R.I.P.: Dragon and Dungeon magazines • Page 6 • Collecting General • The Acaeum

The Acaeum Forums • Collecting General

R.I.P.: Dragon and Dungeon magazines
	Page 6 of 7 • 1 2 3, 4, 5, 67

Author

flying_purple_monkfish
Prolific Collector

Posts: 195
Joined: Mar 31, 2006
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2009
Location: UK

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:03 pm

hmmm... interesting. Can't say I ever read any dragon or dungeon magazines that didn't have something to do with Planescape (i'm a rather particular collector) and they never seemed that easy to find anyway, only one store ever stocked them.
still, it's sad to see them go.

More online content.. hmm.. could go either way. Personally, I don't like things in PDF... but that's because I hate reading off a screen and/or having to waste my ink and paper printing stuff off. I like hard copies of things. I think i'm still one of those people who cant stand buying digital things because it feels wrong. I want to be able to hold my purchase in my hands, examine it from all angles.. etc etc.. lol. Its why I still buy CDs after all.

As for the canning of certain suppliments.. wasn't that long ago they rereleased dragonlance was it? bizzare. Maybe all those endless monstermanuals and such forth have driven them finally mad.
4th ed? eugh... just what we need... reackon they'll nerf rangers again? A repeat of the 3rd ed fiasco so we have to have 4.5 and more online errata asap? or you think they'll get it right this time?

I like to think wotc have more sense than to sell D&D, its a huge high profile name and a great title to own the rights to. Surely its one of the few rpg titles that's fairly secure, the one every single being on the planet has heard of. but hey, if they do sell, kudos to whever gets it.. oh yes

"Somehow, in hell I knew there would be mushrooms"

ExTSR
Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor
Valuation Board

Posts: 1920
Joined: May 01, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 23, 2024
Location: Almost Lake Geneva, WI

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:24 pm

bclarkie wrote:I am thinking that perhaps, the first shot was actually fired off 5 months ago when Peter Adkinson decided to not continue on with GenCon SoCal.

I highly doubt it. Peter doesn't 'license' GenCon; Peter (or rather GenCon LLC) OWNS GenCon, lock stock & barrel.

SoCal was bleeding cash, profusely.

Badmike
Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 8028
Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Last Visit: Apr 21, 2024
Location: DFW TX

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:55 pm

ATOM wrote:And it sure beats a discussion of the sugar/sweetner content of Coke.
Artifical sweetners gave lab animals brain tumors....think on that Diet Coke fans!

Sluuuuuuuuurp!!! Ah! Always love the first Diet Coke of the day!!! :wink:

Mike B.

"THE MORE YOU THINK ABOUT WHY i DONE WHAT i DONE THE MORE i LAUGH" Cougar
"The Acaeum hates fun" Sir Allen
"I had a collecting emergency" Nogrod
Co-founder of the North Texas RPG Con
NTRPGCON

Xaxaxe
Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:02 pm

bclarkie wrote:2) Wizards is getting all of its ducks in a row, because they are planning on selling(or at least trying to sell) the Dungeons & Dragons brand.

I also think some sort of big news is coming in 2007 (either this week at GAMA or this summer at GenCon), and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with this hypothesis, but I have to ask ... who the hell is left that could buy the D&D brand?

Gaming in the U.S. is practically all under one roof now: Hasborg has absorbed it all. The d20 publishers that are hanging on (Alderac, et. al.) don't seem big enough to be able to pull it off ... the second-biggest manufacturer of CCGs is an old baseball-card company (Upper Deck) ... the oldest RPG-maker that hasn't already been assimilated is either Flying Buffalo or Steve Jackson Games. I'm just not seeing who the logical purchaser would be.

Unless ... unless it's not a gaming company at all. Or unless it's not an American-based company. Or both.

Anyway, I'm mostly just thinking aloud here; my guesses are as equally in the dark as anyone else's. I am pretty sure, though, that something big will be happening in gaming-land in 2007.

jasonw1239
Verbose Collector
JG Valuation Board

Posts: 1670
Joined: Jul 01, 2006
Last Visit: Apr 25, 2024
Location: Moncton, NB Canada

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:22 pm

What about a public traded company such as Games Workshop Group PLC?
They had 2006 sales of 115.2 million pounds with an operating profit of 4.2 million as of fiscal year ending April 2006.

They would be in a position already with market penetration, established distribution network etc.

Plus their name has already been associated with the D&D brand over the last two decades.

Check out my Chaosium sourcebook.
Secrets of Tibet

bclarkie
Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6455
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 20, 2023

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:40 pm

ExTSR wrote:
I highly doubt it. Peter doesn't 'license' GenCon; Peter (or rather GenCon LLC) OWNS GenCon, lock stock & barrel.

