How to fix Dragon

[tyrlaan]

You can draw your own conclusions from these numbers, but I would suggest that WotC stop duplicating the same type of article in the same issue, and provide good flavor, fluff and inspiration behind each of their mechanical pieces. Oh, and for the love of God, stop publishing feats, we have a glut of them already.

Great analysis and completely agree, with only one real exception - some races and classes have terrible feat support. I can stomach some feats to fill those gaps.

I've run some numbers myself and there are some incredible disparities in support for some races and classes.

• Average feat count for a specific race is around 35.
• The gnoll has less than 10 feats.
• Out of the Eberron races, the shifter is the only one with above average feat support, the rest are behind the curve, sometimes significantly so.
• Meanwhile, revenants have almost 70 feats.
• Tiefling and dragonborn are the head honchos here, which isn't surprising since they've both received their own splatbook, but they've since had Dragon articles that add more feats to their swelled collection.

• Eladrin apparently have 20 race specific paragon paths.
• The deva has 1.

Dragon articles:

• Tiefling and dragonborn have been the subject of 3 articles a piece (going back as far as 364).
• Most races have only been visited once in Dragon.
• Nothing at all for the githzerai yet.

Average feat count for the classes is about 70.

• Fighter has 180 feats.
• The bard has about 40.
• Runepriest has 11.
• Even the assassin is doing better, at 90 feats.

Average power count for classes comes in at around 200.

• Fighter is again king, at over 350 powers.
• The slackers here are the seeker and runepriest, which isn't too surprising.
• The assassin, for all its feats, has only just over 100 powers (and still only 2 build options - perhaps the Dragon article this month will change that?).

Class specific paragon paths average just under 20.

• Good ol' fighter has over 40.
• Artificer has 6.
• Runepriest and seeker are behind, though again not a surprise.

Dragon articles:

• Wizard and warlock have each been the subject of 6 articles since 364.
• Rogue and paladin only have 2 articles each.

I don't expect all races and classes to have the exact same number of feats, powers, and so on - don't get me wrong. And I'm sure a lot of the disparities are a result of what's popular (or perceived as popular). But if someone wants to play a gnoll, a few more than 10 feat choices would be nice. And I really can't imagine that after 10 feats, we're out of ideas for gnoll feats.

FWIW, I consider it within my power to try to do something about these disparities. I may not be able to up the content level (if the lack of content is due to WotC pulling back on how much they put out there each month that is), but I can certainly put in some submissions. Sadly, the gnoll isn't going to get any attempts at help from me (really have no interest in the race at the moment), but if my pitches are solid and interesting...well, we'll see. And if WotC doesn't bite, I can always flesh out the material for my own games

 

[Mad Hamish]

I'd like to suggest that people who are unhappy with the contents come up with some ideas and send them to Wizards. Submission guidelines are at
Online Writer's Guidelines

Alternatively send them feedback or post on their forums about articles they publish that you do like

 

[AngryMojo]

Great analysis and completely agree, with only one real exception - some races and classes have terrible feat support. I can stomach some feats to fill those gaps.

I can agree with this. What I'd like to see is a new monster-as-race writeup each issue. Go ahead and call it "Savage Species" if you like. I mean, it's two years into the edition, and there's no real support for playing Bugbears, Goblins, Hobgoblins Kobolds or Orcs yet, and these would probably be the most common monstrous races in a game world. I mean, Eberron just about has them as common races.

Add on top of that Kenkus, Bullywugs, Kuo Toas, Troglodytes, Lizardfolk, Duergar and Githyanki, and you've got a year's worth of articles without getting obscure.

I'd like to suggest that people who are unhappy with the contents come up with some ideas and send them to Wizards.

You know, I think I will. I'll write up a pitch for each one of these, just to pound the idea home. And if they accept one, or more than one, than I shall profit. Bwahahaha.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I'd like to see it get back to some of the old standards.

Bizzare of the Bazzar: Magic items that aren't entirely focused on their utility in combat and magic items that have a history in the game and magic items that are different.

Giants in the Earth: I was looking through my old Deities and Demigods and man, lots of heroes in those books. How would 4e handle them? Then to tie it into the player side, provide a few bits of crunch, but more importantly, talk about the importance of these characters and why they were selected. Bits that may be useful for role players to borrow. Provide links to reference material and recommend some books.

Player Focus: Provide players with things they should be doing in their campaign and how it will make the campaign a richer play experience for everyone. Whnever I talk about more player options, it seems GM's experience is players are lazy and look at anything outside of playing their character right then and there as doing homework. Change this perception.

