Dungeon 117

[Alzrius]

I am however looking forward to the Greyhawk maps!

Just so people know, the Greyhawk maps are NOT going to begin with this issue. They've been pushed back one month to make sure they were done as well as they deserve. They'll release in #118-#121. See this thread at the paizo boards for more information.

 

[Erik Mona]

Thanks for spreading the word about the map delay, Alz.

As far as setting material in Dungeon is concerned, my general philosophy is that the vast majority of our readers play Dungeons & Dragons more or less as presented in the three core rulebooks. Sure, many of them augment their experience with material from secondary sourcebooks like the Manual of the Planes or Libris Mortis, but the three things all of them have in common are the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and the Monster Manual.

A (probably sizable) minority of our readers either play in or are interested in the Forgotten Realms campaign setting. Probably about the same number play or are interested in the Greyhawk campaign setting, possibly because they play in the RPGA's 14,000-player Living Greyhawk campaign and possibly because they have exceptionally good taste.

A large percentage of our readers are no doubt curious about the Eberron campaign setting. Most of them probably haven't decided whether to "take the plunge," yet, while others have yet to pull the new campaign together. But more and more every month, Eberron fandom is growing.

Ideally, all three adventures in each issue of Dungeon will be usable in any campaign, with a little modification here and there. Occasionally, a module proposal is so interesting, or an idea so scrumptious or potentially popular, that it is "worth it" to sacrifice a high-utility adventure to spotlight something that will generate buzz, tickle the fancy of a strong contingent of our readers (such as psionics fans), or try something new.

Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms adventures (as well as adventures with "no" setting or a generic setting which everyone must convert) fit the first mold, and make up the vast majority of the adventures we publish. Some Eberron adventures would fit in this category, as well. Others fit in the second mold. "Steel Shadows," with its focus on one of the more esoteric elements of Eberron (warforged), is definitely one of the "riskier" adventures.

We'll definitely take the opportunity to emphasize some of Eberron's quirky elements, but the magazine's primary emphasis will remain more or less "straight" sword & sorcery for as long as I'm associated with it.

--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon Magazines

 

[ecliptic]

James Jacobs & Erik Mona

I would like to see Birthright-esque set of adventures. Even if its not really Birthright but generic. Mainly with the theme of royal intrigue.

 

[takasi]

Mr. Mona, what exactly is "straight" sword & sorcery? What are you implying about Eberron? That it adds some type of element that isn't compatible with other settings? Please don't sell this setting short. I'll admit I don't know exactly what your standards are, but I have a general idea based on casually following your posts over the last three years. Eberron fits in with MOST, not some, of the elements you and the majority of Dungeon readers look for in a D&D campaign.

Your first adventure, Queen with Burning Eyes, was an excellent opportunity to show how traditional Dungeon modules can fit into Eberron. I suspect that it failed to do this, considering the posts in this thread. There are no warforged encounters, yet people assume there are due to the illustrations. And while I'm a very active miniatures player and highly enjoyed the use of terrain tiles and miniatures suggestion, I think you confused readers by mixing this element with your first Eberron adventure.

Whether you personally like it or not, Dungeon plays a role in the success or failure of Eberron. You may have an intuition or market research telling you what your readers want, but you must also factor in your heavy influence on them. If you believe Eberron is not "straight", not core, not fundamental to the D&D brand, than you risk transferring that belief to your readers. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

IMO the best thing you can do to reach out to off-the-shelf-campaigns and raise brand awareness for WotC settings is to add sidebars for campaign placement suggestions for every adventure. Is this possible?

Please don't use your influence at Dungeon to create new adventures for Greyhawk. The best thing you can do for Oerth is to keep spotlighting Living Greyhawk, especially now that Polyhedron is gone. Remind people of the wealth of campaign modules, support material and ongoing canon updates available for free for home use by the RPGA and its members. Creating new Greyhawk adventures does nothing, IMO, but prop up a campaign setting that no longer has retail support from WotC. Exploiting the nostalgia of older fans may help the magazine in the short term, but you are alienating the future fanbase of younger consumers of WotC products, especially players of upcoming games like Dragonshards and D&D Online that take place in Eberron.

 

[Belen]

Well, if you add the intro adventure to Eberron, the two published by WOTC and the 3 published by Paizo, then we currently have six Eberron adventures out there....

Personally, if I am not running an Eberron game and the adventure in Dungeon says "Eberron" then I will not be giving it a look as I already know that Eberron does not fit the feel of style of my game.

Now, I am subscribed for the next two years and 12 Eberron adventures may be a bit much. I would much prefer 1 ever 3 issues.

