• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Another Dragon #300 thread - kill the tie-ins

SemperJase

First Post
Sernett said:


There is only one article that could be called a product tie-in in issue #300.

Thank you for responding to my post. I disagree with this point though. The bulk of the feature articles in the issue relates to the 'vile' themes.

Which brings us to the next point:

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."

Perhaps my perceptioin is a matter of timing. As I received this issue near the beginning of September, I did not think of it as the October (i.e. Halloween) issue. Based on previous issues, it seemed timed more for the coming product (which I'm sure not coincidently is coming out in October).


[List of authors]

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

You got me there. But if you are claiming that the article by Monte Cook (author of BoVD) discussing how vile your campaign can be is not a tie-in, you're trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

I think we have here the classic case of a very vocal minority trying to foist their opinion on everyone else. If Dragon's sales are at it's peak, then Dragon is the best ever, no question about it (unless that just reflects the industry, which is a tricky argument not worth starting here, probably.) I certainly wouldn't take the complaints of a few whiners on the ENWorld messageboards as any kind of substitute for market research.

That said, I'll gladly offer my viewpoint of Dragon and what I'd like to see in it.
  • Plug-n-play "setting" info. Stuff that can be used in lots of different settings. One of my favorite issues, for example, was the one about clerics that had lots of information on how to build pantheons. The Worldbuilder issue had a lot of good info in it as well. In fact, the whole Dungeoncraft theme is one that I love Dragon for -- and where else can you get that kind of stuff?
  • Prestige classes. Sure, a lot of folks grouse about them, but another 2-3 each mag is great. Sure, I won't use most of them, but unless someone writes them, I don't get to make that decision, do I? The more I have, with a variety in themes and abilities, the better off I am as a homebrewer.
  • Rules for things, as the Sigil mentioned, that you can't get anywhere else. Airships, underwater combat, mass combat, etc. are hard to come by. If Dragon had at least one article per issue that addresses a situation not covered by the rules and took a stab at codifying it, that'd make it worth the cover price alone.
  • Comics. I like 'em! I miss some of them. Certainly don't cut the ones you have.
  • Themes. I also like 'em. I don't necessarily want them to completely dominate the issue, but at least if I want an article, I can quickly find where it is by just looking at the cover. Plus, if the idea is a good one, you want more support for it, not just a tiny portion of it. There's some synergy around themed issues, I think.
  • Artwork. More Wayne Reynolds! :) I like the look of Dragon currently.
  • Like JeffB, I would like more how to rather than completed projects, but keep the completed projects coming to! I do miss more how-tos though. The issues that do have them are invariably my favorites. Even if I already have my own opinions on the subject!
 

Flexor the Mighty!

18/100 Strength!
Tom Cashel said:


Oh, I dunno...my favorite article ever was the "Random Damage Table." With entries like "Roll every die you own for damage," "Roll every die within ten feet for damage," "Your character smells smoke; his left arm is on fire. Roll 6d6 damage," and my personal fave...

"Your character cuts himself shaving. Roll 10d10 damage and consult limb-loss subtable."

I still threaten my players with that!:D
 

Paladin

Explorer
No comments on the tie-ins....

...but what happened to the spell template transparency that was mentioned in # 299? It was supposed to be in # 300...did mine just get abducted by the postman, or was it never there?
 

alsih2o

First Post
Johnny Wilson said:
Johnny L. Wilson
President of Paizo Publishing, LLC and Publisher Who Pays Attention


hoo-ah! well spoken. nice to have some facts bog down the conversation.

lately i would alsmot tell you that some members of these boards are owners of dragons competition or something.
 

SemperJase

First Post
Johnny Wilson said:
DO you want reviews of PC games, RPGS and books in the magazine?

Not really, I never buy games or books based on reviews.

DO you want non-D&D material in Dragon?

I like Dragon being the "official" D&D magazine. That said, I like the DMing articles (which I suppose are not technically D&D specific). I don't care to see other gaming systems products included.

DO you want miniatures coverage in Dragon?

Even though I'm not a big collector of minis, I always read these articles. So my answer is yes.

DO you want more pages devoted to humor?

April is good for me, but make sure they are actually funny. Easier said than done, I know.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to us.

Also, my comment that it was a 'crummy' magazine was unneccessarily derogatory (and I believe out of character in my posts). Dragon is one of my favorite magazines and I intend to renew my subscription when it is due.
 

WizarDru

Adventurer
JeffB said:
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.

Just grabbing the Psionics issue off of the shelf: An article about Races of the Underdark, Instant Dungeon Tiles, 101 wondrous whereabouts, an article about DM logjams and how to resolve them, Ed Greenwood's regular FR article, an article about magic masks, a fiction piece, an underdark Bestiary, and the usuals, such as Sage Advice, Nodwick and What's New....oh, and some articles about Psionics. The majority of the issue had nothing to do with Psionics...so I don't see how it would be so useless. Including the portraits page, that's 26 pages out of 112. You may not have found much of use, but I think you'd be in the minority, there.


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).


Well, I think that does a disservice to Erik Mona, who I think has been doing an excellent job, but to each his own. While I think it was better as a standalone magazine, I think some of the material, such as the Death Knights articles and the articles on Onwal and others have been excellent. Your mileage obviously varies.

I also think it's unfair to expect LGJ to publish material that's not on it's charter. The LG triads decide things like what Rary's up to, and what's been going on in the greater Flanaess, not the LGJ, which just reports some occasional material. What the LGJ has been doing is excellent, IMHO.

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.


I might use this, if it weren't so, IMHO, poorly done. Having played Asheron's Call for 2.5 years, I was confused when I read the article that not only showed little grasp of day to day life in Dereth, but was mechanically useless, from what I could tell. An article on Portal Magic would be interesting...an article on 'nerfing' or robes would be funny. These articles are generally neither useful or entertaining to me.

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).


Gotta disagree with you, here. Read the 'See Invisible' spell, and try and figure it out. Read the Shilealegh spell, and then check for the long, bitter thread about it on the Rules forum. The sage at least tries to put them in perspective and give a clue about their reasoning. Sage Advice is consistently valuable to me, even if I do agree sometimes the answers seem obvious, sometimes they are deceptively not.

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.


This sounds an awful lot like the tie-in material we already recieve, honestly. The extra elemental material when RttToEE came out, for example. The irony is that this sounds like the themed material you earlier mentioned you didn't like. It's all in the eye of the beholder, really. If I didn't want to use Sigil or Sunless Citadel, they'd be just as useless as an article about Psions are to you.

To answer your questions, Johnny:

I think humor is like MSG...best used sparingly to add flavor. I don't dislike it, but I don't want it to overwhelm the regular content.

I like reviews, but I can see the concern some might have. I would like them, but if you were to restrict them, how about some of the stuff Dragon used to do in the day, such as reviews of non-rpgs (like Elfenland and Dragon's Gold, for example) and rpg-related computer games. Dragon used to have some great reviews a while back...but I understand it's a thorny subject. I'd like it, but I understand if it can't be put there.

Miniatures coverage: teaching me to paint is good. Showing me tricks of using minatures, clever marking schemes and things to do with miniatures are all fine. Chainmail and rules articles are not, to me. I read the Chainmail articles for the settings, but ignored the rules material and scenarios.

'non-D&D' articles I like are the historical articles, the music and film articles (even though I massively disagreed with the authors at various points, they were fun reads), and game-running articles are good, too. Anything that might enhance my game is good. Your judgement has been good so far...suprise me. :)

Previews of new material on one page is good. Articles are not, to me. I'll buy it or not, but I don't want three or more precious pages dedicated to redundant content. If I'm going to buy it, I don't want to read it three months earlier...if I'm not, it's of no use to me. The 'getting ready for the realms' material and the D&D movie articles were big wastes of paper for me. Others might feel differently. :D
 

JeffB

Legend
Originally posted by WizarDru


Well, I think that does a disservice to Erik Mona, who I think has been doing an excellent job, but to each his own. While I think it was better as a standalone magazine, I think some of the material, such as the Death Knights articles and the articles on Onwal and others have been excellent. Your mileage obviously varies.

I also think it's unfair to expect LGJ to publish material that's not on it's charter. The LG triads decide things like what Rary's up to, and what's been going on in the greater Flanaess, not the LGJ, which just reports some occasional material. What the LGJ has been doing is excellent, IMHO.





I find the LGJ much less useful these days. I don't mean to hurt someones feelings, but that's the way I see it. I have alot of respect for Erik and love his work, but I also know he's been constrained in doing the kind, amount and frequency of GH work he'd like to. The stand-alone mag was very good..I'd like to see that kind of variety again. Since it's been put in Dragon I feel the quality of material has lessened.

I understand the how the LGJ is supposed to support the campaign, but you don't have to give away major plotlines or spoil things for the campaign players either. History, rumors, lore, creation Myths, etc has no big effect on the that goings on in the LGH campaign (which is mostly 4 hour H&S Dungeon adventures at Cons)


This sounds an awful lot like the tie-in material we already recieve, honestly. The extra elemental material when RttToEE came out, for example. The irony is that this sounds like the themed material you earlier mentioned you didn't like. It's all in the eye of the beholder, really. If I didn't want to use Sigil or Sunless Citadel, they'd be just as useless as an article about Psions are to you.

Nope , because they didn't take up the amount of space the themed issues do on such matters. The article on the RoSP was a few pages, in a non-themed issue (as was the RttToEE article you mentioned). SOME product tie-ins are fine with me...not issues that revolve around the theme and take up a goodly portion of the mag. Go look at some of the old GH and Mystara articles from the late 190's to the early 200's. They took up about 4 to 8 pages.

I'll cede to your point on the Psionics issue simply because I sold off my 3E dragon collection a few months ago (tells you how much I think of them) and my recollection is apparently wrong in that case.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree...I think Dragon is a shadow of it's fomer self. The first year after 3E arrived was pretty good after a few years of dissapointment inthe last years of 2E, but since last summer it's been overall very poor, IMO of course. #300 was just the cherry on top.

I'm just voicing my opinion here on the subject at hand, I'm not saying you have to agree, nor am I asking for an argument. I don't consider my opinion based on "nostalgia" either, but on USEFUL gaming material (to me, obviously). It seems that many folks equate NEW with BETTER and I don't agree. QUANTITY does not equal QUALITY either. If I'm getting more pages of stuff that I think is "crap", AND I'm paying more money for it, it really doesn't matter, do it? :D

BTW...I'm curious if those sub numbers are up because of the new edition or because the mag is better? Can we get figures on the rise in subs just prior to and at 2E' and 1E's release?What about 2 years after theirr respective releases? And are these numbers also based on percentages of people who actually play the game AND also subscribe? Seems to me that there are MANY more folks in the hobby now than when 200 and 100 were released. So the proportion of people who play D&D and also sub vs. those who play and don't sub is more important, not the actual numbers Mr. Wilson speaks of, AFAIC.
 

WizarDru

Adventurer
JeffB said:
I understand the how the LGJ is supposed to support the campaign, but you don't have to give away major plotlines or spoil things for the campaign players either. History, rumors, lore, creation Myths, etc has no big effect on the that goings on in the LGH campaign (which is mostly 4 hour H&S Dungeon adventures at Cons)

Well, that material I would like to see again. I liked the 'country by country' updates on rumors and goings-on. It was a great source of ideas. I take your point.


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree...I think Dragon is a shadow of it's fomer self. The first year after 3E arrived was pretty good after a few years of dissapointment inthe last years of 2E, but since last summer it's been overall very poor, IMO of course. #300 was just the cherry on top.

I'm just voicing my opinion here on the subject at hand, I'm not saying you have to agree, nor am I asking for an argument.


Nor was I trying to say you didn't have a right to your opinion, or that you were wrong. I truly just wanted to get a better sense of why you find the current incarnation so disappointing, when I don't, and I think I've got a feel for that now.

BTW...I'm curious if those sub numbers are up because of the new edition or because the mag is better? Can we get figures on the rise in subs just prior to and at 2E' and 1E's release?What about 2 years after theirr respective releases? And are these numbers also based on percentages of people who actually play the game AND also subscribe?

A valid point, although I can tell you that I wouldn't be picking up Dragon if the quality wasn't there. In this age of the web and electronic communication, I can get much of the same types of material that Dragon provides online. I know that there's been a surge of people who left prior to or during 2E who came rushing back with 3E...heck, I was one of 'em! But I don't think most of them would still be there 2.5 years later if they thought Dragon was terrible...you yourself are proof of that. I think it may be a combination of the two, perhaps.
 

The Traveler

First Post
Flexor the Mighty! said:
Dragon is just a large advert for WOTC. It's days as a great roleplaying resource are far behind it.
Which is highlighted if you're one of those who got the anniversary compilation CDs before they were yanked due to the copyright woes. Mindblowingly good stuff in some issues, and not really much that can compare to it now.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top