An Open Letter to Dragon and Dungeon Readers

[Ulrick]

I have an idea.

The should COMBINE the two magazines into one uber-magazine called

Dungeons & Dragons--The Magazine!


Of course, then people would be upset because theres too much Dungeon and not enough Dragon and vice-versa.

 

[Nighthawk]

We'll continue to support the Living Greyhawk campaign in Dungeon with "Living Greyhawk Approved" articles similar to the City of Hardby we ran in #109. Dungeon #114 also has an adventure usable as an introduction to the LG campaign, set in the city of Greyhawk. Dungeons #117, 118, 119, and 120 will contain a massive four-part poster map of the World of Greyhawk similar to the FR map published in Dragon a couple years ago. Wolf Baur's got a module on tap set in the Land of Black Ice, and I've also got Sean Reynolds at work on a Greyhawk adventure. Greyhawk fans will have lots to like about the new Dungeon (as will Eberron and Forgotten Realms fans--lots of exciting stuff for those settings coming up as well).

--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dungeon Magazine

This is great news to me! Very cool. I am really looking forward to seeing these issues (I do have a subscription). I am one of those people who are content to see Dungeon in any format. With regards to Dragon, I will take a wait and see attitude. I like the concept, so that's a good thing. The most significant subscription issue that I have is having all the issues reach my home (and in good condition). Overall, the content of both magazines is satisfactory.

 

[borc killer]

If any of you have not meet Keith at the cons I can assure you that he means everything he says. If he says it is going to be the best at something it will be. And boy do I feel sorry for who ever is to blame for the subscription problems hehe!

Borc Killer

 

[d20Dwarf]

I'm not sure why the Wil column is important. Why not get Wil Upchurch instead?

Best. Idea. Ever.

 

[Vigilance]

Once again every genre that isn't fantasy gets the shaft. I subscribed strictly for the mini-games and won't be getting the magazine anymore.

I love how they want to focus solely on D&D to the point of killing the mini-games, but they have space for miniature articles, computer game articles, and a Wil Wheaton column.

In other words, they have plenty of space for things that aren't D&D, just not Polyhedron.

The people dancing on Poly's grave are probably the same folks who whined about the 10 page Ares Section in the old Dragon till they killed that.

Chuck

 

[Psion]

I do advise you though, the next time you print multiclassing progressions,
that whoever wrote up a cleric/ranger 10/10 with the cleric level first, losing
out on all the ranger skill points (even under 3.0), shouldn't be allowed to
write Class Acts.

I thought multiclass progressions were neat at first, but I've come to beleive their value is pretty vacuous. I mean, do we really need an article to tell us what level to take next, and what benefits you get at those levels? I think that's fairly trivial.

 

[d20Dwarf]

I thought multiclass progressions were neat at first, but I've come to beleive their value is pretty vacuous. I mean, do we really need an article to tell us what level to take next, and what benefits you get at those levels? I think that's fairly trivial.

that's what I was thinking. It's sorta like "gee, thanks for telling me I get a bonus feat at 2nd level fighter!"

 

[Agamon]

Very cool. Thanks for the info, guys. I was just about to let my subscription run out...I've changed my mind.

 

[Agamon]

The people dancing on Poly's grave are probably the same folks who whined about the 10 page Ares Section in the old Dragon till they killed that.

I actually didn't mind Ares. And I would have been happy to see Poly in Dragon. But not Dungeon.

 

[Keith F Strohm]

Once again every genre that isn't fantasy gets the shaft. I subscribed strictly for the mini-games and won't be getting the magazine anymore.

I love how they want to focus solely on D&D to the point of killing the mini-games, but they have space for miniature articles, computer game articles, and a Wil Wheaton column.

In other words, they have plenty of space for things that aren't D&D, just not Polyhedron.

Chuck

Chuck,

I understand your frustration about losing Polyhedron. It was a difficult choice for us to make, but it was clear that we needed to make it. Sales data, discussions on forums, snail mail, and personal email were sending us a message we couldn't ignore.

Non-fantasy genres don't "get the shaft" because we don't like anything outside of fantasy. Many people at Paizo are passionate about other genres in roleplaying (and I think the quality of the d20 mini games are proof of that). The reality is that the collective readership of the magazines and the RPG marketplace in general prefer fantasy content. We don't necessarily create the market force in question here, but our livelihood (and the future of the magazines) depends on our ability to listen to it and respond with what the market wants.

I know that as a multi-genre fan that's got to suck to hear--and I wish that we could make everyone happy and make our magazines successful. The truth was that Dungeon under its current format wasn't truly accomplishing either of those goals.

As far as what is going in those magazines in the future, I wanted to (hopefully) clear something up. The miniature and computer game content is going to appear in Dragon and not Dungeon. It will be D&D focused and will generally take up about as much space in the "new" Dragon as it does currently.

I hope that there is a time when the magazines will once again prove useful to your gaming needs. I want to thank you for your post, and your patronage of Dragon and Dungeon in the past.

I hope we see you again.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC