Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 8519013" data-attributes="member: 27780">Dungeon Issue 43: Sep/Oct 1993part 1/580 pages.  Dragon has been having dragons on it's cover every issue this year. It's been a while since we had one this large in Dungeon though. Just how high a level will you need to be to have a decent chance of taking on something that can rip down a whole castle, and will it involve searching for macguffins first? Time to see what kind of selection they've picked for us this issue.Editorial: Another round of talking about the nonlinear tango here. It can be difficult to keep your balance when your feet are in different time zones, and your head is planning things several years into the future. In real terms this means that even if they accept your module, don't be surprised if it takes them a year or two to publish it, as every issue has to be a set length, so they need to pick bunches that fit together both in total word count and in being aimed at a good mix of levels, plus maybe some kind of thematic connection on top of that. Being patient definitely helps with that. Which also shows the problem with abrupt edition changes where they just completely stop supporting the previous ones, and freelancers haven't seen the new rules yet, but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. Will the average adventure quality take a nosedive when we hit 3e or 4e, and will it pull out again after a few years? After all, they can't pad the transition out with a load of system-light articles like Dragon did. Keep on tuning in and eventually we'll find out.Letters: The first letter wonders how much it would cost to retrofit the Dama Rosa into a spelljamming vessel. Unless you can find some Arcane to sell you a helm, it's not an option anyway. You don't get to go into space unless the DM specifically lets you.Second complains that most of their current adventures are too linear. You should see the Polyhedron ones! But yes, Dungeon is also getting worse about this lately and it's a cause for worry. Best thing you can do is to send in adventures that you would like to play in, give them plenty to choose from.Third complains that they don't do any Battlesystem mass combat scenarios or solo adventures. Another thing they have no objection to covering, but don't get enough submissions for, like many of their campaign worlds. There are a few solo modules in the back catalog if you check out the index. If you want more mass combat, the writers guidelines are right here.Fourth is one of those complaints that NPC's in adventures have power selections impossible for PC's of that level. Yup. Another indicator that they're currently prioritising storytelling over strict adherence to the RAW. No, you can't have those powers when you kill them and take their stuff, so nyah.Fifth is from someone who likes more plot heavy adventures and finds randomised dungeoncrawls boring and easy to make by comparison. They need to do both to keep their playerbase as a whole happy. 6th is another rules nitpick, showing what happens when you get your square/cube law calculations wrong. Scale in general is one of those things RPG's struggle with, and frequently get fudged for the sake of story anyway.Finally, someone who wants more adventures with psionics in, but only if they work thematically, rather than just plonking psionic monsters in a generic fantasy game. Fortunately, they do indeed have one of those this issue. Let's hope it pushes the envelope in the right way for you.</blockquote>

Verification