Dungeon #99 - Is the end near?

[Treebore]

What I find humorous is that a lot of the problems that people are having with Dungeon are the same problems I am having with 3.5. A lot of people are dumping Dungeon, but justify the same marketing tactics for 3.5? Very curious.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

What I find humorous is that a lot of the problems that people are having with Dungeon are the same problems I am having with 3.5. A lot of people are dumping Dungeon, but justify the same marketing tactics for 3.5? Very curious.

3.5 contains 50% content that is unrelated to what I am purchaing it for, increasing the price from the previous version to pay for this 50% unrelated content. I was not aware of that. Does that mean we will be getting Hijinks as part of 3.5 as well.

 

[Numion]

What I find humorous is that a lot of the problems that people are having with Dungeon are the same problems I am having with 3.5. A lot of people are dumping Dungeon, but justify the same marketing tactics for 3.5? Very curious.

What are you saying? That the 3.5e books will come with World of Darkness books on the back?

 

[Iron_Chef]

With any issue I suspect you'll find people who both love it and hate it. Overall, #100 has been highly praised, but not by everybody (as Iron_Chef shows, and his opinions are as valid as any other individual's).

Maybe I was a *little* over the top in my lambasting of issue #100, but I'm glad you see my points, even if you don't agree with them. I just get upset paying for stuff I can't use, and particularly stuff I think isn't very clever.

I don't think Giant robots and Godzillas are a part of most typical D&D games, either, which is why I question their repeated inclusion in recent issues. To me, they are part of the "video game" power escalation of 3e that is most unpleasant and quite frankly, something I find disturbing as an "old schooler"... A one-time special feature on kaiju (in Dragon) and one adventure (Dungeon #97) using similar themes is okay, but this is getting ridiculous, especially when the two adventures (Iron Man and Beast Of Burden) are practically carbon copies of each other. Maybe an adventure where you must build Mecha-Tarrasque to battle the real Tarrasque is next?

The problem with high level adventures is that they are less useful than most low to mid level ones. I don't object to high level adventures per se (except bad ones), but I do object to ones where the PCs are expected to slay gods (or near gods in the case of the lich queen). Again, this is disturbing from an old school mentality like mine, and part of the video game/power escalation of 3e. IMO, it would have been much more reasonable to derail the Lich Queen's plans (for invasion or something more trivial), then to assassinate her in her own palace surrounded by tons of loyal bodyguards... It just seems highly unlikely that such a mission could ever succeed, and the ramifications of the PCs succeeding are so dangerously unbalancing to the power scale of the game and world that no one, mortal or immortal, is safe. Not the kind of game I'd want to participate in, but again, some people like this sort of thing. But how useful is it to the majority of DUNGEON readers except as a curiosity piece never to be used?

I think an ideal mix of adventures would contain the following (here I'm trying to be helpful rather than "bitter" as someone else suggested):

1. Two low level adventures (1-3)
2. Two mid-level adventures (4-8)
3. One high level adventure (9-12 is my idea of "high")

Run higher level adventures (13-up) every other issue.

Make an effort to publish political and other role-playing encouraging adventures instead of just hack-n-slash dungeon crawls at least once every other issue.

Limit dragon villains and uber "save the world" epics to once or twice a year.

Things to be removed: Critical Threats, all comics, LGJ and Poly.

 

[Darrin Drader]

I think an ideal mix of adventures would contain the following (here I'm trying to be helpful rather than "bitter" as someone else suggested):

1. Two low level adventures (1-3)
2. Two mid-level adventures (4-8)
3. One high level adventure (9-12 is my idea of "high")

Run higher level adventures (13-up) every other issue.

Make an effort to publish political and other role-playing encouraging adventures instead of just hack-n-slash dungeon crawls at least once every other issue.

Limit dragon villains and uber "save the world" epics to once or twice a year.

Things to be removed: Critical Threats, all comics, LGJ and Poly.

I like these ideas except for the bit about removing Poly. Poly should stay!

I especially like the idea of including the occasional political adventures. I think this is something relatively absent in 3E. Since the mag is monthly now, I don't mind seeing the "save the world" epics a little more often - say once every 2 or 3 months would be fine.

I could take or leave critical threats. Some of the ideas are very cool, but by the time I could use something like that, the issue is so old that I have forgotten about it. I wouldn't mind seeing comics go from Dungeon. I rather like the idea of keeping them in Dragon.

 

[Andy_Collins]

Dungeon + Polyhedron = Delicious!

I love Dungeon.

* The adventures meet or exceed the highest quality you can find in the industry. The editors' rules expertise is extraordinary, ensuring that I'll rarely if ever be forced to rewrite a stat block or encounter because the author didn't know how the game worked.

* The adventures consistently present a variety of topics and themes far beyond what any single designer (or DM) could create. Any adventure I can't use today is one that I might be able to use next month, or next campaign. I go back to old issues of Dungeon on a regular basis, looking for adventures or ideas to mine for my current campaigns.

* The "bite-sized" features--Critical Threats, Maps of Mystery, Side Treks-- are even more versatile than the adventures, since they rarely require any significant adjustment to fit into my campaigns. I sometimes wish that the opponents featured in the Critical Threats entries were even more unique, but I chalk that up to the editors still finding their way with the feature.


I love Polyhedron.

