Another Dragon #300 thread - kill the tie-ins

[Sernett]

Wait, don't hit that lock thread button.
This isn't about ethics or morality of 'vile' content.

What I'm thinking now is that issue #300 should have been a landmark issue. Thinking back to issue #200 it seemed more of a big deal that they hit that issue.

When I got issue #200 as a subscriber, I was amazed. Looking at the magazine coming out of the mailbox, like most readers I was surprised and excited by three things: the magazine's size, the new binding, and the holograph on the cover. What I and most readers didn't understand was how much those three factors made the magazine cost. To be frank, issue #200 made TSR lose money—a lot of it. It was an incredibly popular issue among subscribers and newsstand buyers alike, but it lost money all the same. This fact was mollified somewhat by the idea that the magazines were a marketing vehicle.

For a long time, the magazines at Wizards of the Coast were viewed as marketing vehicles, but over time that outlook changed. The magazines had to improve quality and increase circulation to survive. We did—Dragon now has a larger circulation than it ever did before—but not enough to outweigh the profitability and decreased risk of licensing the magazine. They were sold to Paizo Publishing, a new company formed by investors and the people who worked on the magazine because we have faith in the magazines. But make no mistake, Dragon is not merely a marketing vehicle anymore; it must make money every issue, or it will cease to exist. Fortunately, most people think we're doing a pretty good job. Like I said before, Dragon is at its peak right now and shows every sign of climbing higher.

Issue #300 has its expensive parts: the gold ink on the cover, the sealed section binding, premium authors, and the multitude of full-color art pieces. These expenses are risks, and as anyone who has worked for a start-up company knows, risks can be deadly. Greater risks, such as adding another 60 pages and a hologram on the cover would have broken Dragon's back; there's no supporting company able to shoot itself in the foot and swallow those costs for the sake of marketing.

Now with 300 they have one article about the evolution of the magazine, then devote the rest of it to a product tie-in.

There is only one article that could be called a product tie-in in issue #300. "Secrets of the Skinscribes" uses some rules from the Book of Vile Darkness, but it gives you all the rules you need to use every spell or alternate rules if you don't want to use them. Every other article in the issue is the same type of horror/dark/evil content that Dragon has had in nearly every October issue in since issue #1 of "The Dragon."

Instead of the heavy product tie-in, why didn't the publisher go with a more general overview? Get a big name fiction writer to do a short story. A guest article by some big names: Cook, Greenwood, even Hickman!

"Up on a Soapbox" by Gary Gygax
"Hellish Fangs on Abyssal Wings" by James Wyatt
"How Far Should You go?" by Monte Cook
"The Flesheaster" by Monte Cook
"Secrets of the Skinscribes" by James Jacobs
"Elminster's Guide to the Realms" by Ed Greenwood
"The Minions of Darkness" by Eric Cagle
"The Risen Dead" by Wizards of the Coast R&D

If you don't know who these authors are, check out the credits pages of the books on your shelves.

So we get a crummy product tie-in for 75% of the mag. Aim higher, don't go for an issue that will be irrelevant when the next product comes out, but one that will be looked at as a standard for the next 100 issues.

Wait, oh no. What if that IS the standard for the next 100 issues?

With more useful game content for D&D in issue #300 than in issue #200 and #100 combined, I'd like to say that issue #300 sets the standard for the next 100 issues, but Dragon serves the needs of the majority of readers better with each new issue, and we're always trying to raise the bar.

Matthew Sernett
Associate Editor
Dragon Magazine

 

[Desdichado]

I didn't see #300 to be necessarily a product tie-in. Villains are certainly applicable across just about any campaign setting I can imagine, and stuff like the fiendish dragons, hag's magic items, etc. have nothing whatsoever to do with the BoVD.

There also were a lot of big authors -- James Wyatt, Monte Cook, etc. What exactly were you expecting that they didn't deliver?

 

[feeb]

It's great to see someone at the Dragon staff caring enough to catch a thread like this and nip the particulars of the scare tactics in the bud. I now really wish I had a copy of issue #300. I had personally hoped to get to do work for it, simply because I figured it would be a landmark issue. I didn't really care much that I missed that issue until this thread came to light. I haven't even seen it yet.

Like I said in my first post on this thread (which I felt compelled to edit once I read the post from one of those responsible for my bread and butter), Dragon invites people to write to them for any suggestions they feel would improve the quality of the magazine.

Frankly, I'm not much of a gamer. I know enough to do a good job on the artwork, and leave it at that (and learn as I go... using my gamer friends as invaluable resources)... so speculating on the functionality and article integrity of the mag is hardly within my realm of argumentative theory. I buy the magazine when I see some art that moves me... which is happening more and more, it seems. I also buy up multiple copies of the issues I have artwork in, but that's a given. I just wanna see some friggin' cool art! For that, I think the magazine has succeeded in spades.

