/transition/frequentlyAskedQuestions



			
				Paizo said:
			
		

> Paizo Publishing's license with Wizards of the Coast ends this fall. Wizards of the Coast has chosen not to renew this license in order to move this type of content onto its own website. In an effort to continue to deliver the value and quality content that current subscribers of both Dungeon and Dragon have come to expect, both companies reached a mutual agreement to extend the license through September when the Savage Tide Adventure Path naturally concludes.




As for the second point, I'm not sure that I can cite it.  I know it is something that Erik Mona has said, and I believe he has said it repeatedly.  I believe I've read it in the letters pages of one or both magazines, as well as on the Paizo boards.  Can any one help me on this one?

As for the third one, there is a great online article that provides similar information to what I'm basing it from.  http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=estimating%20software%20development%20time.  Software, especially complex software is very difficult to produce.  If WotC is producing a character generator, and they have not already started, they likely can't finish before September.  If they have already started, they won't be able to make a lot of changes to suit people's taste.  If you don't want to accept that statement as fact, I'm okay with that.  It is a logical construct, but so is global warming.  A lot of people don't believe that is true either.  A debate on how we 'know' something is a little more complex than I really want to get into.




			
				Jim Hague said:
			
		

> And here we get to the heart of the matter - you're upset.  Upset people don't think or act rationally, by and large.




I think that dividing things either emotionally or rationally creates a false dichotomy.  However, if I were not 'upset' than I wouldn't care.  If I didn't care, than I wouldn't be posting here.  So, anyone who is upset, regardless of the reason, can't be considered unreasonable because they are upset.  They must be judged on their reasonableness of character by some other measure.  Perhaps by their willingness to accept a compromise solution?  Because one hasn't been proposed, that might not work.  Perhaps by being engaged in meaningful dialogue by those who have made this decision.  While I'm willing, I'm afraid that the efforts by WotC have been extremely limited.  Most of what they've said amounts to 'We can't speak to anybody individually, we'll answer what we can, but we'll ignore, at least for now, most of the questions or concerns, probably because of NDA restrictions'.  Personally, I don't believe that they're being entirely honest.  If they are, I think they could be doing a better job.



			
				Jim Hague said:
			
		

> So take your gaming dollar elsewhere.  Seriously.  There's lots of print publishers that make excellent products, and even for PDF products there's Print on Demand.




This is exactly what I intend to do.  However, I want to make certain that WotC understands that I am leaving, understand why I am leaving, and understand what they can do to win me back as a customer.  They don't have to.  The ball is in their court.  However, from my perspective, biased as it may be, letting a customer leave is not a good idea.  While I think it makes business sense to keep customers that have been loyal in the past.  WotC might think players of the game will 'follow blindly wherever they're leading'.  I want to make sure that while there may be people who will, I am not one of them.  

Ideally, they'll come around to my point of view, and I'll keep getting my magazines.  Or not, and I'll purchase from 3rd party publishers exclusively.


----------



## Khairn (May 9, 2007)

deadDMwalking said:
			
		

> WotC might think players of the game will 'follow blindly wherever they're leading'.  I want to make sure that while there may be people who will, I am not one of them.




With having had a year to prepare to prepare their statements regarding both the cancellation and the new DI ... and seeing how little is actually being shared with their customers... its MHO that this is precisely the extent of WotC's original efforts to manage the shock, anger and disappointment from the D&D player base.


----------



## BOZ (May 9, 2007)

hey... OK, i've been away for a few days.

i printed out the interview before it fell off the front of the main News page.  in the beginning, before the interview starts, there is a bolded paragraph as a sort of introduction, and there was a link in the sentence which read "if you have any thoughts, please feel free to drop in on this thread on the messageboards and have your say" - well, of course, since i can't find the interview, i don't know where that link lead.    does anyone have a link to the interview, or better yet a link to the thread in which we can post our thoughts (if this very thread is not the one in question)?


----------



## blargney the second (May 9, 2007)

This thread is that one, BOZ.


----------



## BOZ (May 9, 2007)

that saved me some trouble, then.    you figure they're still reading?  well, here goes nothing...