SoCal was bleeding cash, profusely.

I know Adkinson owns GenCon, I was leaning more towards the uncertainity that might be brought on by the potential impending sale of the brand name. You obviously know a lot more about it than I do though, so I am certainly not arguing your point.

"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

bclarkie
Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6455
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 20, 2023

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:41 pm

Xaxaxe wrote:I also think some sort of big news is coming in 2007 (either this week at GAMA or this summer at GenCon), and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with this hypothesis, but I have to ask ... who the hell is left that could buy the D&D brand?

Gaming in the U.S. is practically all under one roof now: Hasborg has absorbed it all. The d20 publishers that are hanging on (Alderac, et. al.) don't seem big enough to be able to pull it off ... the second-biggest manufacturer of CCGs is an old baseball-card company (Upper Deck) ... the oldest RPG-maker that hasn't already been assimilated is either Flying Buffalo or Steve Jackson Games. I'm just not seeing who the logical purchaser would be.

Unless ... unless it's not a gaming company at all. Or unless it's not an American-based company. Or both.

Anyway, I'm mostly just thinking aloud here; my guesses are as equally in the dark as anyone else's. I am pretty sure, though, that something big will be happening in gaming-land in 2007.

Your guess is as good as mine man.

I just really get the feeling that there is more to this then just the release of D&D 4.0.

"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

FormCritic
Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Sep 30, 2022

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:43 pm

I wonder about a sale of the Dungeons and Dragons brand name.

Whether there is a tabletop RPG called Dungeons and Dragons or not, the name itself will have selling power for as much as three more decades.

Movies...video games...toys...online role-playing.

Lots of stuff can sell with Dungeons and Dragons on it.

If I were to consider who might be in line to buy the Dungeons and Dragons name, my first suspect would be: Microsoft.

Located only a few miles from WOTC, am surprised that Microsoft allowed Hasbro to buy such a nice morsel of game-selling power.

For a company that owns the Bettman Archives, owning WOTC...or the Dungeons and Dragons brand name as a whole...seems like a no-brainer.

Although Microsoft will be interested in WOTC mostly as a vehicle for selling video games, it seems to me that the Microsoft personnel might have a clue what a tabletop RPG is supposed to look like.

The imminent release of Dungeons and Dragons 4.0 would be a part of the sale terms...possibly just after the acquisition.

Hopefully, they will give the rules more thought this time so we don't have another knife in the back like 3.5.

Mark

"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

Radovarl
Prolific Collector

Posts: 115
Joined: Mar 20, 2007
Last Visit: Sep 27, 2007

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 2:10 pm

FormCritic wrote:Located only a few miles from WOTC, am surprised that Microsoft allowed Hasbro to buy such a nice morsel of game-selling power.

For a company that owns the Bettman Archives, owning WOTC...or the Dungeons and Dragons brand name as a whole...seems like a no-brainer.

I dunno; I think maybe we overestimate the degree of recognition the Dungeons and Dragons brand name has in the general population. I was with your line of thinking about Microsoft, until I realized I have no idea what the "Bettman Archives" are.... What are they?

Winterwords
Prolific Collector

Posts: 226
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
Last Visit: Sep 02, 2014

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 2:31 pm

I could be very wrong here, but as far as I know, there's no 4.0 on the horizon at the moment (3e works too well I'm told).

It does all seem very suspicious though. Kind of exciting as well, (for good or ill), we'll have to wait & see what unfolds.

It could be that they know Dragonlance is a line that sells - and thus have bigger plans for it. I would expect a couple of one (two etc.) spin offs from old & new campaign worlds in the future. But not the full support of a "world" (ie. a long running publishing of items for say Dark Sun under 3e).

- Just my opinion though. :-)

Mount Celestia doesn't want me and Baator's afraid I'll take over.

Ninty-eight Blue and Green Slaad at the door, Ninty-eight Blue and Green Slaad, Take one down, they gate in two more, Ninty-nine Blue and Green Slaad at the door...

Badmike
Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 8028
Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Last Visit: Apr 21, 2024
Location: DFW TX

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:33 pm

Radovarl wrote:
I dunno; I think maybe we overestimate the degree of recognition the Dungeons and Dragons brand name has in the general population. I was with your line of thinking about Microsoft, until I realized I have no idea what the "Bettman Archives" are.... What are they?