Dave

 

[The_Gneech]

Please don't use your influence at Dungeon to create new adventures for Greyhawk. The best thing you can do for Oerth is to keep spotlighting Living Greyhawk, especially now that Polyhedron is gone. Remind people of the wealth of campaign modules, support material and ongoing canon updates available for free for home use by the RPGA and its members. Creating new Greyhawk adventures does nothing, IMO, but prop up a campaign setting that no longer has retail support from WotC. Exploiting the nostalgia of older fans may help the magazine in the short term, but you are alienating the future fanbase of younger consumers of WotC products, especially players of upcoming games like Dragonshards and D&D Online that take place in Eberron.

That doesn't make any sense; the reason Greyhawk has fans is because it is and always was a cool setting. How is that going to "alienate a future fanbase"?

"Man, I wish Paramount would stop having Starfleet and Klingons in Star Trek. They're going to alienate future fans! And Lucas should totally get over Jedi Knights."

It seems to me that "the default setting for D&D" should have the most support of any of them.

-The Gneech

 

[jester47]

Please don't use your influence at Dungeon to create new adventures for Greyhawk. The best thing you can do for Oerth is to keep spotlighting Living Greyhawk, especially now that Polyhedron is gone. Remind people of the wealth of campaign modules, support material and ongoing canon updates available for free for home use by the RPGA and its members. Creating new Greyhawk adventures does nothing, IMO, but prop up a campaign setting that no longer has retail support from WotC. Exploiting the nostalgia of older fans may help the magazine in the short term, but you are alienating the future fanbase of younger consumers of WotC products, especially players of upcoming games like Dragonshards and D&D Online that take place in Eberron.

Takasi,

From what I understand it helps if the generic adventures in Dungeon are written with Greyhawk in mind. There are several reasons for this. The first and foremost is that the RPGA's Living Greyhawk Campaign is currently set up to allow a DM to run certain Dungeon adventures as adventures in the LG Campaign. Because of the way the RPGA works, they cannot allow for people to "convert" them from another setting. Thus, it makes sense for any generic adventure to be a Greyhawk adventure. The second reason is that its really easy to go from the Greyhawk to another setting, homebrew or pre-written; but, it is harder to go from somthing like the Forgotten Realms or Eberron to greyhawk or a homebrew. Basicly in a mathmatical sense the set FR includes the set Greyhawk. The set greyhawk does not include all the set FR. The same holds true for Eberron. Eberron has some things in it that just won't translate. But Greyhawk will always translate easily to Eberron. That is why we will continue to see Greyhawk adventures. Every greyhawk adventure can be an Eberron adventure, but every Eberron adventure cannot be a greyhawk advanture. If I were into Eberron, I would also be asking for more generics.

Aaron.

 

[Sebastian Francis]

Hello, all. Quick question from a newcomer:

Is Dungeon #117 the first of the Greyhawk-maps series?

 

[Sebastian Francis]

Mr. Mona, what exactly is "straight" sword & sorcery? What are you implying about Eberron? That it adds some type of element that isn't compatible with other settings?

Sure. Such as magic trains, magic airships, magic robots (warforged), and cities of skyscrapers.

Nothing against Eberron...I think it's actually a cool concept, although it's not my cup of tea...but it is definitely not *standard* D&D fantasy, nor was it intended to be.

 

[takasi]

Well, if you add the intro adventure to Eberron, the two published by WOTC and the 3 published by Paizo, then we currently have six Eberron adventures out there....

Six compared to how many released for Greyhawk by the RPGA?

That doesn't make any sense; the reason Greyhawk has fans is because it is and always was a cool setting. How is that going to "alienate a future fanbase"?

Existing fans are familiar with the setting; new fans aren't. Dungeon is the only retail product that continues to support Greyhawk.

More appropriate analogies:

"Cool, another cover spread of Planet of the Apes action figures in Toyfare."

or

"Last month Casper was on the cover of Wizard. I sure hope they have Richie Rich on the next one!"

or

"I can't wait for the next issue of TV Guide. I wonder if the Jay North interview for his role in Dennis the Menace is as good as last month's interview with Lassie's trainer."

or

"Did you check out the review on the SNES in Game Informer? I wonder if I should get one. I think I'll wait until next month's review of the Genesis."

These are great nostalgia articles, but they do little to familiarize gamers with the current market. I would rather see third party campaigns in Dungeon than Greyhawk because at least there is retail professional errata and general support for these products.

Finally, Greyhawk is NOT the default setting for 3.5 edition D&D. We were told this, but in fact only certain Greyhawk elements are the defaults for the core rulebooks. The history, culture and geographyc of Oerth are nowhere to be found. In fact, is Greyhawk even mentioned in the revised core books?

A fair compromise is to have generic adventures with detailed sidebars for proper campaign setting placement for Forgotten Realms and Eberron. Please leave Greyhawk to the RPGA, and if it's that near and dear to the hearts of Dungeon's editors then spotlight or even publish a few RPGA modules.