Here's what i want to see.  of course we won't see the exact same content coming from Dragon and Dungeon, no matter what - that sort of thing changes every time a major editorial change takes place anway, so no point in trying to avoid it.  there's going to be changes for sure, but here's hoping the baby is not thrown out with the bathwater.

first of all, regardless of everyone's feelings for the content going online, there is one inescapable *good* thing about the content going online: there will no longer be an upper limit on how much content can be put out in a month.  thusly, if you have 10 good articles you want to use, or 20, or 30, or 50 - go ahead and post as many as you feel like!  no more holding off on a good article because there's not enough space to print it this month.  please, please, please take advantage of this, what may very well prove to be your biggest advantage over print.

as for content, i know i would very much like to see certain current Dragon columns, like Campaign Classics, Demonomicon of Iggwilv (particularly if James Jacobs is involved, who is practically chomping at the bit to be involved with it), Creature Catalog, and Core Beliefs.  it would also be cool to see older columns revived, such as Bazaar of the Bizzare, Giants in the Earth, Dragon's Bestiary, etc.  of course, i'm sure new columns are likely to be invented, but don't forget the classics that have stood the test of time!

now i, for one, love seeing old (read: particularly pre-3E) content used in new ways.  witness the Demonomicon articles, for one, and the Campaign Classics issues for another.  look at the gobs and gobs of converted monsters that have appeared in Dragon and Dungeon in the last few years (i'll give you a list if you need it!).  even if you don't wish to utilize this content in the books, please keep an open mind for using it on the digi-magazines.

please keep the mags submission-based.  yes, in-house people will provide content, and yes regular freelancers will provide content; it has always been this way.  but there has also been a lot of content that came from the little guy.  the worst mistake you could make, in my opinion, would be to close the doors on the not-yet-professionals out there.  and i say that not just because of the articles i've had printed in the last couple of years.  

collecting the best of the online content into hardcovers is practically a must.  first of all, print is a format that most people will never completely give up.  secondly, you must consider those who cannot or will not use the internet to get their D&D content - compilations will be the only way these people see the online magazine content, and they will pay for a book where they would not pay for an online subscription.

when considering that, keep in mind that you have access to all the 3E material produced by paizo as well, and the popularity of their run on the magazines.  allowing them to produce further Dragon Compendiums (or doing it yourself if you're so inclined) or doing things like an Age of Worms or Savage Tide AP hardcover would make some big sellers.  a collection of Demonomicon articles would be a goldmine, especially if it included new content.  a Monster Compendium (like the Spell and Magic Item Compendiums) or series thereof could draw on monsters from the Paizo print run, from the digital magazines, the free content on the website, and other sources, and i know i'd buy copies of that.  

well anyway, that's all i have to say about that for the moment - sorry if i rambled or got incoherent, as i probaby should have gone to sleep and wrote this in the morning.


----------



## sjmiller (May 9, 2007)

BOZ said:
			
		

> first of all, regardless of everyone's feelings for the content going online, there is one inescapable *good* thing about the content going online: there will no longer be an upper limit on how much content can be put out in a month.  thusly, if you have 10 good articles you want to use, or 20, or 30, or 50 - go ahead and post as many as you feel like!  no more holding off on a good article because there's not enough space to print it this month.  please, please, please take advantage of this, what may very well prove to be your biggest advantage over print.



Boz, there is a limit to what they can put out each month.  It's called a monthly budget.  Contract writers are paid by the word.  Say you have $5,000 as a budget.  You can only buy a limited number of articles for that month and stay in budget.

Pyramid Magazine Online has been online for years.  They have a limited number of articles, columns, and reviews each week because they have to pay everyone.  They are just one example, of course.

So, the belief that they can post unlimited amounts of stuff each month is a bit unrealistic.


----------



## BOZ (May 9, 2007)

you can count that as part of me being rambling and incoherent then.  

still then, the limit is by the budget and not number of pages/wordcount etc, which is probably still likely to be a lot more than the print mags.


----------



## irdeggman (May 9, 2007)

BOZ said:
			
		

> you can count that as part of me being rambling and incoherent then.
> 
> still then, the limit is by the budget and not number of pages/wordcount etc, which is probably still likely to be a lot more than the print mags.




And art of course.

You have a price per word for text and per picture for artwork.

So while theoretically you could post an unlimited amount of information on-line, cost wise it would still be limited unless the pages were blank (or contained advertising - which I don't beleive is something that WotC has addressed yet, Paizo has said that there won't be any in Pathfinder).


----------



## irdeggman (May 9, 2007)

Jim Hague said:
			
		

> Again - take your gaming dollar to content producers that make what you want.  I really don't see the point in being upset about this and accusing WotC of lying, which they haven't done.




While, for now this appears to be the "solution" to those who feel the same way (I myself am willing to wait and see before forming a set opinion, although I do have preconceived opinions of what I think will happen), the real issue is what will happen in the future.

I say this because something has been missing from the information given so far (which has been real limited from the WotC side - for legal reasons as far as I can tell, but regardless of the "reason" it is still a fact that there has not been a lot of information provided yet) - what of 4th ed?