Arguably, the D&D brand name has at this moment it's highest recognition ever. The brand has been around 30+ years...entire generations have grown up playing it, and are now in their 30s-50s, and they have children that also are aware of and play the game. The game has moved from hushed tones back room dabbling to being played and displayed out in the open in game stores, as well as being mentioned positively in media, enough that the word has become a bit of a punchline (D&D geeks) and recognizable when someone throws it out in casual conversation. The movie, cartoon, web sites, computer games, etc all have done a part to bring in a few more into the fold of knowing what D&D is. If they don't know EXACTLY what it is, they are at least aware of certain concepts connected with the brand. I've actually been surprised since WOTC there hasnt been more of an effort made to cash in on the name recognition of the product through advertising or marketing.

Mike B.

"THE MORE YOU THINK ABOUT WHY i DONE WHAT i DONE THE MORE i LAUGH" Cougar
"The Acaeum hates fun" Sir Allen
"I had a collecting emergency" Nogrod
Co-founder of the North Texas RPG Con
NTRPGCON

Radovarl
Prolific Collector

Posts: 115
Joined: Mar 20, 2007
Last Visit: Sep 27, 2007

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:58 pm

I guess that's true, though D&D was from very early on somewhat visible (references in the movie "ET", mid-eighties tv commercials, etc.). I guess what I'm trying to get at is that maybe the brand "acceptance" is no higher than it used to be. Whether correctly or incorrectly, the game is still seen as something that socially maladjusted teenage boys do in basements for 16 hours at a time. Also, I think the "geek elitism" that always accompanied the hobby has to some extent been accentuated. This was brought home to me very clearly when I went to a high school D&D friend's wedding last summer (he married "late", at 38 years old). He now plays 3.x with a group of younger folks (one of whom is now his wife), who all attended, and when it came up in conversation that I was an "old school D&Der", the reaction I got was exactly the opposite of what I expected... When I asked what kinds of characters they were playing, one young woman said, "I'm a ranger/master thrower, but you don't have the new books so you wouldn't know what that is," (with a definite judgmental tone in her voice). They didn't think it was cool I had played AD&D, they thought it was quaint and obsolete. Happens I did know what a master thrower was, but I didn't tell her that.

The point I'm belaboring is that if the people in the hobby keep an "in-group" mentality, maybe the brand isn't all that desirable, because new players are reluctant to break into the hobby due to the attitude and "elitism". Hence marketing to 11-year-olds, perhaps..

Traveller
Prolific Collector

Posts: 851
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 16, 2024

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:00 pm

Advertising and marketing are losses on the profit and loss statement. Hasbro is only interested in profit, and thus there is no advertising or marketing. Of course, while the drive for profit is good, doing it at the expense of your fanbase is damn near suicidal.

The Gray Book: My homage to E.G.G.

Star Trek: Alpha Quadrant: The game Mongoose failed to make.

sleepyCO
Prolific Collector

Posts: 339
Joined: Sep 09, 2006
Last Visit: May 17, 2022
Location: 8000 feet below the summit of Pikes Peak, Colorado

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:57 pm

ATOM wrote:And it sure beats a discussion of the sugar/sweetner content of Coke.
Artifical sweetners gave lab animals brain tumors....think on that Diet Coke fans!

What I heard was, to get that result the rats had to be fed the equivalent amount of sweetener in 800 cans of soda daily
--that's a little over 33 cases a day.

I don't know any one who could drink 800 cans/day!!

[/i]

FormCritic
Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Sep 30, 2022

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 11:23 pm

The Bettman Archives is a collection of historic photographs and drawings that features prominently in many history books.

Microsoft owns the Archives. It's on Bill Gate's equipment list.

Probably positioning themselves for the future and saw a price they were willing to pay.

I can't believe they did not buy TSR and/or WOTC.

Also, I don't know what a master thrower is.

Mark

"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

gyg
Verbose Collector

Posts: 1921
Joined: Mar 26, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 25, 2024
Location: UK

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 11:28 pm

FormCritic wrote:Also, I don't know what a master thrower is.

Mark

Obviously it's like a thrower but ....better

(possibly a rare potter prestige class!)

You can never have too much of something you didn't need in the first place.

Radovarl
Prolific Collector

Posts: 115
Joined: Mar 20, 2007
Last Visit: Sep 27, 2007

Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:26 am

It's one of the goofy prestige classes that accompanied the deluge of similar crunchy bits published in the Complete series splatbooks from WotC. I'd give you more detail, as if you'd care, but about six months ago I got so disgusted with Wizbro that I sold almost all of my 3.x books on eBay. It's basically exactly what it sounds like.

Blackmoor
Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3601
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: Apr 19, 2024
Location: Canada

Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:33 am

I just got a notice to renew my Dungeon subscription from Paizo today!!

What a bunch of nobs

Games can get you through times of no money but money can not get you through times of no games!!

The Acaeum Forums • Collecting General

Page 6 of 7 • 1 2 3, 4, 5, 67