On the other hand... if that is so, why do they take the place of Dragon articles in the editorial calendar for January? On the days with a preview we don't get a Dragon article...
It would really be nice if someone could clean up this confusion...
Maybe it's because people claimed previews aren't exclusive and original content but ads and thus they don't belong into Dragon Mag.
On the other hand... if that is so, why do they take the place of Dragon articles in the editorial calendar for January? On the days with a preview we don't get a Dragon article...
It would really be nice if someone could clean up this confusion...
As I recall, we are supposed to get free content and subscriber content every M-W-F. For the most part this means a new Dragon or Dungeon crunch article. As those have been basically the only subsciber content that there was. However, the previews are for subscribers only, so they count towards subscriber content as well.
We all just need to give the previews a rest.
However, the previews are not actually Dragon articles (consider 'em a bonus-- for subscribers only). Even if they do act as content on the editorial calendar however, they aren't compiled into the end-of-month issue.
However and however . . . Am I the only one who gets a headache trying to take this in :P?
However and however . . . Am I the only one who gets a headache trying to take this in :P?
Not the only one. Basically, WotC needs to sit down and decide WTF.
Not the only one. Basically, WotC needs to sit down and decide WTF.
I think they did..but Ranadiel said it best
As I recall, we are supposed to get free content and subscriber content every M-W-F. For the most part this means a new Dragon or Dungeon crunch article. As those have been basically the only subsciber content that there was. However, the previews are for subscribers only, so they count towards subscriber content as well.
However, the previews are not actually Dragon articles (consider 'em a bonus-- for subscribers only). Even if they do act as content on the editorial calendar however, they aren't compiled into the end-of-month issue.
Dragon 370
If you look at the articles listed, both Druid and Invoker are listed as being part of Dragon 370. For whatever reason, they weren't compiled into it. So they're not usable if you're playing LFR as an example.
Dragon 370
If you look at the articles listed, both Druid and Invoker are listed as being part of Dragon 370. For whatever reason, they weren't compiled into it. So they're not usable if you're playing LFR as an example.
*checks the Table of Contents* I don't see them. I don't see them in the list of what is in Dragon 370 at the top of the page you linked to either. It just lists:
This month in Dragon:
Her Majesty's Secret Servants
Riven Justice: The Mercykillers
Lords of Chaos: Mual-tar
Adventurers of the Realms
Bestiary: Monsters of the Demonweb
Design & Development: Cosmology
Roll vs. Role: Harbinger of Yule-tide Woe
Confessions of a Full-Time Wizard
D&D Alumni
RPGA Report
Ampersand
*checks the Table of Contents* I don't see them. I don't see them in the list of what is in Dragon 370 at the top of the page you linked to either. It just lists:
Check the 'Features' part right below in my link, not the link to the compiled magazine. They're both listed as being part of Dragon 370.
*checks the Table of Contents* I don't see them. I don't see them in the list of what is in Dragon 370 at the top of the page you linked to either. It just lists:
The table of contents is and was subject to change. What you see now is not what users saw about a month ago of the same link.
They should be complied, or they should not replace other content. Either way, it appears we are getting less than we did before. That might not be true, but it is certainly the impression they are creating right now.
The intention for them - from everything indicated thus far - was to be as bonus material. Not replacing any actual articles, not taking up space in the magazine.
However, this has come the same time as a small drop in the content of the magazine - likely due to the December Holiday. Dragon is clocking in at 66 pages this month, as opposed to the 71 from last month, or the whopping 100 from the month before. Dungeon, on the other hand, weighs in at 128 pages, compared to last months 104, or the previous months 99. I'd say the drop in content is more perceived than actual.
I do think WotC should try and clarify the issue a bit more, given the confusion still ongoing in the forums. But I think the complaining going on is largely based on false assumpions more than anything else (and prodded along by the rumor-mongering of a few specific folks.)
I do think WotC should try and clarify the issue a bit more, given the confusion still ongoing in the forums. But I think the complaining going on is largely based on false assumpions more than anything else (and prodded along by the rumor-mongering of a few specific folks.)
The issue is LFR - you're only allowed to play Dragon preview classes after the compilation of the magazine. The Dragon page says they were Dragon preview classes, so that they're not in the Dragon means they're unplayable.
So the playtest/preview/whatever classes other than artificer and barbarian are not RPGA-legal? And what's the status of the bard, since it was in Ampersand and not a proper playtest article?
Bard was compiled into Dragon 369, so it is legal. There was a mistake, but that's been errata'd.
It's my opinion that since the release date of the Player's Handbook 2 has been moved up from March of '09 to January of '09...
When did that happen? It's still listed as a March '09 release on the release calendar.
