Let's read the entire run

Dragon Issue 77: September 1983

part 1/2

86 pages

In this issue:

Out on a limb: A letter questioning why Ed greenwood referred to Sekolah as female. They reply that was because sahuagin are female dominated, so it makes more sense if their god is female as well. This is of course an entirely unofficial alteration.
A letter from someone who sent in a module, and then found one with a similar name on the gen con list of events, asking if it is his. They reply that no, they would have told him. Plaglarism is bad, but there are only so many monsters and scenarios, so unless you get all abstract and whimsical, chances are someone else'll do similar things at some point.
A letter from David Axler replying to the comments about his weather system article. Some are valid, some aren't, all will be useful in refining it for next time, you know the drill.
A letter criticizing Roger's all teamwork, all the time soapbox piece in issue 73. Another case where I say bloody well right too. :D
A letter from a person who's realized that the map of Launewt is actually Brittany rotated. Well spotted. As they've said before, judicious stealing creates far better verisimilitude than even the most careful wholecloth creation.
One of many letters they've received asking for the address of Starblaze editions Books. This is duly provided.

Tarot of many things: Random stuff. Muahahahaha!!! I do so love these articles. This brings an extra tactile edge compared to a regular deck of many things, because you can draw from a real deck to determine the results. And what fun they are. You character could be permanently enhanced or horribly debilitated based upon what they draw. Do you dare brave it? Some people would jump right in, while others would rather face a horde of energy draining undead led by a beholder. As this has to cover 78 cards, each with two effects, it spans 16 pages, effectively making it a full special feature in itself. The powers are split fairly evenly between good, bad and mixed blessings, although most are definitely more one or the other. As with any of these gambling things, the trick to them is to know when to quit, because if you keep on drawing, you will lose eventually. (Or cheat. Wild mages kicked ass pre 3rd edition. With an item like this, they could god mod themselves quite a bit. )Anyway, this is definitely a good way to kick off the issue, and another thing I would delight in using at some point.

The ecology of the unicorn: They really are pretty enthusiastic about this series, aren't they. Roger Moore asks PETA girl (who is a dryad, so the nature loving is to be expected. (great, now I want to put an urbanized dryad who's tree is in the middle of a city market square in a game)) about the unicorn, and gets a reply which turns into rather a love-in. Well, they are the insufferably pure mary-sues of the natural world, lusted after by many, but only accessable to virgins. (so most gaming groups are in with a pretty good shot :p ) What's not to hate? Not that the article is badly written, but it is too flowers and skippy-happy for my tastes. This starts the habit of putting game material in the appendix, although they still haven't started using footnotes yet. Still, good to see this series being developed and refined. Hopefully next time they'll pick a less twee creature to tackle.

Curses!: Ed contributes only a little article this month. A new selection of curses, slightly less brutal than the standard ones given for cursed scrolls and flasks, so low level adventurers have a decent chance of surviving if they find one in a pile. Which still means unpleasant and humiliating stuff happening to you when you least want it too. All part of the fun of old skool dungeoneering. One of those articles you can drop in pretty much any time, given it's modularity and lack of setting.

Nasty additions to a DM's arsenal: More items that are mostly pains in the ass, but can also be turned to useful ends by clever characters. Fun fun fun. We have the helm of enemy nondetection, which is basically a hitchikers guide joke transplanted to D&D. The ring of hypochondria, and arrows of conscientious objection, which do exactly what they say on the tin. The ring of gaseous form, which is very useful as long as you have someone around to help you get it off. The dagger of monster calling, which is just amusing. And the medallion of protection from thieves, which is incredibly useful as long as you're not in a situation where your group needs those abilities. Depending on the type of dungeon, that may not be a problem, particularly if you have spellcasters who can make a rogue redundant in any case. It's good to have peace of mind about the safety of your equipment. Another neat little article that you can drop in stuff from any time.

Elemental gods: Sometimes you don't want to populate your world with hundreds of deities for every concept under the sun, plus the sun itself. If you want to maintain a strong sense of theme, it can be better to have a limited cast of gods covering everything, worshipped under different names for different cultures and aspects. As an example, 4 elemental ones is a good place to start, as you can fit associations to most aspects of life easily enough under their umbrellas. And then you can start building your own. Try not to end up with the krynnish pantheon, as embarrassment and railroading may result. Remember, your job is to help the players make a story, not tell a story and drag them along as spectators. Even if your deities are active agents who's actions regularly impact upon the world, they still shouldn't overshadow the PC's. Anyway, this is a pretty solid worldbuilding article that is useful regardless of system. After all, very few worlds make religion completely irrelevant, even if they don't have D&D style granted spellcasting.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I might be able to work up detailed physics, ethics, psychologies, societies, music, and statistical data for my worlds and stories, but languages? Sorry. I'll leave that to someone else.

