[Dragon] Differences Now and Then?

[WizarDru]

Now I have a question, and one that I've been meaning to ask: I have heard, more than once from different posters that Dragon used to be great, and now is not. I can certainly understand that. What I'm curious about is when WAS it great, exactly? Can you point to an issue or a run where it served your needs best? I ask this not in facetiousness, but in all honesty. I suspect that the answer will be that you want something different out of the magazine than I do, ultimately.

My memory reminds me of all the things that Dragon used to do that I didn't like, as well as what I did; things like article after article about falling damage, Jester NPC classes or debates about Gandalf being a 4th-level wizard or 5th-level druid. Which is not to say that there weren't tons of things I did like, as there were; things like What's New and Wormy, articles by EGG, Sage Advice, game reviews, historical reviews and so forth. But I find the usable content ratio is much higher, for me. Have I forgotten what made Dragon better in the past, is it difference in taste, nostalgia, or something else?

 

[Alzrius]

I've only been reading for about a hundred issues now, but I have issues going back to the late 50's thanks to a friend giving away all his stuff.

In general, I have to say I prefer the way it is now to the way it was. We've seen things like the Forums (which I hated) be cleared away, and perhaps best of all is how the magazine now focuses just on D&D, and not on all those other games as well (the ARES section was just wasteful IMO, most of those games are gone now anyway, but old 1E and 2E articles can still be used). And of course, the page count has gone up, as has the quality pages themselves, and the quality of the binding (perfect bound, not stapled!).

All in all, things have only gotten better over the years!

 

[Buttercup]

but I have issues going back to the late 50's

If you mean 1950, well then, I can trump you. I've been reading Dragon since 1878!

(Hong wasn't around, so I thought I would do his reply for him.)

 

[diaglo]

guess which vote was mine.

 

[HellHound]

I really had to say I like them both.

There is a distinct difference between them (having subscribed in 1981 through 1984 and then again in 2001-2002), but I like them all.

I'd rather not have to read Gary's ranting about how house rules and other companies' products are ruining the game, etc...

 

[WizarDru]

(the ARES section was just wasteful IMO, most of those games are gone now anyway, but old 1E and 2E articles can still be used). And of course, the page count has gone up, as has the quality pages themselves, and the quality of the binding (perfect bound, not stapled!).

All in all, things have only gotten better over the years!

For the most part, I tend to agree, although I think some of the older issues had quite a lot of nice material. Personally, I think they've gone through several eras, and each had it's strength and weakenesses. The Forum section lost it relevance when Discussion Forums and the web came to town. Fans have moved online. A 3-month delay between writing a letter and getting a response, particularly to a pressing rules question, is no longer necessary.

The stuff towards the end of 1e was when I dropped out, as each issue became less and less interesting to me...the Ares section was something I'd really disliked and forgotten. I can't comment as much on 2e, as I skipped most of that era for D&D and Dragon Magazine...but what I've seen when I skipped back convinced me I didn't miss much, since I wasn't that interested in 2e, the Realms, Dark Sun or Dragonlance, for example.

Hellhound: what brand of beer is that? A local microbrew?

 

[HellHound]

AIEE!

The ARES section WASTEFUL?

Goodness... for most issues, if I coldn't find anything else awesome, I could always get some neat stuff for my other games from the ARES section. The sheer variety of articles stuffed into those back pages was amazing and mind-boggling.

 

[HellHound]

Wizardru: The beer in question is Hobgoblin. It's a fairly high-visibility beer in the UK, I've been told, but quite rare out here in the colonies.

I saw it and HAD to buy it. I mean, it's not every day you can come back from the store with a dozen hobgoblins in tow. "Look honey, I'm amassing an evil army of hobgoblins!" (my wife loved that).

 

[trentonjoe]

I don't how to vote so I'll sum it up.

The early dragons rocked! I still pick up and read issues 50-120 quite frequently. I liked all the new monsters, spells, the ecology articles, the forums, the new classes, etc.

Somewhere after 125ish until 225 dragon really sucked in my opinion. THere grew to be to many articles on stuff other than D&D. Maybe I am in the minority but I didn't play top secret, boot hill, marvels, or alternity and frankly I didn't care.

Lately, like the last 7 years or so, when they changed the print style (so you can see the issue # when its on it side) it has seemed like it went back to its older form. More D&D stuff. Trentonjoe likes it.

To sum up (again) as long as they put D&D stuff in it I am happy. I am never gonna use all (or most) of the articles but I am gonna use something. THe more they put, the better the chance I am gonna use something.

PS That is why I am looking for to the ENWorld Players Journal. That should be full of stuff. WooHoo!

 

[EricNoah]

Dragon can never be what it once was, simply due to the one-way nature of time. Back then, it was THE way for TSR to communicate with gamers, and for gamers to communicate with each other. We have a thing called the Internet nowadays. We have a choice between downloading the D&D FAQ from the wizards.com website, or reading Sage Advice in Dragon Magazine -- so in a way, Dragon is no longer "required reading" the way it once was.

Back then, D&D was nearly a one-man show, and having that one man, Gary, writing in the magazine was vitally important. Nowadays you really can't point to "the guy" in charge of D&D's rules, and so we get varying amounts of optional rules, prestige classes, feats, etc. from the different designers (submitted, no doubt, to Dragon just as if they were free-lancers). Only rarely do we get "official" new rules in Dragon, so again, the "must-read" factor is lower.

So good or bad, better or worse, many of the differences, to me, are ones that we really can't expect Paizo to do much about. Heck, maybe they need to change *more* in some way, get out of the shadow of the old Dragon that they can never be.