Silver Griffon
Explorer
Oh yeah, and page 3 elves 
BTW, I'm one of the few other Americans who get that joke
BTW, I'm one of the few other Americans who get that joke
Last edited:
[Dragon] What would you do?
- Thread starter Eternalknight
- Start date
Ranes
Adventurer
Darn it! I was just about to go to bed...
Okay, I would remove the fiction. I'd keep the FR and Greyhawk material to a minimum but not remove it entirely. I'd axe Gary Gygax's column (sorry but...), hire a sub-editor who can spot the difference between 'it's' and 'its'. (The editor makes that gaffe in the editorial of 304; I like to think that I'm paying for high quality editorial, not stuff riddled with elementary errors. While I'm on the subject, these sorts of errors have been cropping up more in Dungeon recently, too.) As another poster said, I'd like to see clearer status of Sage Advice material. On the whole, I find the majority of the content colourful, readable and useful.
Somebody else mentioned moving all the ads to the back. That would never happen. Periodicals can charge more for a right hand facing page than a left hand one and more still for an ad dropped next to or within a specific article. Inside and outside back covers are also prime ad real estate. We need Dragon to generate as much ad revenue as possible. If the economics of magazine publishing in the States are anything like they are in the UK, the cover price only recoups the cost of printing. And I know that distribution in the States is more expensive than here in Britain.
Finally, I'd do something about the cover. A more mature approach to art and headline writing, a return to the old days, would suit me. And I suspect it would suit Dragon more than its staff seem to believe. A publishing truism is that cover art does not make a cover art! What that means is that the cover has a function that must be fulfilled. That function is to make the beholder become a purchaser. There are so many computer games magazines today that each has to try to out-do the other with ever-busier cover designs and lowest common denominator pseudo-shock headlines. It seems to me - and a reply to a letter in a recent issue of Dragon lends credence to my suspicion - that Dragon has deliberately followed suit in an attempt to whammy the potential consumer with a critical hit to the optic nerve. Where I go out on a limb and what I have no evidence for is the proposition that Dragon does not need to do this. It has no effective competition. It does need to attract new readers but it can only do so from the D&D user base; its content is never going to reach out to anyone else and the D&D user is going to be aware of Dragon. I'd like it therefore to adopt - or return to - the appearance of a journal about games of the imagination and a have little less of the comic book influence. Don't get me wrong, I do think the cover art is good and I do think the headlines are clever, usually. It's just that their style is just a little too tabloid for my taste.
Anyway, all of that and page three elves. And dwarves. And half-orcs.
Okay, I would remove the fiction. I'd keep the FR and Greyhawk material to a minimum but not remove it entirely. I'd axe Gary Gygax's column (sorry but...), hire a sub-editor who can spot the difference between 'it's' and 'its'. (The editor makes that gaffe in the editorial of 304; I like to think that I'm paying for high quality editorial, not stuff riddled with elementary errors. While I'm on the subject, these sorts of errors have been cropping up more in Dungeon recently, too.) As another poster said, I'd like to see clearer status of Sage Advice material. On the whole, I find the majority of the content colourful, readable and useful.
Somebody else mentioned moving all the ads to the back. That would never happen. Periodicals can charge more for a right hand facing page than a left hand one and more still for an ad dropped next to or within a specific article. Inside and outside back covers are also prime ad real estate. We need Dragon to generate as much ad revenue as possible. If the economics of magazine publishing in the States are anything like they are in the UK, the cover price only recoups the cost of printing. And I know that distribution in the States is more expensive than here in Britain.
Finally, I'd do something about the cover. A more mature approach to art and headline writing, a return to the old days, would suit me. And I suspect it would suit Dragon more than its staff seem to believe. A publishing truism is that cover art does not make a cover art! What that means is that the cover has a function that must be fulfilled. That function is to make the beholder become a purchaser. There are so many computer games magazines today that each has to try to out-do the other with ever-busier cover designs and lowest common denominator pseudo-shock headlines. It seems to me - and a reply to a letter in a recent issue of Dragon lends credence to my suspicion - that Dragon has deliberately followed suit in an attempt to whammy the potential consumer with a critical hit to the optic nerve. Where I go out on a limb and what I have no evidence for is the proposition that Dragon does not need to do this. It has no effective competition. It does need to attract new readers but it can only do so from the D&D user base; its content is never going to reach out to anyone else and the D&D user is going to be aware of Dragon. I'd like it therefore to adopt - or return to - the appearance of a journal about games of the imagination and a have little less of the comic book influence. Don't get me wrong, I do think the cover art is good and I do think the headlines are clever, usually. It's just that their style is just a little too tabloid for my taste.