Reskinning: Without making any new game mecahnics, provide solid examples of reskinning feats with changes of text and perhaps visual clues as to the changes that have taken place.

Pages From the Mages: More spells/rituals/etc... for players that have a focus on a campaign setting.

Faiths and Avatars: While i'd love to see more demonimicon bits, I think those would be sent to Dungeon. The bit on the Gods though, are meant for players. Things like common expressions, holy days, famous texts, quotes from the canon, feats/spells/paragon paths, etc...

There's so much that could be done and isn't.

 

[DonAdam]

I spelled out some of my thoughts here.

I would actually like to see conversions of classic adventures. Not "return to...," just straight-up conversions, with substantial changes only where 4e mechanics can no longer support the older material.

Give me big pieces rather than small pieces of clutter; subsystems and variant class features or builds are more use to me at this point than feats and powers.

I like the idea of theme issues. I would love one on human-only campaigns, low-magic games, etc.

The schools of magic not covered in H of the F... should be fleshed out in articles.

Most of all, I think they need to get away from the idea that every article should be useful in every campaign or setting. Dark Sun looks great because it was more willing to take chances for the sake of flavor. More of that please.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I have one idea for both Dragon and Dungeon. Completely change the format! I'm talking about ePub, MOBI, or something that will display properly on modern electronic e-readers, tablets, or iPad-like devices.

PDFs are great for printing, but lack as far as the intended purpose--to read them on electronic devices. You can still make them pretty.

This.

With the new magic item rules they should be able to create meatier magic item articles with uncommom and rare items.

Also I would like to see more rituals and articles about incorporating rituals in to campaigns and into the actual actions.

 

[tyrlaan]

I can agree with this. What I'd like to see is a new monster-as-race writeup each issue. Go ahead and call it "Savage Species" if you like. I mean, it's two years into the edition, and there's no real support for playing Bugbears, Goblins, Hobgoblins Kobolds or Orcs yet, and these would probably be the most common monstrous races in a game world. I mean, Eberron just about has them as common races.

Add on top of that Kenkus, Bullywugs, Kuo Toas, Troglodytes, Lizardfolk, Duergar and Githyanki, and you've got a year's worth of articles without getting obscure.

You know, I think I will. I'll write up a pitch for each one of these, just to pound the idea home. And if they accept one, or more than one, than I shall profit. Bwahahaha.

Go for it! Awesome idea and Savage Species is the perfect title.

(Would have said that in XP, but I have to spread some around first )

 

[Nork]

It does seem like they are running out of ideas... Yet they seem loathe to cover the classics. Classics are classics for a reason!

How many powers, feats, etc do wizards have?

Why can my wizard not pick a power called Summon Fire Elemental?

Did they intend for Summon Magma Beast to be a fire elemental with a sexed up name? If so, what was so horrible about the name Fire Elemental? Where is a Water Elemental (I guess they would call it a splashy hydroreaver or something)? The article that gave most of the summons was literally one paragraph and then a bunch of stat blocks. I mean seriously?

Content should make you want to play it because it sounds fun and interesting, not because you can harvest stat blocks to pimp your DPR (although powers ought to be of at least average effectiveness. It sucks to have Fireball in your spell book but never ever wanting to memorize it because you've got an at-will that can do nearly the same thing with enlarge spell).

It is an eMagazine, they are not exactly going to run out of page space, unless this is some absurd cost cutting measure to limit word count.

I'd really like to see an article where they present lesser(heroic)/regular(paragon)/greater(epic) fire/earth/air/water elementals.

I'd like that article to go into depth with a bunch of background and fluffy information on elemental summoning, the psychology of elementals.

Maybe they could even throw in the old school elemental summoning magic items as rare magic items now.

It just seems like they don't have follow through on ideas, they try too hard to be "original" at the expense of presenting well crafted classics.

 

[AngryMojo]

Why can my wizard not pick a power called Summon Fire Elemental?

Not to be too picky, but there is one. It's called "Summon Fire Warrior" Wizard Daily 1 from Arcane Power. They changed the name to avoid confusion if you summon the fire warrior while fighting fire elementals.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Not to be too picky, but there is one. It's called "Summon Fire Warrior" Wizard Daily 1 from Arcane Power. They changed the name to avoid confusion if you summon the fire warrior while fighting fire elementals.

Unless WoTC reprinted the MM1 4e version, there were no 'standard' elementals in it last time I looked.