* The mini-games, frankly, are one of the best things to happen to the gaming industry in years. They expose readers to a staggering variety of ideas without requiring a significant up-front investment, and push the d20 system in ways that many couldn't even conceive of when the whole OGL thing started up. Issue #99's "Hijinx" is one of the cleverest things written for d20 in the rules' 3-year lifespan, and is a must-read for anyone even vaguely interested in game design (and don't fool yourself--*every* DM has at least a passing interest in game design, because that's what house rules are). Even if you'll "never play" any of these games (and really, who can say that for certain), every one has at least a couple of intriguing ideas that can fit into a variety of other games (Omega World's reserve point system, for instance, can easily be swiped for a low-magic D&D game).

* The other d20 system support in Polyhedron is still finding its footing, but has the potential of eventually turning the magazine into the "Dragon" of the d20 system. Is it there yet? Of course not, and it'd be foolish to push this particular hatchling out of the nest before it gets comfortable with its wings. But if anything can make Polyhedron viable as its own independent mag, it'll be its ability to support a wide range of d20-system players. (Personally, I'd put LGJ back into Dragon, since that's the magazine that most average D&D players are drawn to, but I understand that the historical affiliation between Poly and the RPGA membership is probably a tough one to sever.)


So chalk me up as another supporter of the combined package. I'm willing to suspend judgment of the new monthly format for a few more issues, but I have faith that the editors of these magazines will continue to work diligently to present their readers with the best magazines that they can.

 

[MerricB]

Re: Dungeon + Polyhedron = Delicious!

G'day, Andy!

(Personally, I'd put LGJ back into Dragon, since that's the magazine that most average D&D players are drawn to, but I understand that the historical affiliation between Poly and the RPGA membership is probably a tough one to sever.)

I think this actually has more to do with Erik Mona being the editor of Polyhedron and of the LGJ, and finding the two deadlines of Dragon and Dungeon to be very difficult to handle - thus having both Poly & the LGJ in the one magazine made things much easier for him.

Otherwise, some good points. I'm being drawn back to supporting the combined package.

I'm getting the impression that the main thing that would make people happier is a bit more Dungeon in each issue... but that might just be my own preferences talking.

Cheers!

 

[rounser]

Personally, I'd put LGJ back into Dragon, since that's the magazine that most average D&D players are drawn to

Disagree with you on the sentiment of that...if anything, Dragon has provided far more support in the past (but not in recent years) for non-D&D RPGs than Dungeon ever has. It appears that Dungeon's having to make the compromise into non-D&D material simply because it's less popular, and can't stand alone anymore.

If Dungeon was D&D adventures/LG setting material, I reckon the level of acceptance would be much higher among Dungeon subscribers - adapting D&D setting material is a lot more obviously "relevant" to a D&D game than adapting mecha/rock stars/gun fu etc. Not as progressive, but how progressive are D&D players?

 

[Iron_Chef]

LGJ is nearly worthless, as Greyhawk will never receive the depth of support of FR, thus making most of it useless--I mean, who plays Greyhawk anymore, and more specifically, who likes the horrible changes made to the setting during/since 2e's Greyhawk Wars? Not me, not my group. All the rotten changes TSR and then WoTC/RPGA made to the setting permanently soured us on ever using it again, and we really loved this setting when it came out.

LGJ is only occasionally useful, when items can be easily transplanted to FR or another setting, such as the Vault of the Drow special.

The RPGA means nothing to me or to the majority of gamers. Let them get their own ezine or something, not waste space in Dragon or Dungeon with their LGJ/Poly. And please get rid of the horribly unfunny, untalented comics in Dungeon. Dragon is the place for these, if they must be run at all, and Dragon has way too many awful comics in it clogging up space already, which amount to six free full page ads for Kenzer & Co. comic books.

I may sound bitter, but I'm really unhappy with the changes to Dragon/Dungeon lately and have given up hope that they will ever be improved to my satisfaction, where every issue will have at least **something** useful in it (but preferably at least 50% useful content).

 

[rounser]

LGJ is nearly worthless, as Greyhawk will never receive the depth of support of FR, thus making most of it useless

Erm, don't really agree with that. Some folks dislike FR because of overkill on the detail.

I mean, who plays Greyhawk anymore, and more specifically, who likes the horrible changes made to the setting during/since 2e's Greyhawk Wars? Not me, not my group. All the rotten changes TSR and then WoTC/RPGA made to the setting permanently soured us on ever using it again, and we really loved this setting when it came out.

Well, GH aside, I think a D&D adventure/generic D&D setting material magazine would be superior to something setting-specific, but without a setting to "hang" setting material off, you end up with lesser quality material (IMO), but if you do hang it off a specific setting, you get people complaining that it's not for their setting (despite the fact that D&D in general is so darn generic that you can lift Dragonlance stuff into Birthright into FR into GH almost whole cloth and not raise an eyebrow) so perhaps it's inevitable that this will never happen.

The "setting to hang ideas off" thing is why I think the flavour of crunch (and fluff alike) for FR material is consistently better than the generic splatbook stuff, simply because there's a more of a solid foundation of setting for ideas to nest in than the implied D&D setting, and a solid context to inspire and spark ideas off of. You can tell that the authors of Magic of Faerun were perhaps significantly more inspired than those of Tome and Blood, f'rinstance, and I reckon that's got everything to do with it being a book intended for a specific setting.

I'd be happier to see a town this issue, maps and stats for a wizards' academy the next, and a guard's wayhouse on a highway the next than a minigame each issue, simply because you could just lift them straight out and plonk them straight down into your D&D game, regardless of level. I think non-D&D d20 can take care of itself...I don't really want to read academic lessons in applying d20 to new territory, simply because I don't care much about d20 and it's oh-so-bright future when we already have D&D. *shrug*