I know that strikes up all kinds of feelings in people and I am not saying "the sky is falling".

It is a fact there will be a 4th ed - when that will occur is unkown.

Will it be OGC like 3.x? Again that is unknown.

A lot of options for gamers depends on the answer to that question.

If it is not OGC then things get real tight and this will, IMO, cause a huge fan base recoil.

If it is OGC - but in a more limited fashion than the SRD - that will also have huge effects on the 3rd party products available but less recoil.

I'm sorry but I can't help but see a connection here what with the "reabsorption" of many D&D product lines by WotC.

Something that might be a part of this, based on marketing, is that it is time for WotC to make a drastic change in the D&D product line to support continual growth. This is something that Monte's past articles (and others with past and present expereince with D&D and similar products) have shown.

So instead of simply publishing "retreads" or a major 4th ed total change the time before 4th ed will happen can be extended by introducing the DI. This will cause a sudden flurry in activity (changes like this always do) and may or may not be able to be sustainable until the actual 4th ed happens.

These are mere observations but they are questions that must be answered eventually by WotC. I would extrapolate that this will occur within the 1st 3 months of the DI as part of the DI itself. Normally there is a "what will happen" intro article at the beginning of products like this when there is a drastic change being made.


----------



## Mark CMG (May 9, 2007)

Scott Rouse - 

Regarding DI and advertising:




			
				irdeggman said:
			
		

> (. . .) advertising - which I don't beleive is something that WotC has addressed yet (. . .)





Has this been addressed and, if not, can you, please, discuss if it is something that is under consideration and, if so, what sort of discussion is currently being had?

Thanks.


----------



## HeruShango (May 10, 2007)

*Epic Gaming*

*Greetings,

I hope non-DI and Dungeon and Dragon magazine questions can be asked here. 

Can someone give me WotC's "official" reasoning for not outsourcing Epic Level Gaming to other companies? Like Paizo having/had Dragon and Margaret Weiss having/had Dragonlance. 

IF it is not a profitable product like I have been hearing, why not license the Epic rules to a company that will provide quality products to the large(not large enough for your profit margins of course, but it is substantial enough to support more content) Epic Community. 

They are 2 sites(that I know of), Dicefreaks and UK's site that mainly supports the Epic Community, and if you read the many posts about folks wanting more Epic content it is a great many peolple. On this site as well as Wotc offcial site and many others. Just look at the "Hosted Publishers Forum" here and you see that Eternity Publishing has more posts than the other companies combined. I only say that to point out the great(again not by Wotc standards) interest and loyalty Epic fans have for your product. 


I can't stop folks from responding as they wish only make a request, please refrain from negative remarks about the Epic Handbook. This is for the above people I wrote about who truly want more Epic support.

Again, from what I've read AND the fact that Wotc has not supported Epic Level Gaming with 3.5 update books and other means, why can't we Epic gamers get the support we would like from a 3rd party taking over?

Thanks for your time.*


----------



## Khairn (May 11, 2007)

I would assume, based on recent WotC comments, that "Epic" content would be put in the same bucket as D20 Modern and other D&D variants that are not as main stream as say Eberron, Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk.  Namely that the amount of DI content will be dependent on a balancing act between level of activity and a desire not to fracture the D&D community.  I believe the words Scott used was not wanting to "slice the audience too thin".


----------



## the Lorax (May 12, 2007)

*Copyright notice*

This is something that as come up on another thread. 

How will the copyright notices be worded so that DI subscribers will be able to print articles out at a commercial copy location?  The current copyright notices on Wizards free downloads expressly prohibit makeing reproductions of the material.


----------



## caudor (May 13, 2007)

One thing I saw in the D&D survey that interests me is the D&D University.  I interpret this as being a series that classes where new players can learn game basics, and experienced players can gain a more in depth understanding of the game's mechanics.  Self-assessment tests could be used to allow folks to determine where they stand in regards to rules knowledge.

As for electronic tools, like a character generator, I can't imagine that WotC would pull the CMP license without planning to do some kind of replacement.  That's why I think we'll see one.  

However, if these tools do not materialize, I hope they do something geared toward making the game easier to prepare and play.  Even a wiki or some kind of electronic index bringing together a list of spells, feats, etc. would help.  The tricky part, is how could they provide such a service without giving the contents of paper sourcebooks away?

I'm hopeful for some online tools, but the reality of how difficult this might be is starting to set in.