 

[JeffB]

.Like I said before, Dragon is at its peak right now

I beg to differ, content and creativity-wise.

I'd like to say that issue #300 sets the standard for the next 100 issuese

Then I certainly won't be resubbing for the next 100 issues.

Sorry to be harsh, but If Piazzo think's Dragon is at it's best right now, then our mindsets are so far apart it's scary.

I had high hope that the magazine would be changing for the better, seems we shall see more of the same..sigh...

 

[WizarDru]

Sorry to be harsh, but If Piazzo think's Dragon is at it's best right now, then our mindsets are so far apart it's scary.

I had high hope that the magazine would be changing for the better, seems we shall see more of the same..sigh...

I'm curious what issues of the past you would give as an example of how Dragon should be, as opposed to how it is, now.

Many of my older issues of Dragon, pre-3E, were interesting, but not terribly useful. Currently, I've yet to have an issue of Dragon (the Drow issue notwithstanding) that didn't have a good chunk of content for my use. Even the Shannara issue, which is one of my least favorite of the past three years, still had some good content I made use of in-game. Far more useful than, say, the Jester NPC class, for example.

Do I miss the reviews section? Yes, I do. Do I like the fiction? Not particularly. I usually don't read it, despite the quality, as it's not what I buy or read Dragon for....I can get that from other sources. I feel the same way about the Chainmail articles and wish they'd review PC games, instead of doing silly pseudo-feat articles about them. I don't take much interest in Ed Greenwood's material, but certainly can see how many (possibly most) do. And so forth.

But I do think that, page for page, the Dragon currently is far superior to it's previous incarnations by leaps and bounds. Issue 300 was not the landmark issue I'd expected, to be sure...but it was a good issue. Lots of good content, nice art and the promise of improvement. I think the real problem is that folks were looking for the magazine to 'wow' them, and it really doesn't. It performs, but it's not really that special in the way you would hope such an anniversary issue would be. I agree, but I don't see that so much as a failing as a missed opportunity. I certainly understand the business decisions that led to it.

So what do you think would be an improvement for Dragon Magazine? I think the editors would be much more interested in what you feel they're doing wrong than the simple quote above.

 

[Malakye]

I like the theme style Dragon is using. I may have some months that aren't as useful as others but if I want info on knights, for example, I know there is one issue I need to read to get the most info on that specific subject. I think of dragon as mini supplements I get every month on different subjects.
Like somebody said in a previous post, I may not use anything from a particular Dragon right now in my current campaign, but I'll probably be going back to it later for future campaigns.

 

[Johnny Wilson]

Frankly, we’re a little confused about all of this Dragon #300 bashing. We’ve built this magazine based on what our readers have told us that they like and dislike. Over the few years I’ve been associated with Dragon as publisher, I’ve seen lots of emails and letters indicating that: 1) no one would trust role-playing game reviews in Dragon because we are so closely tied to Wizards of the Coast R&D; 2) no one wants computer/video game reviews because they can purchase specialized information to get that; 3) book reviews in Dragon would be tainted by the fact that many of us on the staff write for WotC books; 4) coverage of other game systems than D&D is a waste of space; 5) convention information is better handled on the web and is both out-of-date and redundant in the magazine; 6) miniatures coverage is only appealing to a small minority; 7) theme sections are a bad idea; and 8) previews of upcoming products are the equivalent of advertorial. Add to these considerations the fact that almost 50% of our readers hate having humor in Dragon and you’ll see our quandary.

As part of the #300 bashing, we are told that #200 is the watermark for which we should shoot. Earlier, I posted a warning that #300 was not going to be a super-fat issue like #200 was. Truthfully, #200 was the only perfect-bound issue of Dragon in the year it was published (has a spine instead of being stapled together). It was 172 pages long, but it contained 1.3 pages of convention coverage, two pages of puzzles (which always rank low in reader evaluations), 13 pages of comics (a roughly 50-50 split among our readership), five pages of computer game reviews, two pages of book reviews, 4.5 pages of RPG reviews, three pages of board game reviews, three pages of Star Wars RPG coverage, and five pages of miniatures reviews. Subtract this 40.3 pages of material that your reader surveys have told us you don’t want from that 172 pages and you’re down to 121.6 pages total. Subtract the 62.3 pages of ads and you’re down to 59.3 pages of useful content. Ironically, 17.3 pages of that is THEME coverage (29%).

