Dungeon 114 Cover

[RFisher]

One of the stated goals of redesigning the logos was to make them easier to read.

I think it has just about all the qualities of a good logo.

Do you think this will help them stand out on the newsstand?

I think it would catch my eye better than the previous style.

The sad thing is that it may be more important that they change the look on a periodic basis than what the look is.

While I'm at it, what do people think of the new "Dungeon is for DMs, Dragon is for Players" concept?

I like it.

I'd prefer Dungeon focus exclusively on adventures & figuring out how to make that profitable. Whether its cutting production values or going online or whatever, I think there's a market to be served there. I think providing adventures is worthy of 100% focus.

But, I'm nearly as positive on the current plan. Clear differentiation between the two magazines is very important for readers, authors, advertisers, & Paizo. People need a basis for answering the question "Where does X belong?" This division is clear & sensible.

Will it make you more likely to buy one or both of the magazines?

Yes, although the likelyhood was pretty small anyway. Actually, I'll probably be buying more copies of Dungeon on the newsstand due to the changes.

I really think Dragon needs to return to being willing to cover games beyond the latest D&D, even if its less than one article an issue. Appearantly a majority of readers & potential readers disagree with me.

 

[myrdden]

I kinda dig it!

 

[Antonios S]

I don't like the logo...

...but I like all the changes, I feel as if they were reading my mind. In fact, it is the announced changes that made me renew my subscription to a 3-year one!

 

[haiiro]

What do folks think of the new look of Dungeon magazine?

While I'm at it, what do people think of the new "Dungeon is for DMs, Dragon is for Players" concept? Will it make you more likely to buy one or both of the magazines?

I'm indifferent to the new logo (it "pops" more, but it's definitely pretty retro), but I like the cover layout. Good cover art should be seen, not obscured by text, IMO.

One thing I've always wished was on the covers of Dragon and Dungeon since 3e rolled around is the issue number -- well-placed and readably large. It didn't used to be on there at all, and recently it has been, but I still think it should be easier to read. Minor beef, really (once I've got some issue spread out in front of me, squinting to find it on the cover or checking the spine is a bit frustrating).

As for the content split, I think it's a pretty good idea. I buy both Dungeon and Dragon, so what's in which one doesn't change anything for me. I think it'll be neat to keep secret DM stuff with the secret DM adventures.

 

[Richards]

I'm not a big fan of the new logo, but I like it better than the one it's replacing. Of course, I'd really prefer it if they'd just go back to their pre-3E logo (the same goes for Dragon's logo). I really like the artwork being uncluttered by verbiage, though.

Johnathan

 

[DaveStebbins]

I like the logo.

The added DM material is the main reason why I recently subscribed again (last time I was a subscriber was when the issue numbers were single digits).

 

[Steel_Wind]

I don't mind the "Dungeon is for DMs; Dragon is for players" approach. It does make some sense.

BUT... I am a huge fan of Dungeon and always have been. The last issue of Dragon I bought was the 30 th anniversary last month. The last copy I bought PRIOR to that ...

was issue #100.

The intervening 20 years or so worth of mags I would read when others had them lying around. I always leafed through them on the newstand, but the articles seemed less relevant and more fluffy with each issue. So much so, for a while I was surprised they were not carried away on the wind like so many dandelion seeds.

Worse, they seemed to retill the same old ground every 3 years or so. It was deva vu, all the time with Dragon.

I never felt that way regarding Dungeon, which is why I keep buying it and always have - even when I was not using AD&D/D&D as a rules system.

Still, I will try to keep an open mind about it all.

 

[KB9JMQ]

I like the new look. It is clean and easy on the eyes.
The font does look a little Amazing Storiesish but that is ok.
From what I have read the splitting into DM and Player groupings is fine with me.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

What do folks think of the new look of Dungeon magazine?

​

One of the stated goals of redesigning the logos was to make them easier to read. Do you think this will help them stand out on the newsstand?

While I'm at it, what do people think of the new "Dungeon is for DMs, Dragon is for Players" concept? Will it make you more likely to buy one or both of the magazines?

(I haven't seen this discussed yet, but please delete this if we've already had this conversation. )

The cover is AWESOME.

The art is great, the logo doesnt beat you over the head with it's pretentiousness and is very direct and to the point. I think the retro look of the logo will do well. I've never subcribed to Dungeon or Dragon before and I've been playing off and on for over 20 years, but if the content is good I may do just that for both.

 

[JeffB]

Cover Art by WAR...YAY!

New intent of the magazine...YAY!

New Logo..BOO!