Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Let's read the entire run
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 5723097" data-attributes="member: 27780"><p><strong><u>Dragon Magazine Issue 253: November 1998</u></strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>part 1/8</p><p></p><p></p><p>124 pages. Hmm. This is a nice cover. Certainly a good bit of light relief compared to the more blatant supernatural covers. It is a bit cheescakey, mind, but they've done worse (issue 114, for example) The theme this month is another look at magic, magic items in particular. Well, I suppose we've got to have something to beat the new undead they introduce every year. The arms race continues. Will the players or the DM benefit most from this issue? Guess we'll have to carry on and see. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Scan quality: Excellent colour, but no indexing. A few slightly angled pages. </p><p></p><p></p><p>In this issue:</p><p></p><p></p><p>The wyrms turn: Having finally got rid of book and RPG reviews, it seems a great irony that they're now thinking of starting up a minis column again. Swings and roundabouts. But I suppose they will push playing with minis more in the next edition. I wouldn't be surprised if the people responsible for that decision are already working here. So this editorial is devoted to selling readers on the idea, and asking them what they want in it. Well, this is interesting. Since I was never particularly interested in minis, it's not as welcome as the gaming reviews, but it certainly adds a bit of variety and gives me something to think about. And if there's a place they should be announcing changes to the magazine, this is it. At least they're not trying to work jokes in the whole time. </p><p></p><p></p><p>D-Mail: We start off with some praise for Ed Greenwood, and the other old greats of the company. He's stuck with the magazine through thick and thin. The others should come back too! I think many of them are earning way more working for computer game companies. And TSR did get rather stressful near the end. They may well be happier where they are. </p><p></p><p>A letter pointing out that Thulsa doom IS an original R.E.H character, but from a Kull story rather than Conan. That's egg on Justin Bacon's face. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Another letter, this time pointing out that while some characters have been through so many hands it's hard to say which is the right interpretation, this does not apply when the first author is still fully known and in print. Well, maybe in the case of comic books, but those were always collaborative anyway, with the artist as important as the writer in building the character. </p><p></p><p>A letter criticising Dave Gross's editorial from issue 248. He stands by his basic point though. Fun is crucial for a game. Everything else is not. Therefore it has to be the first priority. Worry too much about everything else and you'll suck out the primary reason for doing this in the first place. </p><p></p><p>A request for a bit less crunch, more general roleplaying advice. I think at this stage, they have trouble providing either without repeating themselves. But there's more different bits of crunch they can add to the game, so that's why things have slanted towards that as time went on. The stuff in the old magazines is still perfectly valid. </p><p></p><p>A letter full of ideas for who might play the Dragonlance characters in a movie. Most of them are a bit old for that now. The passage of time sucks. Mind you, we did get a Dragonlance movie in the end. And that sucked too. Sucking all round! There's plenty for everyone, and that doesn't suck! </p><p></p><p>A letter praising their artwork in recent issues, and in particular that of Rebecca Guay. They already have repeat commissions from her, rest assured. This is one area they don't intend to skimp upon. </p><p></p><p>And finally, yet another letter that asks about submissions procedure. They're more email friendly than they used to be, but they still want the damn SASE's for the manuscript itself. It's just the way they still roll, despite adding days to revision times.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="(un)reason, post: 5723097, member: 27780"] [B][U]Dragon Magazine Issue 253: November 1998[/U][/B] part 1/8 124 pages. Hmm. This is a nice cover. Certainly a good bit of light relief compared to the more blatant supernatural covers. It is a bit cheescakey, mind, but they've done worse (issue 114, for example) The theme this month is another look at magic, magic items in particular. Well, I suppose we've got to have something to beat the new undead they introduce every year. The arms race continues. Will the players or the DM benefit most from this issue? Guess we'll have to carry on and see. Scan quality: Excellent colour, but no indexing. A few slightly angled pages. In this issue: The wyrms turn: Having finally got rid of book and RPG reviews, it seems a great irony that they're now thinking of starting up a minis column again. Swings and roundabouts. But I suppose they will push playing with minis more in the next edition. I wouldn't be surprised if the people responsible for that decision are already working here. So this editorial is devoted to selling readers on the idea, and asking them what they want in it. Well, this is interesting. Since I was never particularly interested in minis, it's not as welcome as the gaming reviews, but it certainly adds a bit of variety and gives me something to think about. And if there's a place they should be announcing changes to the magazine, this is it. At least they're not trying to work jokes in the whole time. D-Mail: We start off with some praise for Ed Greenwood, and the other old greats of the company. He's stuck with the magazine through thick and thin. The others should come back too! I think many of them are earning way more working for computer game companies. And TSR did get rather stressful near the end. They may well be happier where they are. A letter pointing out that Thulsa doom IS an original R.E.H character, but from a Kull story rather than Conan. That's egg on Justin Bacon's face. :) Another letter, this time pointing out that while some characters have been through so many hands it's hard to say which is the right interpretation, this does not apply when the first author is still fully known and in print. Well, maybe in the case of comic books, but those were always collaborative anyway, with the artist as important as the writer in building the character. A letter criticising Dave Gross's editorial from issue 248. He stands by his basic point though. Fun is crucial for a game. Everything else is not. Therefore it has to be the first priority. Worry too much about everything else and you'll suck out the primary reason for doing this in the first place. A request for a bit less crunch, more general roleplaying advice. I think at this stage, they have trouble providing either without repeating themselves. But there's more different bits of crunch they can add to the game, so that's why things have slanted towards that as time went on. The stuff in the old magazines is still perfectly valid. A letter full of ideas for who might play the Dragonlance characters in a movie. Most of them are a bit old for that now. The passage of time sucks. Mind you, we did get a Dragonlance movie in the end. And that sucked too. Sucking all round! There's plenty for everyone, and that doesn't suck! A letter praising their artwork in recent issues, and in particular that of Rebecca Guay. They already have repeat commissions from her, rest assured. This is one area they don't intend to skimp upon. And finally, yet another letter that asks about submissions procedure. They're more email friendly than they used to be, but they still want the damn SASE's for the manuscript itself. It's just the way they still roll, despite adding days to revision times. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Let's read the entire run
Top