An Open Letter to Dragon and Dungeon Readers

[wingsandsword]

*sigh*

Dungeon, well, there's $7 a month I can save. I only bought it for the d20 Modern/d20 Star Wars/Mini-Games. I subscribed to Star Wars Gamer, it bit the dust, I was about to finally get off my duff and subscribe to Polyhedron, scratch that.

Adventures? I really don't need any more. I don't run D&D often (d20 Modern is my game of choice, followed by Star Wars, then Forgotten Realms, so I run D&D, but it's down the list), and between the issues of Dungeon I already have (everything since they were Dungeon/Polyhedron), and all the adventures that have been up for free download on the WotC site (both 3e adventures, and old 1e/2e adventures put up for free download), I could probably run an entire campaign out of the box.

The changes to Dragon make me very wary. I've bought Dragon every months since 3e came out, and admittedly I probably still will, but I'm afraid the game-useful material will be choked out by flashy, vapid coverage of computer games I don't care about (there is a reason I don't subscribe to any video game mags).

Dragon used to have really cool articles, like the Planar Factions article in issue #287 for one. Lately though, it's been a lot of PrC's that fill character concepts that are already filled by other PrC's or feat trees or something else, Feats that are so specialized that they would never come into play in most games, lots of flashy pictures pushing new products (and not a lot of useful stuff about those products), and it seems like re-hashes of old concepts. Maybe it's just a rut of having been around for 300+ issues over almost three decades, but I just feel like I'm seeing the same thing over and over most of the time.

What about new clerical domains (occasional, but not often done)? New planar cosmologies? New base classes for unusual campaign styles (something it seems like is rarely done, Sage, Physician, Engineer, Sailor, European-style Monk are examples). More stuff on quasi-historical gaming? Ideas for very-low magic, low-magic or very-high-magic games. Maybe dust off a few old settings and see how they shape up in 3e (I loved that old "Campaign Classics" issue last year). The Shannara issue was cool, how hard would it be to do one-shots of other fantasy novels (I know there are licensing deals to make, but it could be a great thing). What about issues with themes of campaigning in a quasi-Greek, or pseudo-Egyptian setting?

I don't mean to be to harsh about Dragon, but a few years ago (early in 3e), they were rich with "crunch", very legible and easy to read (while all the color recently sure is flashy, it seems to distract from the actual text much of the time), and it really felt like it was adding a lot with every purchase. Now it seems more like a habit, and one article might be useful or funny.

 

[Sigurd]

Dungeon Should be for Dungeons

The more Dungeons you can get into Dungeon the better.

Ditch Polyhedron & Lower your prices

or

Ditch Polyhedron & Give us 5 dungeons an issue. No dungeon smaller than 3 pages.

If you can't pay for more than 3 professional High layout dungeons gather the best of the web for 2 small dungeons an issue.

I know its not as simple as counting the dungeon's in an issue, artwork, layout detail, etc... all are essential, but it seems like now you produce roughly 3 dungeons an issue plus polyhedron. How much will things really change?

My 02

Sigurd

ps. just my opinion, 'Challenges' are beneath you guys. I'd rather pull a portion out of a real dungeon with possible leads to more material than be given an isolated encounter.
If you want to do 'Challenges' set yourself a goal for a calendar year and detail the workings of a goblin\orc army such that all the challenges work together. The more context you provide the less work I have to do as a DM and the happier I am as a customer. If I go ahead and do too much work and rewrite everything you give me, thats my choice, but I still want to absorb the atmosphere and context of individual dungeons.

 

[TeaBee]

I just resubcribed to Dungeon for 3 years, a month ago or so. I did it for (98% for) the Polyhedron content.

To say I'm dissapointed is an understatement. I feel cheated.

For any other companies out there reading this, I'm willing to pay for a nice mag full of Star Wars/d20 Modern/mini-games/etc.

I don't think I would have resubscribed at all if I knew at the time...

 

[Keith F Strohm]

So, Keith, I'll ask again... Has there been any consideration given to test marketing a mini-game or a mini-game expansion in the electronic market, whether from the Paizo website or RPGNow? I don't know how the PDF Bundle sold that was advertised in Polyhedron a number of months ago, but it seems like you have built-in advertising/marketing, and a semi-captive (and I assume receptive) audience with your subscribers and buyers.

