[Dungeon] Dungeon/Polyhedron Goes Monthly

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Any good GM can keep a campaign going without much outside support. It's just a matter of coming up with good ideas which is sometimes hard to do

Any good GM WITH TIME can do so. There are quite alot of us with full-time jobs, spouses, children, friends and other responsibilities that keep us from devoting as much time as we wish to the game. Back when I did have the time, I did play other games and came up with my own stuff. We were asked by Thommasson why we don't find value in Poly and all I can give is MY opinion.

Thanks for the allusion that I am not a good GM, btw.

 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Sounds like good news to me! You should have done this a long time ago. I'm especially pleased to here there will be additional support for the mini-games. You guys rock!

 

[Thomasson]

I can only speak for myself, but as a new Poly subscriber since the beginning of 2002, the inclusion of d20 mini-games is the main reason why I pick up the combo magazine.

If it does not focus on mini-games or non-D&D articles, then I would find no value in Dungeon. They would not get my money, as well as those new subscribers who think the same way as I do, readership would still be the same which means Dungeon would have to end its circulation.

So think of it this way, it's a bipartisan magazine. I can tolerate Dungeon as much as I can tolerate Republicans in DC.

BTW, I think I can safely predict that readership will further expand when the first Dungeon/Polyhedron issue to feature the first Star Wars RPG-related article will appear in store shelves.

Here's a question I put to Dungeon readers: Why would I -- a 10-year RPG veteran whose first love is D&D -- find any value in Dungeon when I can create my own adventures tailored for my group?

(No offense intended, Chris Thomasson.)

I think loads of other folks have answered this question quite well. Let me answer, as well, since I'm not only the DUNGEON editor but also a reader (I sound like that Hair Club for Men guy).

I don't typically run modules straight out of the magazine in my home campaign. I would, if they fit the situation. As I've said before, that's the basic guideline I use to determine whether an adventure is worth printing. But I've used countless maps from issues past and present. Those alone have saved me hours of prep time I'd much rather devote to developing cool storylines, unique NPCs, and hatching plots to monkey with my players. I also use DUNGEON for stat blocks. Again, developing this on my own is a huge time-suck. Heck, even supplementing my game from DUNGEON, I still spend most of my prep time developing stat blocks. It's still saved me hours of time. On top of that, I get to use the occassional adventure whole cloth. When Matt Sernett (Associate Editor for DRAGON) was still in my campaign, I had an extra reason to hold back on using adventures since he had often read them in advance. But now I plan on implementing even more ideas from the magazine in my campaign. It's not that I'm not capable of coming up with my own adventure ideas, which I do frequently anyway because it's fun and rewarding. And while the time factor is a hefty contributor, there's something more. In a way, reading DUNGEON is like sitting around the table with four or five other DMs every couple months and swapping ideas and war stories, then taking that information and applying it to my game.

And no offense taken.

 

[Thomasson]

A few questions to part with for you in return. What is the Poly subscriber after? Was the choice to devote so much effort to min-games pressure from the readers or mearly an editorial choice? If the readers want min-games then the next question is moot, but did you consider droping the mini-games and going to a monthly 2/3 Dungeon 1/3 Poly 100 page monthly all the time? If you went this way I would buy every issue instead of every other. Why the huge increase in Poly coverage compared to before with little to no increase in the Dungeon coverage? How large (percentages will do) was each portion of the combined readership base before? Is there some evidence that such a lopsided benefit to only one part of you magazine will increase your readership?

I'll try to answer these in order: It's hard to say. But it's hard to say about any magazine. We know we're on track delivering what our readers are after when they continue to buy our magazine. As a result of the past year's numbers, we're pretty darn sure the majority of POLY subscribers dig the Mini-Games. In fact, most folks rave about them.

Initially, the Mini-Game concept (kudos to Mr. Mona for the revolutionary idea, by the way) was an editorial decision. But that's how most innovation is made when you're redesigning a magazine. You come up with a concept you think will appeal to your readers and you try it out. In this case, it seems to have worked.

The reason for the increase in POLY coverage is complex. But the basic reasons are these: Adding more DUNGEON content isn't economically feasible. We don't have the staff to add more content on that side of the book, and doing so wouldn't bring in enough extra income that adding staff would be possible. Second, there's been a pretty hefty outcry, as we've seen on this very thread, for more Mini-Game support. Increasing the POLY word count to that of a "real" magazine (100 pages versus the paltry 64 Erik was somehow working with before) allows the magazine to better cover the Mini-Games, popular d20 System games (like Star Wars, CoC, WoT, and others), and the industry at large.

I'm not sure I can share our subscription number breakdown with you percentage-wise. I'll ask Johnny. But in vague terms, the subscriber numbers were pretty even before the combination of the magazines. There was a fairly substantial crossover, and we've basically since found a middle ground between the total of the two subscriber bases and one of the old DUNGEONs or POLYHEDRONs alone.

Finally, we think this change will please most of our readership. Some folks might be resistant at first, but hopefully once they've given the new format a shot, they'll come around. Anytime you make a change this significant you risk ticking off your loyal fan base (check the initial responses to the 3E announcement), but we feel that this change is for the better. We could be wrong, but business (especially magazines) is often about taking calculated risks.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Chris,

Thanks for your response. It not every editor who takes the time to personally answer his readers questions.