Anyway, all of that and page three elves. And dwarves. And half-orcs.
1) Get rid of the Greyhawk section. If the RPGA wants to have a monthly newsletter, they can distribute it over the web in .PDF form. There's no point in tying up 4-5 valuable pages with information on how to play Living Greyhawk.
2) I would like to see more templates, more information on nice little stuff to add to a dungeon (I absolutely loved the section on treasure chests in the latest issue).
3) Less product tie-ins. If I'm buying the Book of Vile Darkness in 2 days, I don't need a whole crapload of information about the book. Most people who will buy it are already committed to the purchase anyway.
4) Less insert cards, ESPECIALLY with existing subscriptions. Send me a letter when it's time to renew, don't send me an insert card in every issue. I hate them.
5) Tell Phil Foglio that the Good Phil/Evil Dixie -> Good Dixie/Evil Phil thing is played out, has been played out for over 6 months, and it's time to find humor somewhere else.
2) I would like to see more templates, more information on nice little stuff to add to a dungeon (I absolutely loved the section on treasure chests in the latest issue).
3) Less product tie-ins. If I'm buying the Book of Vile Darkness in 2 days, I don't need a whole crapload of information about the book. Most people who will buy it are already committed to the purchase anyway.
4) Less insert cards, ESPECIALLY with existing subscriptions. Send me a letter when it's time to renew, don't send me an insert card in every issue. I hate them.
5) Tell Phil Foglio that the Good Phil/Evil Dixie -> Good Dixie/Evil Phil thing is played out, has been played out for over 6 months, and it's time to find humor somewhere else.
Thresher
First Post
"that Dragon has deliberately followed suit in an attempt to whammy the potential consumer with a critical hit to the optic nerve."
Would 'tragic' be too strong a word to describe it these days? Ah well guess its all fun and games until someone loses an eye, then its fun and games with one eye...
Would 'tragic' be too strong a word to describe it these days?
Ah well guess its all fun and games until someone loses an eye, then its fun and games with one eye...
Mercule
Adventurer
First, let me say that I don't think Dragon isn't bad as it stands. I get about every other issue, but I've been thinking about a subscription -- even the issues I don't think have $6.00 of content usually have an article or two worth my time, so the subscription price would let me feel like I was getting my value from all of them.
Also, this is in order according to train of thought, not importance.
1) Kill the FR content. Then again, if it were up to me, I'd kill the FR content in the FR books.
2) Turnabout's fair play -- Kill the GH content. I really love Greyhawk. I really hate Living Greyhawk. Put out a friggin' sourcebook or two instead of the magazine bits. Okay, I'll stop now before I really rant.
* Maybe an occasional article on either campaign world (or Kalamar, maybe), but not anything resembling a regular feature.
2a) Anytime a setting needed to be used, use Greyhawk. Greyhawk as the default setting was one of the big promises that WotC made for 3E. Other than the deity names in the core books, which are only included because the new clerical domains rules require something, this is practically a bald-faced lie. That's another rant issue, though, and not really Paizo's fault.
3) Better cover art. Some of it's really good (the Gladiators cover). Some of it's mediocre (the Swashbuckler knife guy). Regardless, the style is lame. Dump the paper doll looking crud and go back to full-cover spreads. Those were memorable -- really memorable -- almost worth the price of the magazine themselves. Even the best of the current covers are immediately forgetable.
As someone else said, don't let it look like PC Gamer.
4) Kill the computer games stuff. That's what PC Gamer is for. Dragon is for table-top gaming. Maybe an occasional two-page spread on some hot game. Nothing more. I'm going to kill someone if I see another worthless port of the Neverwinter Nights monsters.
LARP articles would be better than CRPG articles. At least those actually involve dealing with another person face-to-face.
5) Change the Table of Contents. It's useless at best as it stands. I _have_ to read the magazine from beginning to end because the ToC is too painful.
Actually, looking at the Gladiators issue (303), it isn't so bad. I do remember some really horrid ones, though. It the least, they could get rid of most of the thumbnail pictures and lay it out better.
6) More Campaign Components (or, at least not less). Even the ones I wouldn't base an entire campaign around (Gladiators are cool and interesting, but they'd never be more than a side piece in my game) are useful and inspire a lot of ideas. These are absolutely _awesome_.
6a) Here's a couple of actual suggestions: Campaign Components: Barbarians. Campaign Components: The Church. Campaign Components: Explorers (Marco Polo, etc.). Campaign Components: War (Crusades, Roman expansion, etc.).
