Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Savage Wombat" data-source="post: 769125" data-attributes="member: 1932">Well, I've been reading Dragon magazine from the eighties, and one thing I've definitely noticed:No matter when you look, you'll always find people complaining that the magazine wasn't as good as it used to be.At least ENWorlders have demonstrated themselves actually able to articulate their criticisms.To add my .02:1) Personally, I don't see what's so bad about this latest cover.  It doesn't look that "cheesecake"-ish to me - especially compared to that long-ago issue with the naked woman on the tombstone.  Caused a bit of comment, that one.2) I do think the covers have gotten too heavy in the contents listings, and not very helpful ones at that.  The Dragon covers that were best were detailed art pieces, with beautiful backgrounds as well as striking foreground figures.  Now that's being lost, replaced with issue hype.3) I'm having trouble articulating this thought, but we'll see.  Anyway: it was a good thing that Dragon has been providing ideas and materials for new gamers and new GMs.  That said, I think they go too far with this.  For example, an article suggesting "apply the half-elemental template to fiends" is clever, but extremely obvious to long-term gamers.  When an article such as that takes up a lot of pagecount as well, by including detailed stat blocks for said creatures, it begins to wear.Enough of Dragon's readers have been gamers for twenty years, that they don't want to read articles every month that don't contribute anything new to their worldview.  We've had detailed threads here on ENWorld about things like building a real-world economy, or the ramifications of Raise Dead on the world economy, that would make interesting Dragon articles.  They wouldn't be for the casual, Diablo-style gamers, but they'd be a change of pace.  Give me something for my word count other than long repetetive stat blocks.Of course, this requires people to actually submit these articles, but you did ask what I wanted to see.4) I enjoy the comics you include thoroughly.  Although I think Phil is going through the motions a bit.  But if Aaron Williams asks you for more money, pay him - he conveys the true spirit of D&D, with all its virtues and faults, better than anyone.  And he's a better artist than the guys at KoDT.5) I agree the themes have been overdone in the past.  If you don't, for example, like Drow very much, then having three articles of "drow magic" and "drow weapons" following a long ecology article, coupled with a horde of drow NPCs - we've used up almost two-thirds the issue, and none of it useful to you.  Theme issues were better served by, say, the Halloween issue, with all sorts of various spooky things, but not all on one topic.6) I liked the silly April issues.  I think people who complain haven't seen some of the really hysterical ones from the old days.  Who out there remembers the adventure "Nogard", or the Wandering Damage Table?7) I don't read the fiction as a rule, but I've done so in the past enough that I think it should be included.  But it's not mandatory, and I'd like it to be short, and excellent.8) Personally, I don't care for articles that are nothing but "here's the write-up I did for these monsters from XXX computer game" - the fact that these seem to come along every issue makes it worse.All right, I feel that's enough for now.</blockquote>

Verification