Dragon #361 and Dungeon #152 news

[Vigilance]

I'd never heard that wizards was using unpublished material. I really doubt it, given that most of the non-adventure stuff revolves around pitching 4E fluff and reporting playtests.

Q. Has there been any sort of decision about what will happen with articles sitting in the slush pile over at Paizo?

A. Chris Thomasson and Bart Carroll are responsible for D&D online editorial content (among other things) and are currently going through all of the submissions for Paizo. So we’re planning to put as much of that content to use as we can.

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=862010

Here we go.

My guess is that at least some of this material was in various stages of development by Paizo, especially while the magazines are still releasing 3e content.

I also thought the author of the Tsojcanth update had specifically mentioned that he had been going back and forth with the Paizo guys about that (iow it was originally slated for the print magazines).

I also think this just because of how long Dungeon and Dragon stuff seems to be in the pipeline before release.

 

[Garnfellow]

Um, aren't the articles Wizards is publishing now articles they got from Paizo?

It seems really, really soon in the process to be saying "the Paizo writing was great, the Wizards writing sucks".

I seem to recall hearing that they'd received Paizo's unpublished articles and were going through those.

Something pulled from Paizo's slush pile is NOT the same thing as a Paizo finished product. Not even remotely close.

For that matter, something written by a Paizo staffer is not the same thing as a Paizo finished product.

I figure editing makes up at least a quarter to a third of an article, if not much more.

Now that said, I think your point is somewhat valid -- I'm sure that some people's prejudices are making them view these DI articles less favorably than they would have if they read them in a Paizo magazine. (And I'm sure there are folks who are reading these articles much more favorably just because they now have WotC's special imprimatur.)

But people's perceptions aren't just getting spiked by a Paizo/Wizards bigotry. For example, I had a helluva time trying to log in to read the Demonomicon article. For whatever reason, there was a day or two there where Gleemax seemed to hate me. So by the time I did finally get in and read it, I just really wasn't in the mood: it seemed pretty good, but not nearly as spectacular as earlier installments. Now was the Graz'zt article really, objectively inferior to its predecessors? Doubtful. But what are you gonna do?

 

[Vigilance]

Something pulled from Paizo's slush pile is NOT the same thing as a Paizo finished product. Not even remotely close.

For that matter, something written by a Paizo staffer is not the same thing as a Paizo finished product.

I figure editing makes up at least a quarter to a third of an article, if not much more.

Wasn't Chris Thomasson an editor for Paizo when they were publishing the magazines?

 

[Demmero]

Wasn't Chris Thomasson an editor for Paizo when they were publishing the magazines?

Yep. I just checked a Dungeon mag from 2003 and he was listed as the editor. And if I'm not mistaken, he was the guy who pushed to make Adventure Paths a regular part of the magazine.

I think at least the Dungeon side of the D&DI mags will make the transition online just fine.

 

[Glyfair]

My guess is that at least some of this material was in various stages of development by Paizo, especially while the magazines are still releasing 3e content.

Not development, submitted. Someone wrote to Paizo suggesting an article.

In fact, James Jacobs has commented that the Tsojanth adventure was one that Paizo had rejected.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Not development, submitted. Someone wrote to Paizo suggesting an article.

In fact, James Jacobs has commented that the Tsojanth adventure was one that Paizo had rejected.

See, I really wish this hadn't been brought up in a public forum. Because now I have to address it in a public forum, and I hate doing that.

The expansion to Tsojcanth--parts 1 and 4, written by myself and C.A. Suleiman--were submitted to Erik Mona over a year before James Jacobs took over as editor of Dungeon. And at the time, Erik had accepted them for publication--not just the ideas, but full drafts of the articles--but subject to certain changes and rewrites. By the time all was said and done, however, the editor position had changed, and James (very politely and professionally, I must say) decided they didn't fit with what he wanted.

I hold no animosity over this. It was his right as editor at the time, as no contracts had been signed, and I'd love to work for him again as Paizo moves forward. (Also, it would have appeared in the midst of Savage Tide, which was also pretty demon-heavy. And although I didn't know it at the time, I'm sure the ending of the magazines played a factor.)

But my point in mentioning this is that it's very easy for people to hear "Oh, that was rejected by Paizo" and therefore assume that there's some objective flaw. The fact is, what one editor rejects another loves, and that in this case, there were people at Paizo on both sides of the fence.

 

[JoeGKushner]

But my point in mentioning this is that it's very easy for people to hear "Oh, that was rejected by Paizo" and therefore assume that there's some objective flaw. The fact is, what one editor rejects another loves, and that in this case, there were people at Paizo on both sides of the fence.

I agree.

But we can't have it both ways. We can't point out that this is great because it's what Paizo would've done then change up when it turns out it's NOT what Paizo would've done.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I agree.

But we can't have it both ways. We can't point out that this is great because it's what Paizo would've done then change up when it turns out it's NOT what Paizo would've done.

I'm not "trying to have it both ways." I'm explaining the history of the piece. As to whether it's good or not--or whether it would've looked different if it had appeared in a Paizo-run version of the magazine--I make no claims. (Well, no claims beyond the fact that I obviously think it's at least decent, or I wouldn't have submitted it. )

 

[JoeGKushner]

I'm not "trying to have it both ways." I'm explaining the history of the piece. As to whether it's good or not--or whether it would've looked different if it had appeared in a Paizo-run version of the magazine--I make no claims. (Well, no claims beyond the fact that I obviously think it's at least decent, or I wouldn't have submitted it. )

It would've looked better in Paizo's hands simply because they could give it the proper graphic treatment.

The WoTC site still needs a lotta work in that respect. Not too fond of the layout or download methodology, etc... etc... etc....

 

[Garnfellow]

Wasn't Chris Thomasson an editor for Paizo when they were publishing the magazines?

I'm not sure, but I think that was only for the first year or so. Hasn't he been full time with Wizards since 2003 or 2004?

But it brings up an important point: the Paizo era wasn't exactly monolithic. I think they had just picked up Dragon when the magazine went "player's only" with disastrous results. Once Mona held the reigns there was a fairly steady trajectory of improvement.

If it helps, I think that when folks write glowingly about Paizo, I think they're really talking about (more specifically) Paizo under Mona/Jacobs.