Since I was in that accounting mode, I decided to look at the two issues on each side of #200. I discovered that #199 had 124 pages. Of that, there were four pages of PC reviews, 4.5 pages of RPG reviews, 3.5 pages of book reviews, 2.5 pages of Shadowrun coverage, 1.5 pages of convention coverage, five pages of comics and five pages of miniatures reviews. That’s 26 pages of coverage that most people tell us they don’t want and reduces the theoretical usefulness count to 98 pages. Subtract out the 43.3 pages of ads and you’re down to 54.6 pages of useful content with, once again, 17.3 pages of themed content (31%).

Dragon #201 had 124 pages. Of that, there were 3.5 pages of PC reviews, five pages of RPG reviews, four pages of book reviews, two pages of convention calendar, eight pages of comics, seven pages of miniature reviews, and three pages of King Arthur: Pendragon coverage. That’s 32.5 pages that most people don’t want even BEFORE you count the four pages of advertorial for the AD&D Historical Reference series. Since our readers don’t even like the .33 page we usually give to previews of WotC products or the tie-ins we try to provide with useful gaming material, we’re relatively certain that this is really 36.5 pages of unwanted material. That drops us to 87.5 pages of “useful” material. Take out the 32.5 pages of ads and you’re down to 55.2 pages. THIS time, there were 30 pages of themed content (54%) with only 25.2 pages of non-themed useful content.

Okay, so much for counting the past. What’s the deal with the present? I looked at Dragon #300 and discovered that only 2.3 pages were devoted to comics and 2 pages to Silicon Sorcery, our attempt to cover PC and video games while providing useful spells, artifacts and ideas. None of the other stuff was in there. So, the 118 pages for the run of book were reduced by 4.3 pages for the non-useful stuff. That’s a count of 113.6 pages to work with, but 30 pages of those were ads (take note those of you who think today’s Dragon issues have too many ads—this is a lower ad count than in the glory years to which you refer), reducing us to 83.6 pages of useful stuff. There were 15 pages of sealed section material dealing with the Vile theme, a four page introductory article to the Vile theme, and two pages of prestige class material that probably belonged in the section. That’s 21 pages of themed coverage (25%--less than any of the other three) and left 62.6 pages for non-thematic goodness (or evil, as the case may be).

Now, what this little accounting exercise tells me is that many of you are simply remembering the old Dragon with a heavy nostalgia factor that has colored your memory or the research we’ve been building the magazine from is faulty. DO you want reviews of PC games, RPGS and books in the magazine? DO you want non-D&D material in Dragon? DO you want miniatures coverage in Dragon? DO you want more pages devoted to humor? IF you do, you need to make sure you fill out the next readership survey (Spring, 2003). We take seriously what our readers say and, as you can tell by the very way we build the book, percentage-wise, our editorial philosophy reflects what you have to say.

So, I’d just like to say that after comparing issues #200 and #300, I’m more convinced than ever that Dragon is doing a better job of meeting gamer needs than it was 100 issues ago. You are certainly welcome to your opinions, but I thought a few measurable quantifiers should be injected into the discussion.

Johnny L. Wilson
President of Paizo Publishing, LLC and Publisher Who Pays Attention

 

[Chroma]

Johnny L. Wilson
President of Paizo Publishing, LLC and Publisher Who Pays Attention

Wow! That was one of the best rebuttals I've seen in a long time. Keep up the good work Mr. Wilson!

And, thanks for Dragon.

 

[Aeolius]

6) miniatures coverage is only appealing to a small minority

Now THAT gave me a chuckle


What did I find useful in #300? My campaign is set underwater and deals quite often with hags. With that in mind...

"Hellish Fangs" – Liked it. Back in 1e AD&D (pre fiend, half-fiend, and planetouched), I devised the “planar dragons”, the Dun (half-dragon(red)/half-fiend (devil)), Indigo (half-dragon(blue)/half-fiend (daemon)), and Teal (half-dragon(green)/half-fiend (demon)). Note how well they translate into “3e-speak”.

“Hands of Hags” – Woo-ho! Written just for me. I appreciate that.

“How Far Should You Go?” – Looks like I run a “Mature Game”

“The Minions of Darkness” – Deep Thrall and Shoal Servant...I will be using these.

“The Flesheater” – needs a space, as it looks like “Fles Heater” to me. It reminds me of the Wendigo, as presented in DRAGON many moons ago.

“The Risen Dead” – You oughta see my bonehags. They would put a bog mummy to shame.

“Ecology of the Mummy” – any article which mentions canopic jars gets my thumbs up.

“Living Greyhawk Journal” – as I run a campaign set in the World of Greyhawk, but choose to set it in uncharted seas and then run the game online, these pages are somewhat of a mixed blessing.

Oh...and Dixie’s still a hottie.

 

[JeffB]

Well, I’ve gone through this before on the umpteen threads previous….Sigh…

1) Cut out the heavy themed issues. I can kinda be lenient about 300 since it WAS an October issue, but last year’s October issue tackled the themes much better. Monte’s article on “how vile is your game” was pretty useless. A paragraph could have sufficed on such a subject i.e. If you plan on doing something in the game that may be “Vile” discuss it with your group”…end of story. I don’t need a multi-page breakdown on it.

Fact is, that the more narrow the theme, the less useful it is to the majority of readers. October and April (perhaps) I can see as having themes, otherwise, nope. The Stronghold issue was totally worthless to me. I won’t begrudge those who need that stuff, but the majority of an entire issue? Same with the Elves, and Psionist, and Dwarf and Drow, and Underdark, and blah blah blah issues. I don’t use Psionics: majority of issue is worthless. On the things that ARE core (mosteveryone uses Elves, or Dwarves) Split that content up over the year. A cool article on Dwarven language. Then next month one on maybe Dwarven Ale..whatever. There were far fewer themed issues in the past, and when they did do one, it was rarely the majority of the mag.

2) I don’t mind stuff like PRClasses. Let’s see more how to articles instead of “here we completed the project for you”. I like tools, not completed projects that I may or may not (usually) use.
3) Personally I like Ed’s articles, and I don’t even game in the Realms. How bout mixing those articles up with Prclasses and Feats and whatnot that tie-in. Like the Halfling Brewery which is a Zhentarim front thing that was in one of his articles a few issues ago..How about a Zhent Prclasses to go with that?..Zhent spy or something. Most of the Prclasses I’ve sen in Dragon are so bizarre I would never use them for NPC’s let alone PC’s. They always seem to be tied into some “kewl” new feats or abilities. How about using them for Organizations that might grant feats that help with RP aspects (Underground Contacts: You can use this feat once a week to get piece of information you have been seeking…etc etc..) Instead.we get “Improved Super-Sneak Attack” and similar drivel.
4) Living GH Journal has gone downhill. When it was a separate entity it was very well rounded..PR classes, campaign news, Maps, Info on the City of GH, Adventure Hooks, etc. Other than “Drow” issue, it’s been a front for more prestige classes lately. How about some articles on GH history, creation Myth, Locales, Lore, rumors, etc. Other than Alan’s article on GH magic items (which while a great article Alan, and I appreciate the work was not terribly useful if you didn’t have all those books). What’s happened to the Ghost Tower of Inverness? What’s Rary up to? Older Dragon Mags supplied this kind of info (either Gary’s stuff, or the Campaign Classics series in the early 200’s).
5) Silicon Sorcery. Aye…this needs to go. An excuse to put it more feats and spells, etc. How many people use this?, really? I don’t even read it.
6) How about some Industry news? The Ennies? GenCon? You don’t have to devote 10 pages an issue but a page or two every couple of issues is not a big deal, is it?
7) Sage Advice takes up WAY too much space per issue. Especially when the questions can be answered by reading the rulebook (remember “why does an ½ Orc get a total –2 (or whatever) to his ability scores?” Do we need a paragraph explaining that? There’s usually a question or two like that each issue..How about “read the rulebook..page XX” (or don’t even bother putting it in).
8) Not everyone who reads Dragon is looking to break away from the classic themes of the game. E.G. Steampunk & GH2000 articles, however cool, should be on the website or split up over the course of time..not in the same issue (see #1 above). If you are going to do an article on Sorcerer’s how about writing some “alt. Sorcerers” not from a rules standpoint but from a standpoint of “In your game Sorcerers need not be considered Dragon Blooded, perhaps they were X, perhaps They are Z, etc etc.)
9) I’m all for fluff..the Ed G articles and similar…people complain about that kind of stuff, yet they have no problem with 10 pages of Fiction..blech…I’ve never liked Fiction in Dragon unless it was small part of an otherwise gaming-related article. And I certainly don’t want to see STATS for the characters.
10) PC Portraits. How useful are these to people? Really? The art is certainly of lesser quality than usual for Dragon..if you ARE going to do it, do it right: Let Sam wood, Wayne Reynolds or whomever do it.
11) No more political BS from Johnny Wilson. I could care less what his feelings about Criminals not being able to play D&D are. One article was way too much.
12) One thing the old Mags did was expand upon released product..though in recent years it seems to be more of “stuff from the cutting room floor”. How about articles like we saw about the Rod of Seven Parts box (where they gave advice on tying the box set into the various campaign settings). How about an expansion to the Sunless Citadel perhaps with a short but detailed history of the place? A 3E Perspective on Sigil? A mini-adventure that features a new critter in the MM2? More mini-campaigns (not necessarily having to do with a certain campaign world, but certain themes…Invasion, natural disasters, Political (or monster territory) uprisings, the fall of a decadent society, genocide, planes/dimensions/alternate timelines colliding, etc.etc.

I’m sure I could come up with more but that’s all the time I have for now.