haiiro
First Post
Psion's thread about enjoying Dragon #304 really got me thinking about the magazine as a whole. I have a subscription, and I have every 3e issue in a big stack on my bookshelf - I like Dragon, and I always have. It's had its ups and downs, but overall I think it has remained an asset to the hobby.
For the last few months, however, I haven't been excited when I open my mailbox and find a new Dragon waiting for me. I page through it, maybe read an article or two, and then shelve it. By way of contrast, #304 really grabbed me from the get-go: great cover, interior chock full of useful and diverse material, and generally quality content. On the other hand, the cover copy really annoyed me, particularly: "IS 3RD EDITION DEAD?" (all the more so because the cover art is fantastic). Leaving aside the issue of overall enjoyment of Dragon, I want to look at the cover copy in particular.
Looking back over older issues, I realized that the cover copy has bothered me for a long time - often in an almost subconscious way. I gave it some thought, and here's what I came up with:
1. "IS 3RD EDITION DEAD?" has almost nothing to do with what's inside the issue. Yes, there's an article about 3.5e, but the tenor and theme of that article don't mesh with the "in your face" attitude of the cover quote. Nor does the content: the article emphasizes how WotC is taking player input and using it to tweak and update the game - not kill 3rd Edition.
2. It seems intended solely to get a rise out of the reader. In my case, I guess it worked.
I realize that one of the primary goals of any magazine's cover is to attract the attention of potential customers, and that Dragon has a lot more attitude overall since 3e came about, but this doesn't seem like the right approach to me.
3. Something about the cover copy strikes me as insipid - much like the cover copy you'd find on, say, magazines about teen fashion or boy bands. I don't think the cover of Dragon should look like the cover of Scientific American, but I don't think it should look like Tiger Beat either.
None of these points is true across the board, of course. Here are some counter-examples:
- "SLAY DRAGONS: CAN DRAGONS BE DECEIVED? Dragon senses explained" (#296) -- Eye-catching, but also succinctly informative.
- "NINJAS: 3 PRESTIGE CLASSES, SECRET HISTORY" (#289) -- Has the "ooh, cooool...ninjas" factor, but also tells you that you're going to get crunch (3 PrCs) and background (secret history).
- "FIGHT THE GODS: 23 Holy Relics, Complete Stats: 4 GREYHAWK GODS" (#294) -- Lots of new magic items plus god stats: you know right off the bat whether or not the high points of this issue are to your tastes.
On the other hand, here are some others that strike me as sensationalism for its own sake:
- "FREE XP, NO WEAPONS NEEDED" (#303) -- The article is about new uses and optional rules for social skills - which may not require weapons but doesn't add up to "free XP."
- "10 SECRETS YOUR DM DOESN"T WANT YOU TO KNOW!" (#278) -- The article is about plot hooks, which most DMs I know would love to have players include in their PC backgrounds.
- "SEX AND THE SINGLE ELF" (#279) -- Pulls you in for...a lengthy and serious examination of elven life and culture, with very little about sex. So even if you were looking for the humor factor that the copy suggests, you'd be disappointed.
Now, maybe I'm just a stodgy and boring person, but I don't think that's why this bugs me. For a hobby (way of life?) that generally draws people of above-average intelligence - often way above average - why market your flagship magazine this way?
All of which leads up to my real questions: who does this appeal to? Why? Does this bother anyone else?
I understand that this post could be taken as Dragon-bashing (which it isn't) so I've tried to be as thorough and even-handed as possible. By and large, I really enjoy Dragon, and I loved issue 304. But this topic has nagged at me for awhile, and I wanted to see what others had to say about it.
For the last few months, however, I haven't been excited when I open my mailbox and find a new Dragon waiting for me. I page through it, maybe read an article or two, and then shelve it. By way of contrast, #304 really grabbed me from the get-go: great cover, interior chock full of useful and diverse material, and generally quality content. On the other hand, the cover copy really annoyed me, particularly: "IS 3RD EDITION DEAD?" (all the more so because the cover art is fantastic). Leaving aside the issue of overall enjoyment of Dragon, I want to look at the cover copy in particular.
Looking back over older issues, I realized that the cover copy has bothered me for a long time - often in an almost subconscious way. I gave it some thought, and here's what I came up with:
1. "IS 3RD EDITION DEAD?" has almost nothing to do with what's inside the issue. Yes, there's an article about 3.5e, but the tenor and theme of that article don't mesh with the "in your face" attitude of the cover quote. Nor does the content: the article emphasizes how WotC is taking player input and using it to tweak and update the game - not kill 3rd Edition.
2. It seems intended solely to get a rise out of the reader. In my case, I guess it worked.
I realize that one of the primary goals of any magazine's cover is to attract the attention of potential customers, and that Dragon has a lot more attitude overall since 3e came about, but this doesn't seem like the right approach to me.3. Something about the cover copy strikes me as insipid - much like the cover copy you'd find on, say, magazines about teen fashion or boy bands. I don't think the cover of Dragon should look like the cover of Scientific American, but I don't think it should look like Tiger Beat either.
None of these points is true across the board, of course. Here are some counter-examples:
- "SLAY DRAGONS: CAN DRAGONS BE DECEIVED? Dragon senses explained" (#296) -- Eye-catching, but also succinctly informative.
- "NINJAS: 3 PRESTIGE CLASSES, SECRET HISTORY" (#289) -- Has the "ooh, cooool...ninjas" factor, but also tells you that you're going to get crunch (3 PrCs) and background (secret history).
- "FIGHT THE GODS: 23 Holy Relics, Complete Stats: 4 GREYHAWK GODS" (#294) -- Lots of new magic items plus god stats: you know right off the bat whether or not the high points of this issue are to your tastes.
On the other hand, here are some others that strike me as sensationalism for its own sake:
- "FREE XP, NO WEAPONS NEEDED" (#303) -- The article is about new uses and optional rules for social skills - which may not require weapons but doesn't add up to "free XP."
- "10 SECRETS YOUR DM DOESN"T WANT YOU TO KNOW!" (#278) -- The article is about plot hooks, which most DMs I know would love to have players include in their PC backgrounds.
- "SEX AND THE SINGLE ELF" (#279) -- Pulls you in for...a lengthy and serious examination of elven life and culture, with very little about sex. So even if you were looking for the humor factor that the copy suggests, you'd be disappointed.
Now, maybe I'm just a stodgy and boring person
, but I don't think that's why this bugs me. For a hobby (way of life?) that generally draws people of above-average intelligence - often way above average - why market your flagship magazine this way?All of which leads up to my real questions: who does this appeal to? Why? Does this bother anyone else?
I understand that this post could be taken as Dragon-bashing (which it isn't) so I've tried to be as thorough and even-handed as possible. By and large, I really enjoy Dragon, and I loved issue 304. But this topic has nagged at me for awhile, and I wanted to see what others had to say about it.