Thanks,
Jason

Jason,

Sorry, I think I missed your originnal question. We've definitely thought about it. However, Paizo is a relatively small company, and our resources (from editing right down to marketing) are stretched thin at the moment. Once we move past the relaunch of Dragon and Dungeon, launch Amazing, and overhaul our website, we'll give this possibility another look.

But, mini-games do take a lot of effort on the art directors and editors. We'd only do it if we felt we wwouldn't be jeopardizing the quality of our magazines.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC

 

[MacMathan]

The changes sound good to me.

As for Wil Wheaton, give the guy a chance.

I like him on Tech TV, he writes well in his books and blogs.

As if that were not enough he had a nice piece in KoDT this month also.

He represents the 30ish, gamer w/ a life that I see as many of the people here on EN World.

I remember seeing him at game cons 15 years ago and that is when "Kill Wesley" pins were the rage and being sold at the same Con. So he has done more than dabble in our hobby.

 

[beta-ray]

I understand the economic realities of the situation but I am still saddend by the decision to stop the D20 stuff in Dungeon. But if the audience of this board is any indication (kind of a sad one at that), it is the right thing to do.

I haven't been that much of a pure D&Der for a while, looking for more of a variety of things. I wonder about the support that D20 Modern, Future and Star Wars will have. Oh well, good luck to you. I probably won't be buying Dungeon much except possibly for special occassions.

Good job on the minigames by the way. Much of them were inspired and creative.

 

[RodneyThompson]

Well, it's a little disheartening to see Polyhedron go away (since most of my articles have been in Poly). Still, you can't fault the guys for trying to cater to gamers, eh? Never let it be said that the company is run by those blind to the needs of roleplayers.

 

[Bagpuss]

Never let it be said that the company is run by those blind to the needs of roleplayers.

Don't you mean mini-gamers and computer gamers?

Having read that letter I've decided I'll be saving some money each month as well. First of they are removing all the Polyhedron content (to be fair this has often been so Fantasy orientate in recent issue as to be near useless), and yet not significantly increasing the number of Dungeon adventures, so you pay the same for less. Then they are adding computer and wargame articles to Dragon, and so must remove RPG content to find the space, again pay the same for less.

We the good news is I won't have trouble with subscriptions anymore since I don't intend to have one.

 

[Balrog]

I must say that for myself I am pleased with the sound of these changes. I never liked the addition of Polyhedron to Dungeon. I have used Dungeon adventures since the SINGLE DIGIT issues to supplement my DnD gaming material, not provide me with useless d20 games. give me Dungeon by itself and let the customers decide with their dollars.

I do like the overall concept of having Polyhedron content moved to Dragon, as I have felt for quite some time that Dragon was more of a players mag anyway.

Dungeon magazine should be a source of DM material for their DnD games, not a source of monthly tangent d20 material that appeals to about 20% of the audience.

 

[Alzrius]

I'm sorry to see Polyhedron go. Not so much because I had any special attachment to it, but because its a rather iconic staple as far as long-term D&D magazines go, and seeing it bite the dust is hard.

That said, I'm also slightly worried over the almost-total lack of support for d20 Modern this will generate. I don't own d20 Modern, but I want to, and articles like FEAR, and Dark*Matter: Shades of Grey were just incredible. Now, the only resource for Modern d20 is its website on WotC's page.

I'm also slightly worried about the new features that Dungeon will include. While I certainly understand the mindset behind putting DM-focused articles into Dungeon, this worries me somewhat...what the majority of people seem to want out of Dungeon is a greater number of published adventures. Replacing the lost Poly content with DM-content may be a step in the right direction, but at the end of the day, it's still pages in the magazine that aren't being used for adventures.

For Dragon, there isn't much I can say, because honestly, to me, it sounds almost exactly the same as the Dragon I'm seeing now. We already have content about miniatures and computer games...I just hope we keep the current trend with having those articles provide something (new spells, new monsters, etc.) in the mechanics of the tabletop D&D game itself. I do want to add that I find the new races section to sound cool. That will be exciting.

I've been subscribing to Dragon for almost a hundred issues now, and to Dungeon for almost thirty (and buying it off the newsstands for a while before that). I can honestly say that I will never let my subscriptions to either one lapse. While some of these changes may not be exactly what I was wishing for, there isn't a doubt in my mind that I'm going to enjoy the end results. Keep up the great work Paizo!