I had no idea that Poly was that big. Since the mini-games are so popular with the Poly readers I will retract any sugestion that they be dropped. It is not my place to tell others what they should or shouldn't like.

I hope you are correct in your choices as I do realy enjoy Dungeon and I hope it continues for a long time. Unfortunately I still personally don't have a use for Mini-Games and will not be purchacing those issues, but hopefully from your response there are enough people who do like that feature that I will be replaced by someone who likes the Mini-Games and your Magazine will continue on. It is not that I am resistant to change(I did not complain when Poly was added to Dungeon and I do look forward to reading more articles about other developed games such as LGJ and SW and maybe hopefully CoC) it is more of in my case of needing to decide what to spend my limited RPG money on.

Thanks again for your response.

 

[EarthsShadow]

As for Poly-Dungeon, I dig both parts of the magazine. It is cool to see that the d20 system can incorporate many different types of campaigns and seeing the mini-games enforces that. I think now, however, since we have so many mini-games that have already been brought to us, many of us are now also wanting further support for some of these games (you even did it once with a later article for Thunderball Ralley with the monkey race, so even though I don't and never will play that game, it was nice to see added support for a previous mini-game).

Also, there are soooooooooooooo many d20 games out now that many of us are also noticing that they don't get the support they deserve, namely CoC, WoT, Star Wars, Dragonstar (although there are a couple of adventures out for it now, to me they could also use some minor adventures to go along with the bigger ones), Scarred Lands (a single adventure specific for that world would be awesome), and upcoming products like Gamma World and Dragonlance when they become available.

I like the Dungeon side because the adventures are pretty great, from the small to the large, and most mini-games are pretty cool because they show the diversity that can be accomplished with the d20 system. That said, however, we don't need that many different mini-games and I think we need more support for all the stuff that is already out.

No matter what, however, I would never want you guys to split the magazines up. The merger is great.

 

[Ranger REG]

And no offense taken.

Don't get me wrong. I do like what you've written for Dungeon whenever I peek the other side of the magazine. But I tend to be self-reliant, self-creative when it comes to my own campaigns. I mean if I'm the designated DM/GM, I would do everything to make a good game. I'll even MAKE THE TIME to create an adventure and prepare my notes. I may find one or two elements, tools, or devices from Dungeon that I could use for my own game, but that would probably account for 1% usage of that magazine.

Still, I tolerate it. I'm glad that half of my $8 goes to you guys.

And that's NOT a Random Thought.

 

[Kenpo Wolf]

Any good GM WITH TIME can do so. There are quite alot of us with full-time jobs, spouses, children, friends and other responsibilities that keep us from devoting as much time as we wish to the game. Back when I did have the time, I did play other games and came up with my own stuff. We were asked by Thommasson why we don't find value in Poly and all I can give is MY opinion.

Thanks for the allusion that I am not a good GM, btw.

My comment was a blanket statement aimed at everyone so I'm sorry if you took it personally. No offense meant. Now, please excuse me while I get my foot out of my mouth

BTW, I know where you're coming from and should have looked at things from both sides of the fence.

 

[Henry]

WOW!


What a response! And here I thought when I first saw this that it was gonna be generally positive. (I'd still love to know more about European readers that can't get their subscriptions. Bagpuss gets his issues, but is the problem with getting issues at all, or jsut people who subscribed?)

As for my take, I am just glad to have the magazine go monthly! The fact that I will see a new adventure every month as opposed to every two, AND the fact that the new Polyhedron material will be EASIER to add to existing campaigns, not harder (keep in mind - IT'S NOT A MINI-GAME PER MONTH! It's different content) then I can foresee great value with this choice.

As for myself, I have NEVER used one of the polyhedron mini-games. Not one.

Perhaps someone might ask, "Then why would you find value at all in the Polyhedron stuff, you Raving Loon???"

Easy answer: I steal ideas from it liberally. Perhaps I DON'T want 40-foot high marching Death-Mechas in my D&D game - but The weapons and personal armaments from the Mecha Crusade article are great to add to my d20 Modern game ideas.

Perhaps I don't want to run a "Gamma World" campaign with Omega World - but there are still plenty of things to use from the mini-game, from feats to powers to equipment.

But as usual, results may vary by individual user.

I use Dungeon magazine adventures all the time, however. I will take a dungeon, take its maps, RIP the story and background info off of it, and run it through the meat grinder that is my campaign until it is properly tender and ready for braising. No prepublished material has EVER escaped my campaign unscathed -- except if we are playing it as a one-shot game (As I did years ago with the old Greyhawk Ruins module, and kept the ENTIRE campaign within the dungeon. Their goal was to escape. )

 

[Sir Edgar]

I'd like to subscribe, but I'm not really familiar/interested in the Polyhedron section of the magazine. I would definitely subscribe if Dragon and Dungeon were combined. I think it makes more sense and I'd be willing to pay $7.99 (newstand) an issue for such a publication.