Dragon #344

[James Jacobs]

Also, the Dreadhold article sounds more like a backdrop that belongs in Dungeon. Stat blocks for the guards and maps of the area? I'm not complaining, I just don't understand the decision here. If someone wanted to write an article like this one where would be the best place to send it to?

This article did indeed start life as a backdrop in Dungeon, but we could never find space in an issue for it. Eventually, we decided that in order for a backdrop to appear in Dungeon there had to be an adventure associated with it, and since at the time we didn't have a Dreadhold adventure it got kicked over to Dragon for publication rather than just sitting on a cool article and not publishing it for a year. You can probably expect to see similar backdrop-like articles appear now and then in Dragon, actually, as cool articles come in.

If you have an idea for a backdrop-type article, it's probably best to pitch it to Dragon unless you also want to write an adventure to go along with it. Keep in mind that the competition for backdrop/adventure combos in Dungeon is pretty fierice; we've pretty much filled all our open slots for these out through October 2007, so if you want a chance to see an adventureless backdrop in print this year, Dragon's the go-to place for submissions.

 

[Alzrius]

May I ask what are the alternate dracoliches please? And the stats of Aurgloroasa?

Aurgloroasa is a female ancient shadow dragon dracolich.

The sidebar on alternate dracoliches is relatively short. It talks about how any creature of the Dragon-type can become a dracolich, such as a half-dragon. Note, however, that the section on becoming a dracolich does give three alternative dracolich creation methods: The Well of Dragons, spiritgorgers, and soul substitution.

This is an Alphatian artifact? Or the Nucleus of the Spheres (a Glantrian artifact)?

Sorry, my last post on this wasn't very clear. I previously said "their artifact," and the last specific place I'd mentioned was Glantri. To be more specific, the last paragraph of the sidebar is discussing Alphatian views of the artifact at Glantri.

Also, is there a timeline given for the article? It sounds like it takes place around 1001 AC or so when the last one left off, and not post-Wrath of the Immortals, but I can't tell for sure.

This is done as a "lost" article being uncovered now. It's got a part number and everything (thirty-six), so it seems to be set contemporary to all of the other Princess Ark articles. No timeline is given, however.

BTW, thanks for answering the questions- myself and other Mystara-philes have been itching to see this article for a while now.

My pleasure!

 

[Snapdragyn]

I'm so glad to see backdrop articles in "Dragon"; I love them! This one in particular is great, since a very short-lived adventure run by our regular DM was set on a fantasy Alcatraz; I'd planned to use his notes for a session in the campaign I'm starting, and now have lots more prisony goodness to use!

 

[Zaukrie]

Another very good issue. The Three Wizards article was, I am sorry to say, one of the worst in recent Dragon history. It does nothing at all other than introduce three new spells. Very, very uninteresting. Fluff is ok, but you should learn something about the characters/world/anything!

The Princess Ark story was good - very good. I also enjoyed the Gord story, though three pieces of fiction may be a couple too many for future magazines.

I enjoyed the new dragons - though I thought the ecology of the dracolich article was a little light on content. I'm not sure what more I wanted, but it seemed light. I still say I enjoyed the monster hunters' style of ecology articles a lot more than the dry versions we get now (and, no, that is not contradictory to what I said above).

I really like the new version of the class acts, much better.

How do you rank the best dragon minis and leave the large red off of the list?

Whatever you are paying Rich for OotS is not enough!

 

[Razz]

Kostchtchie is indeed being covered in Fiendish Codex I. HOWEVER: There's very little reprinted information between the two sources; the Demonomicon articles and the Fiendish Codex support each other quite nicely without reprinting too much information.

The Demonomicons present a LOT more information about specific demon lords, but they do so only one at a time. The Fiendish Codex presents a LOT more information about multiple demon lords (there are 14 with stat blocks and nearly 80 in all with at least a sentance or two of info).

I suppose the closest analogy between the Demonomicon articles and the Fiendish Codex would be to compare them to the monster ecology articles Dragon runs and the Monster Manuals they come from originally.

Ah yes, good work then. I don't mind seeing a few reprints here and there in books, because not everyone has access to the original source, I just get annoyed when like half the material of a particular type (spells, feats, etc.) are reprints.

 

[Arnwyn]

The Three Wizards article was, I am sorry to say, one of the worst in recent Dragon history. It does nothing at all other than introduce three new spells. Very, very uninteresting. Fluff is ok, but you should learn something about the characters/world/anything!!

This article probably suffered a bit if you had not read the previous entries in the Wizards Three series.

I, OTOH, am pleased that there's another Wizards Three article.

 

[Zaukrie]

I think I've read them all. However, my recollection is that there were rumors of what was going on in the worlds. There were conversations that could be used in games. This was a food fight, with nothing new to offer to any game. I'm usually not this harsh, but man, it offered nothing. That, and it was basically the third piece of fiction in the magazine, the other two of which were interesting reads.

 

[Zaukrie]

I think I've read them all. However, my recollection is that there were rumors of what was going on in the worlds. There were conversations that could be used in games. This was a food fight, with nothing new to offer to any game. I'm usually not this harsh, but man, it offered nothing. That, and it was basically the third piece of fiction in the magazine, the other two of which were interesting reads.

 

[Nightfall]

Well what I missed mostly was not seeing Dalamar in the picture. Of course with the problems/time anamolies that DL suffered because of the whole transition from 2nd to 3rd (along with that period where DL wasn't a WotC/TSR setting any more) makes it easy to understand why. Still I miss seeing Dalamar gripe to Elminster. It was always fun.

 

[Erik Mona]

The Princess Ark story was good - very good. I also enjoyed the Gord story, though three pieces of fiction may be a couple too many for future magazines.

This issue was a special case, because all three of the fiction pieces in some way tied into the history of Dragon. The Princess Ark and Wizards Three articles hearkened back to long-running columns in the magazine, and Gord the Rogue made his first-ever appearance in Dragon #100.

I don't expect to publish this much fiction in a given issue in the future.

--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon