Dragon 361 Editorial

[JoeGKushner]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dred/20071221

Wow.

Way to tell me how I'll be playing the game for the next SIX months minimum.

On one hand, we have Dungeon. Several new adventures. So obviously people are playing the game.

On the other... Dragon. No new mechanics because no one is going to be playing? :\

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Huh.

Seems like a pretty reasonable approach to me.

 

[megamania]

See WoTC foot

See WoTC gun

See Wotc shot own foot......

 

[Ry]

defensive editorial... chris sounds demoralized.

I feel for him, but the only way to make the criticism go away is to step up to the plate and make the magazine awesome.

 

[Reynard]

If we were to print a new 3.5 prestige class tomorrow. Will having this class improve your D&D experience? More importantly, will it even make it into your game?

We talked about these questions and more, and felt the answers were "No" and "Extremely unlikely." And the same was true as we went down the list of all the rules elements in the game. Monsters? Same situation. Feats? Even less likely to find a place at the table. Magic items? Maybe most likely to see play, but still only minimally.

What if the PrC is tied to an oprganization a la DMG II, with fairly standard entry prerequisites? What if the monster is a cool variation on an old theme, making it easy for the DM to slip it in to existing and/or planned adventures in place of a more typical D&D monster? What if the feats are built for taking standard, mid-level characters down a path toward a particular, interesting focus or niche? What if the magic item is something one can base entire adventures around?

Five months is a long time. Those that play weekly can probably engage in an entire campaign in that time. Adeventures are all well and good for those that use them, but cutting out the homebrewers by offering nothing of value to their games means they won't be following Dragon, which means they won't be engaged in it once the time comes to pony up. They'll say they get along just fine without it, and it is dollars lost -- or worse yet, dollars redirected toward some other company that is willing to continue to support 3.x through this transition.

See, WotC, here's the thing: we don't actually need you to play D&D. It is your job to convince us otherwise, or at least make it a palatable enough illusion that we are willing to lay down our hard earned dollars.

 

[C.W.Richeson]

I don't see how advertising 4E will be of use to me in 6 months. I've still got the long line of Dragons advertising 3E, and amazingly I don't consult them. At least with a new Class, PrC, or other 3.5 content it's something to play with and incorporate into my current games.

For me that was what Dragon was always about. Read the latest issue, see something cool, incorporate it into a game. I have tons of old Dragons, but with so many other resources I certainly don't go hunting through them for content.

 

[DaveMage]

Seems like more of the same from the online mags - much ado about nothing.

 

[szilard]

I understand the desire not to load the magazine with crunch that will cease being useful to most of its readers in a few months.

On the other hand, the things they are loading the magazine with (4e previews) will cease being useful to most of its readers in a few months.

How about some 4e-compatible fluff? Edition-neutral (or dual-statted!) quasi-crunch? Fiction? DMing advice? Roleplaying advice for players? Articles on inspiration for gaming? There's all sorts of things that could be offered that would continue to be useful.

-Stuart

 

[Agamon]

Two of the biggest arguments against 4E:

1. I have too much 3.x content I haven't had a chance to use yet

2. They haven't told us enough about the new game.

I think they're taking the right approach, even though I agree that what they've put out so far isn't all that interesting.

 

[JoeGKushner]

June is still six months now right? Jan, Feb, March, April, May... June. Yup. Six. Not a few. Not three. Six.