The intention for them - from everything indicated thus far - was to be as bonus material. Not replacing any actual articles, not taking up space in the magazine.
You are probably correct. But then they really shouldn't have referenced them (at least, the druid preview) in the text of the mag - this month's Ampersand mentions it has preview material as a sort of follow up to the druid preview earlier in the week... :D
You are probably correct. But then they really shouldn't have referenced them (at least, the druid preview) in the text of the mag - this month's Ampersand mentions it has preview material as a sort of follow up to the druid preview earlier in the week... :D
Yeah, I will definitely agree that their communication on this matter (and in general) is really in need of improvement. There seems to be a lot of crossed wires, and I'm sure the recent personnel changes and the December holidays didn't help.
Regarding this, please note that the "RPGA Character Creation Guide" clearly shows a distinction between "Dragon Magazine" content, which can include class writeups, and "Playtest Classes" which are available to D&D Insider subscribers.
I believe the Druid and Invoker fall under the "Playtest Classes" and not "Dragon Magazine" content.
----------------------------
RPGA Character Creation Guide
=> page 2 "Player Resources" section
"Dragon Magazine: Content appearing in Dragon Magazine that is player resource-friendly (full racial write-ups, classes, paragon paths, epic destinies, powers, and feats) is available for access when the complete issue is available for download (typically at the end of the current month). Content from individual articles is not available for access upon the date of the article’s publication, as the complete issue may make final modifications to the rules in the article."
"Playtest Classes: Occasionally, D&D Insider subscribers to Dragon Magazine may have playable “playtest” classes previewed to them months before they actually see print. These classes are usable when the monthly issue is available, but keep in mind that some features and powers of the class may change when the final version of the class is published."
----------------------------
So the Playtest Classes are not part of the Dragon Magazine content, but include the associated Dragon Magazine issue number, #370 in this case, because they become usable when that issue is available for download.
At least that is how I read the above sections. If someone else has more current or relevant information that shows otherwise please feel free to either post or reference it.
My thanks,
Jandrys
-- Moonshae Isles
When did that happen? It's still listed as a March '09 release on the release calendar.
can we get back to the important part...has it really been moved up!??!?!?!?
"Ampersand
By Bill Slavicsek
Bill previews more of the druid and looks further ahead to another 2009 release."
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drtoc/370
can we get back to the important part...has it really been moved up!??!?!?!?
Barnes and Noble still has it listed for a March 17 release.
*shrugs*
Best answer I could find.
So the Playtest Classes are not part of the Dragon Magazine content, but include the associated Dragon Magazine issue number, #370 in this case, because they become usable when that issue is available for download.
They are specifically listed as being Dragon Magazine features here
Notice that Barbarian is specifically listed as being a Playtest and they are not...
Barnes and Noble still has it listed for a March 17 release.
*shrugs*
Best answer I could find.
Amazon agrees.
IT is very confusing. It is my opinion that the intent was to include the Druid in the Ampersand article, but it got preempted by the layoffs that WotC had in early December. The basis for this, is that the Druid was originally under Ampersand, and the description still lists the topic as:
"Ampersand
By Bill Slavicsek
Bill previews more of the druid and looks further ahead to another 2009 release."
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drtoc/370
If you check out the Ampersand article he does preview the Primal Avatar, a Paragon option for the Druid. That would fit under previewing "more of the druid".
The Dangerous Delves section covers the other "2009 release" that is mentioned.
Was the Druid writeup originally part of the Ampersand article when it was first posted or has it always been on it's own webpage?
Unfortunately you may be correct about the layoffs...
Jandrys
They are specifically listed as being Dragon Magazine features here
Notice that Barbarian is specifically listed as being a Playtest and they are not...
Good point, but the Barbarian article is much different than the Bard, Druid or Invoker class info. Did they just copy the Druid and Invoker class info from the draft PHB2, do a quick format and post it under the Dragon content instead of writing a full article like the Barbarian class?
*shrugs* Either way, everyone has brought up some very good points pro and con. Until someone from WotC posts a clarification the issue will still be up in the air.
Thanks,
Jandrys
Good point, but the Barbarian article is much different than the Bard, Druid or Invoker class info. Did they just copy the Druid and Invoker class info from the draft PHB2, do a quick format and post it under the Dragon content instead of writing a full article like the Barbarian class?
Umm that is what they did for the Barbabarian. They didn't write anything new for the Barbarian playtest(except for maybe the sidebar and I think that was a copy and paste from the Artificer playtest). The only differences are that the Druid/Invoker previews only covered levels 1-3, are the final version, and they have both builds.It's my opinion that since the release date of the Player's Handbook 2 has been moved up from March of '09 to January of '09
I am in error. I honestly thought someone had told me the release date had been moved up. This... disturbs me greatly.
If they're in there as Dragon/Dungeon Articles to be discussed, they should be in the magazine, no?
WotC, an answer on this issue -- even that you're working on it and to expect an update soon -- would be very appropriate right about now.
It was bad enough that we had to wait all through the holidays without an answer on this. I myself (and many others as well) were looking forward to playing the Druid in our LFR adventures. Now, here it is the end of the holidays and this issue still hasn't been resolved. We have the new Warden preview (which is much appreciated, BTW) but no answer on whether or not the exclusion of the Druid and Invoker previews from the previous compiled issue of Dragon was a mistake or deliberate (and if so, for what reason).
I also couldn't help but notice that we don't have the new graphic for the latest issue of Dragon and that the release calendar link *still* points to November's calendar. I'm beginning to strongly suspect that the job cuts are to blame for things happening more slowly as of late. If so, that's understandable.
But PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE let us know what to expect! Even if we have to wait a day or so for the real answer, even telling us that will be enough.
UPDATE
(Yes, the graphic and new calendar were updated about an hour after I originally posted this. Still waiting on this answer, though!)
I just received this response from WotC customer service about why this content is missing from Dragon 370:
"Thank you for writing. Unfortunately we cannot answer as to why it was not included in that issue. However, since it was not included in the magazine, it is not LFR legal."
Umm...what's going on here? Is this just a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing?? Who *would* know why this content wasn't included?
Would an official representative weigh in on this so we can understand what's going on?
Damon
That being said, know that both I have asked CM to find out why the preview articles were labelled as part of Dragon, and then not included in the compiled issues.
The previews are obviously just that, a preview of something in an upcoming book. Hence as you notice they are not in PDF format but as a web page.
And as we have seen with the Bard, they will not go back and make corrections to a compiled magazine.
So no Druids and no Invokers until March. Unless you choose to play them in a home campaign.
WotC, really, how long does it take to confirm whether the absence of the Druid and Invoker previews from the compiled issue of Dragon 370 was deliberate (likely because of the reason Mithreinmaethor mentioned below) or unintentional?
If I seemed a bit boorish before, I apologize. What I meant was that I had been patiently waiting since issue #370 was released *just before the holidays*, until everyone could get back and we could get an answer. I was hoping that it could be a quick, 5 minute thing the first day that everyone was back, but here it is Friday and still no official word yet.
I've seen the news about the new DM rewards program and the new list of modules to be released this quarter (although it looks like we're behind again since EAST1-3 wasn't released on the 7th as scheduled), which is good. But the news I really wanted to hear about, nada.
Can someone at WotC take just 5 minutes and sort this out, please? I've been waiting for three weeks to start a new LFR character with a spellscar and really wanted it to be a Druid. If the previews won't ever be LFR legal, then I'll hold off on new characters until March.
Damon
Unless the new CCG expected sometime this month changes that, that is what you have to go by. Sorry
They didn't include it in Dragon, but they didn't say WHY they didn't include it.
Now, the Sorceror and Invoker are listed as part of this month's Dragon (see: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dragon), but we have no indication if they'll be in the PDF or not... or why.
I'm p*ssed, not by the fact that the Warden and Sorcerer aren't in this month's compilation of Dragon (which I'd half-expected because they weren't listed in the table of contents), but because of the severe lack of communication on WotC's part.
We asked. A lot of us asked. Many times. Over and over again. To customer service, on the forum, PMing staff, and even PMing Chris Youngs when a helpful staff person suggested it -- but Chris never bothered to respond. We wanted to know WHY the Druid and Invoker weren't in the compilation for issue #370. If the exclusion was deliberate, what was the reason?
And we never got an answer. I'm very disappointed that WotC never deigned to say something official on this. It's pretty obvious now that the exclusion was deliberate, of course. But things like the veiled reference to this issue in the character creation guide -- content not in the compiled issue isn't LFR legal -- made this even more painful.
I'm sad to say that it looks like at least part of the time, even when many of us want an issue addressed (like not being able to cancel auto-renewal because of technical difficulties), there will have to be some sort of PR problem for it to happen. Otherwise, communicating just isn't important enough.
Who knows? At the New York Comic Con, maybe I can corner someone into telling me why, then share that with everyone else here.
Damon
PS. I don't like being ignored. Makes me more persistent.
I think also, the Preview articles probably weren't compiled into the individual issues (although I personally wish they were) because Wizards/the RPGA didn't want them available in LFR which I can kind-of understand since they're only 3 level previews.
WotC, before I have to pester the sh*t out of some innocent employee of yours at a con, when they'll likely have tons of other stuff to do, would you respond to this?
Damon