From here:
http://www.paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/dungeon/generalDiscussion/articlesForDMs
Ok. A week's passed, the cat's out of the bag, and here I am.
I'm your new editor-in-chief.
And I agree with you. One of the things that concerns me most about the recent (successful) relaunch of both titles is that we've given the impression that, since Dungeon is being positioned as a "DM's Magazine," that means Dragon is the "Player's Magazine."
This is in fact not the case. The key behind the relaunch of Dragon was to position it as the "D&D Magazine," which is to say that it appeals to all fans of Dungeons & Dragons, whether players or DMs. Since people who like D&D generally like to be kept abreast of interesting fantasy novels or electronic games, we've made sure to include that type of content in the magazine (but it's been there for ages, so that's nothing new).
I too love the "Campaign Components" articles. My favorite Dragon article of all time was probably Ed Greenwood's "Nine Hells" overview from 100 years ago, and that sucker spanned three issues. Don't get me wrong. I like short articles, and shorties like Class Acts are important for the magazine on a number of levels. But I also like features, and I tend to like 'em long. Not all of them, mind you, but enough. Every so often, I think Dragon should present something really significant along the lines of the Greenwood Hells articles, a Creature Catalog, or the more recent Campaign Components articles.
Dragon is a new magazine with a fresh look and slightly modified focus. But it is still Dragon magazine, the flagship of our hobby and the most storied and oldest in-print professional gaming magazine in the world.
I guess what I'm trying to say is stick with us. DMs will find plenty to love in both magazines.
--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon
PS: You probably won't find many DM advice articles in Dragon, however, and certainly no adventures. That's what Dungeon's for, after all.
http://www.paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/dungeon/generalDiscussion/articlesForDMs
Ok. A week's passed, the cat's out of the bag, and here I am.
I'm your new editor-in-chief.
And I agree with you. One of the things that concerns me most about the recent (successful) relaunch of both titles is that we've given the impression that, since Dungeon is being positioned as a "DM's Magazine," that means Dragon is the "Player's Magazine."
This is in fact not the case. The key behind the relaunch of Dragon was to position it as the "D&D Magazine," which is to say that it appeals to all fans of Dungeons & Dragons, whether players or DMs. Since people who like D&D generally like to be kept abreast of interesting fantasy novels or electronic games, we've made sure to include that type of content in the magazine (but it's been there for ages, so that's nothing new).
I too love the "Campaign Components" articles. My favorite Dragon article of all time was probably Ed Greenwood's "Nine Hells" overview from 100 years ago, and that sucker spanned three issues. Don't get me wrong. I like short articles, and shorties like Class Acts are important for the magazine on a number of levels. But I also like features, and I tend to like 'em long. Not all of them, mind you, but enough. Every so often, I think Dragon should present something really significant along the lines of the Greenwood Hells articles, a Creature Catalog, or the more recent Campaign Components articles.
Dragon is a new magazine with a fresh look and slightly modified focus. But it is still Dragon magazine, the flagship of our hobby and the most storied and oldest in-print professional gaming magazine in the world.
I guess what I'm trying to say is stick with us. DMs will find plenty to love in both magazines.
--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon
PS: You probably won't find many DM advice articles in Dragon, however, and certainly no adventures. That's what Dungeon's for, after all.
Last edited:
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