7) Alternate/additional rules. I remember some of the older articles with rules for things like pain, equipment upkeep, more realistic height and weight tables, underwater adventures, and double and triple specialization (just to name some of the Dragons I've still got around). I wouldn't devote _too_ much space to this, but these sorts of articles were great.
8) Even more articles like the DM's Toolbox and other "Wizard's Workshop" articles. _This_ is where it's at, baby. Give me more ideas on how to involve players in the game, add depth to PCs and NPCs, and speed play. I guess I don't know if I'd add too many more pages to the section, but it definitely should grow a little.
Things like the alternate summoning tables and the prestige races (although I don't much like that particular idea) are along the lines of what I'm thinking.
9) Get rid of the fiction as a regular feature. In 20 years of gaming, 15 of which I actually collected Dragon, I think I've read three, maybe four of these. About the only thing I'm less likely to read are the Realms updates.
That'll do for now.
Edit: D'oh! Changed "Dragon is bad as it stands." to "Dragon isn't bad as it stands." Major bad of me. Completely the bass ackward meaning that I'd intended. Sorry, Paizo.
Also, this is in order according to train of thought, not importance.
1) Kill the FR content. Then again, if it were up to me, I'd kill the FR content in the FR books.
2) Turnabout's fair play -- Kill the GH content. I really love Greyhawk. I really hate Living Greyhawk. Put out a friggin' sourcebook or two instead of the magazine bits. Okay, I'll stop now before I really rant.
* Maybe an occasional article on either campaign world (or Kalamar, maybe), but not anything resembling a regular feature.
2a) Anytime a setting needed to be used, use Greyhawk. Greyhawk as the default setting was one of the big promises that WotC made for 3E. Other than the deity names in the core books, which are only included because the new clerical domains rules require something, this is practically a bald-faced lie. That's another rant issue, though, and not really Paizo's fault.
3) Better cover art. Some of it's really good (the Gladiators cover). Some of it's mediocre (the Swashbuckler knife guy). Regardless, the style is lame. Dump the paper doll looking crud and go back to full-cover spreads. Those were memorable -- really memorable -- almost worth the price of the magazine themselves. Even the best of the current covers are immediately forgetable.
As someone else said, don't let it look like PC Gamer.
4) Kill the computer games stuff. That's what PC Gamer is for. Dragon is for table-top gaming. Maybe an occasional two-page spread on some hot game. Nothing more. I'm going to kill someone if I see another worthless port of the Neverwinter Nights monsters.
LARP articles would be better than CRPG articles. At least those actually involve dealing with another person face-to-face.
5) Change the Table of Contents. It's useless at best as it stands. I _have_ to read the magazine from beginning to end because the ToC is too painful.
Actually, looking at the Gladiators issue (303), it isn't so bad. I do remember some really horrid ones, though. It the least, they could get rid of most of the thumbnail pictures and lay it out better.
6) More Campaign Components (or, at least not less). Even the ones I wouldn't base an entire campaign around (Gladiators are cool and interesting, but they'd never be more than a side piece in my game) are useful and inspire a lot of ideas. These are absolutely _awesome_.
6a) Here's a couple of actual suggestions: Campaign Components: Barbarians. Campaign Components: The Church. Campaign Components: Explorers (Marco Polo, etc.). Campaign Components: War (Crusades, Roman expansion, etc.).
7) Alternate/additional rules. I remember some of the older articles with rules for things like pain, equipment upkeep, more realistic height and weight tables, underwater adventures, and double and triple specialization (just to name some of the Dragons I've still got around). I wouldn't devote _too_ much space to this, but these sorts of articles were great.
8) Even more articles like the DM's Toolbox and other "Wizard's Workshop" articles. _This_ is where it's at, baby. Give me more ideas on how to involve players in the game, add depth to PCs and NPCs, and speed play. I guess I don't know if I'd add too many more pages to the section, but it definitely should grow a little.
Things like the alternate summoning tables and the prestige races (although I don't much like that particular idea) are along the lines of what I'm thinking.
9) Get rid of the fiction as a regular feature. In 20 years of gaming, 15 of which I actually collected Dragon, I think I've read three, maybe four of these. About the only thing I'm less likely to read are the Realms updates.
That'll do for now.
Edit: D'oh! Changed "Dragon is bad as it stands." to "Dragon isn't bad as it stands." Major bad of me. Completely the bass ackward meaning that I'd intended. Sorry, Paizo.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