----------



## Razz (May 14, 2007)

I agree, I'd really like to see more epic content. Not everyone likes to limit their games to just 20th level, and I though that was the purpose of epic level material. Sure, some epic material needs to be patched up, but I think the system works fine. 

I mean, throwing creatures like this at your players can't get any cooler (or could it?) than this: *Glacierdrak and Gravewyrm* 

I'd say a Hecatoncheres is definitely another fun one to throw at them.


----------



## irdeggman (May 14, 2007)

HeruShango said:
			
		

> Can someone give me WotC's "official" reasoning for not outsourcing Epic Level Gaming to other companies? Like Paizo having/had Dragon and Margaret Weiss having/had Dragonlance.




Because they don't need to?

The epic rules are in the SRD and any company can use them in anything they publish.

I would hazard a guess that the reason no one has taken up the flag is because they don't see it as a profit making venture.


----------



## daemonslye (May 16, 2007)

*crickets*

Where'd they go?


----------



## DonTadow (May 16, 2007)

Razz said:
			
		

> I agree, I'd really like to see more epic content. Not everyone likes to limit their games to just 20th level, and I though that was the purpose of epic level material. Sure, some epic material needs to be patched up, but I think the system works fine.
> 
> I mean, throwing creatures like this at your players can't get any cooler (or could it?) than this: *Glacierdrak and Gravewyrm*
> 
> I'd say a Hecatoncheres is definitely another fun one to throw at them.



It's a cost wreward thing. It takes a lot of work to make epic level content, because you're essentially making content for people who are gods.  YOu have to try to account for too many things.  It can be done, but the work put into it will not pay off because not a lot of games go that far and a lot of DMs whom run games that far are better off making their own content considering how many intangibles characters at this level have.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (May 17, 2007)

daemonslye said:
			
		

> *crickets*
> 
> Where'd they go?





Montana   

I took a much needed vacation to visit family in Montana. I took my 4 yo son fishing, did some fishing my self, and never looked at my computer once the whole time.


----------



## Piratecat (May 17, 2007)

It's a conspiracy! Scott has a good reason for --

Oh, wait.

Carry on, then. And welcome back!


----------



## Khairn (May 17, 2007)

Scott_Rouse said:
			
		

> Montana
> 
> I took a much needed vacation to visit family in Montana. I took my 4 yo son fishing, did some fishing my self, and never looked at my computer once the whole time.




Welcome back Scott!  I hope you had a nice relaxing time.  But since you are now back, would it be possible to answer a few outstanding questions.

So far, the only pieces of firm information about the DI that has been shared is that ...

-It will be online content
-It will have some kind of subscription price associated with it
-WotC will still be utilizing the services of freelance writers
- And that it will launch sometime after the last edition of the magazine has hit the stores.

Since the announcement of the magazines cancellation and the pending launch of the DI, there have been thousands of posts from excited customers suggesting content that they would like to see, thousands of posts from passionate gamers with opinions on what WotC must certainly be providing, and thousands of posts from upset gamers with worries, concerns, fears and doubts about the new DI business and its impact on how we game.  Despite all those many posts there has been precious little about the DI that has been confirmed by WotC.

Is there anything that you can share with us now that will answer any of the many questions posted on this and other threads about the DI?
When is WotC planning to start sharing solid information about the DI?  
Can you tell us when the start of the PR and advertising campaign will begin?


Thanks in advance


----------



## Brown Jenkin (May 17, 2007)

I would expect Gen Con for a date for more info. Any chance we might get something earlier.


----------



## irdeggman (May 17, 2007)

Hope you had a good time Scott.  Family is always more important than anything related to work.

Did you pick up a pair of chrome encrusted tweezers?


----------



## Hussar (May 18, 2007)

> When is WotC planning to start sharing solid information about the DI?
> Can you tell us when the start of the PR and advertising campaign will begin?




Honestly, I think these are a pair of the best questions I've seen to date.  We can speculate good and bad all we like, but, basically, we're spinning our wheels without a little more information.  Is there a scheduled date for this?


----------



## Khairn (May 18, 2007)

Hussar said:
			
		

> Honestly, I think these are a pair of the best questions I've seen to date.  We can speculate good and bad all we like, but, basically, we're spinning our wheels without a little more information.  Is there a scheduled date for this?




I kind of thought the same.  But apparently neither sharing information, or advising customers when they might begin to share information is part of WotC's current plan for managing customer expectations and the launch of the DI.

Its really kind of puzzling.  Has to make you wonder why ?


----------



## TheYeti1775 (May 18, 2007)

Hussar said:
			
		

> > When is WotC planning to start sharing solid information about the DI?
> > Can you tell us when the start of the PR and advertising campaign will begin?
> 
> 
> ...




