[Dragon] Lack of historical articles

[Krug]

No I don't think Dragon sucks, but looking through recent issues, there seems to be far less historical stuff. Oh sure, why bother putting them in when you can easily look through this and this?

Well I think these articles are great for grounding one's campaign. They were a great help and always good for providing ideas. As one can see from Expeditious Press Magical Medieval Europe sales, there is interest in these areas.

My 2 coppers.

 

[alsih2o]

if it helps at all i have been posting a group of historical lonks every monday - http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46158

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45279

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44414

and they are free

 

[alsih2o]

NO! It DOES'NT help! How dare you provide links to useful information. And for free?!

You'll burn in Hell for this one, Oh Potter of the Clay.

mom? is that you?

 

[Joseph Elric Smith]

if it helps at all i have been posting a group of historical lonks every monday - http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46158

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45279

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44414

and they are free

nice links
ken

 

[jgbrowning]

I looked through my dragon archives CD and there was quite a bit of good historical stuff that seems to be missing in the newest incarnation of Dragon. Personally, I think are a few reasons for this.

1. Its hard to do. Most people when they make up new stuff for DnD go through the difficult creation/balance part. When you do historical stuff you also have to do a lot of research before you get to the difficult creation/balance part.

2. IMHO, there is a assumption that this type of material isn't interesting, ie. won't sell. The only company putting out historical D20 stuff is Avalanche and, i think they're insulting their audience with their cover choice. (Lets not start that arguement again ok? It's just my opinion.)

3. IMHO, i think many publishers are selling to a market that's matured beyond what the last study shows. Five years ago the market may have been mostly 18-21 year olds, but now they're all 23-26 and have different interests. Also, unlike any other time in DnD we have more late 30's and 40 year olds playing. They have very different views on what is a "good" product for their games.

4. There actually may not be a shortage of historical based articles being sent to Dragon. They may just not be buying. That's up to Paizo to clarify if they wish.

Of course, this is pure hearsay. If anyone knows of more current information than the last survey done by WotC, i'd like a look at it.

joe b.

 

[Krug]

Re: Re: [Dragon] Lack of historical articles

It's my understanding that DRAGON takes submissions. In fact, a lot of articles in DRAGON are from schmoes like you and me.

Why not write one and submit it?

Me? Write? Submit? Ogay... what is this 'stamp' thing? 'Grammah'?

 

[Krug]

I looked through my dragon archives CD and there was quite a bit of good historical stuff that seems to be missing in the newest incarnation of Dragon. Personally, I think are a few reasons for this.
...
joe b.

I agree with you there Joe. Some of the old Dragon articles are great stuff, and not just for D&D. I did enjoy the cities of history articles they did when Dragon went 3E.

 

[Eosin the Red]

I did enjoy the cities of history articles they did when Dragon went 3E.

Those were some of my all time favorite articles...but they were too short. I also liked seeing the historical figures written up. And the Red Sails issue.

Gee, are we seeing a trend?