Yes many of us would like to know.


----------



## Hussar (May 19, 2007)

Devyn said:
			
		

> I kind of thought the same.  But apparently neither sharing information, or advising customers when they might begin to share information is part of WotC's current plan for managing customer expectations and the launch of the DI.
> 
> Its really kind of puzzling.  Has to make you wonder why ?




Well, the simplest answer would be that the launch isn't for three months, so, it's a trifle early.  

That and the fact that they are under no obligation to provide any sort of timetable.  

/me very tired of conspiracy theory, "sky is falling" type speculation.


----------



## Khairn (May 19, 2007)

Hussar said:
			
		

> Well, the simplest answer would be that the launch isn't for three months, so, it's a trifle early.
> 
> That and the fact that they are under no obligation to provide any sort of timetable.
> 
> /me very tired of conspiracy theory, "sky is falling" type speculation.





The move to DI is responsible for the cancellation of 2 iconic RPG magazines, will herald a dramatic and fundamental shift in the RPG community, and based on the scant information provided will exclude a good part of WotC's own customer base. Next to the announcement of 3E and the OGL/SRD, this is IMHO the most important and dramatic change in the gaming industry over the last 20 years.

I know WotC are under no obligation to advise their customers about anything.  Having said that, I would have expected that they would consider it a priority, especially given both the dramatic change in business models that the DI represents and their stated intent to improve communication with their already "online" customer base.

In response to a question on the D&D forums regarding why WotC hasn't been willing to share even the slightest information about the DI, WotC_Logan stated 


> People want all the information on our digital content so they can decide whether they will accept it or hate it. Now is not the time for people to make that decision.




Based on that comment I guess we will all just have to wait until WotC feels that we are somehow "ready" to make that decision.

This doesn't look to me like a company making an effort to improve communication.

No "sky is falling" ... no "conspiracy" talk ... just a disgruntled customer recognizing that WotC doesn't have to share anything, but hoping that they could at least give us an idea as to when we can anticipate the communication to start.


----------



## Hussar (May 22, 2007)

> The move to DI is responsible for the cancellation of 2 iconic RPG magazines, will herald a dramatic and fundamental shift in the RPG community, and based on the scant information provided will exclude a good part of WotC's own customer base. Next to the announcement of 3E and the OGL/SRD, this is IMHO the most important and dramatic change in the gaming industry over the last 20 years.




Ok, I'll bite.  

Why?

Why would this be that important.  From Paizo's own numbers, only a tiny fraction of gamers actually buy either magazine.  This isn't even going to register on the radar for the majority of gamers.  Sure, the magazines are iconic, but, they haven't been the "go to" source for gaming in many years.

I love Dragon and Dungeon, but, I'm also under no illusions as to how much of an impact they actually have.

I would also point out that the magazines are not cancelled.  They are moving to a different format.  

Also, why would this exclude a large percentage of WOTC's own consumer base?  Even back in 99 when WOTC did the surveys for 3e, they found that half of players had regular access to the internet.  Do you honestly think that this has gone down in the eight or ten years since they did the survey?



> especially given both the dramatic change in business models that the DI represents




What dramatic change in business models?  They are still going to be cranking out books same as usual.  The only people directly affected by this decision are those of us who bought Dragon and/or Dungeon.  We are not a majority.  We're actually a pretty small minority.  From WOTC's perspective, absolutely nothing has changed.  From Paizo's perspective, this represents a huge change.  From the perspective of most gamers, this is a ripple and that's about it.  WOTC's production schedule remains unchanged.


----------



## daemonslye (May 25, 2007)

> daemonslye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*cough*    ....and?  Just noticing a few lingering questions in the above thread.  Thanks.

~D


----------



## Mark CMG (May 25, 2007)

daemonslye said:
			
		

> *cough*    ....and?  Just noticing a few lingering questions in the above thread.  Thanks.
> 
> ~D





Indeed.  Will there be outside advertising on DI?


----------



## daemonslye (Jun 2, 2007)

daemonslye said:
			
		

> *cough*    ....and?  Just noticing a few lingering questions in the above thread.  Thanks.
> 
> ~D




*elevator music*


~D


----------



## Jasperak (Jun 26, 2007)

One Eyed Jacques FTW

(edit) What is Gleemax?(/edit)



			
				PoeticJustice said:
			
		

> I was not, nor ever have been a subscriber. I preferred to buy from my FLGS.
> 
> I would walk for the following reasons.
> 
> ...


----------