I'll take it, I'm geeky enough to play around with invented languages. ;)

Though these days, I'm much more likely just to come up with simple roots for consistant people and place names than anything else. Most of the time it's not really worth the effort. But consistant naming convention always adds a touch of polish to the setting, polish that gets scuffed up by the first goofy PC name that pops up (likely in the first session).
 

I'm a bit young to have followed Dragon during its golden era, but courtesy of an older brother, I got to read many of those issues nonetheless. Wonderful stuff. Classic.

I loved Giants in the Earth, amongst others... seeing how various fictional characters were translated to AD&D (even though I'm still frustrated my own characters can't have an 18/00 dexterity score, like some of those guys!)

Then there was Roger Moore's series that elaborated on the various non-human races and gave us the wonderful demi-human pantheons that are (pretty much) still around today.

The article that detailed paladins for each of the other alignments was wonderful, too(I think that may have been by Moore too, if memory serves). As well as all of those other cool npc classes that were featured.

I babble. I'd contribute something useful, but unfortunately neither I nor my brother have the Dragon library any longer. :(
 

Dragon Issue 77: September 1983

part 2/2

A new game with a familiar name: Frank Mentzer talks about the new edition of the basic and expert sets (again? That's the third new edition in 4 years. And we complain now that 5 years between editions is too soon) and how much of an improvement it is over the last ones, particularly for complete n00bs, with it's introductory adventure teaching you the rules as you go. (remember, it's easier to get people to learn things if they don't view it as work. ) Better artwork, better editing, better initial adventure, better all round. Meanwhile in the expert set, we see the start of Mystara, as they expand outwards from the map in X1. YAY! Another classic setting starts here. All the old D&D modules now have locations on the map there, plus you have a proper hometown in karimekos. This is awesome, and hopefully we'll be seeing articles expanding on my own personal favourite of the generic D&D fantasy campaign worlds soon. The companion set also gets it's first mention, and it and the master set are coming soon. (For a generous value of soon :p ) Yeah, this is a pretty significant article, even if it does fall a little into the trap of selling the new stuff by saying the old stuff was crap. It also once again shows up the differences in tone between D&D and AD&D, with the greater emphasis on evolving playstyles, and the PC's coming to have important social positions within the world, making big changes to the setting instead of just wandering from one adventure to the next getting tougher, but still doing basically the same thing. Funny how that worked out. You might start out smaller, but you have a clearly defined path which leads to bigger and better things. It's a shame they've pretty much dropped that aspect from the newer games.

Figure feature: This month features a slightly more unusual set of minis, with superheroes, civil war, 20's (plus cthulhoid monster), star trek (khaaaaan!), and swashbucklers catered for. Do your games need any of those?

Spy's advice: What are the effects of being exposed to a cubic inch of uranium (how should I know, am I a physicist?(answer, not a lot, unless it's purified U235, as U238 is actually pretty stable, with a half-life of billions of years. A cubic inch won't be a problem unless you make it into a ring and wear it for years. ))
How much does thermite cost. What can it burn through ( $30 per bomb or 12 oz tube. Most things, apart from brick and concrete, which are just too damn absorbent.)
How long does a flash grenade blind you (1-100 minutes)
Can tripods or Two weapon stances increase your hit odds. (yes, by +10)
Why are my characters so much tougher than the NPC's (you're forgetting to divide by 10)
What are the odds of failing a parachute jump. (1 in 500 for round chutes, 3 in 10,000 for square ones)
When you gain knowledge points, do your AOK's go up (yes)
Is there a limit to AOK's (150)
Can you get more superior AOK's (only by buying them up the hard way)
Can NPC's have fame and fortune points (only if they were once PC's)
Does drinking too much alcohol kill you (yes)
How do I keep players from finding out each other's objectives in a PvP campaign. (note passing and leaving the relevant parts of their sheet blank so they can't find out just by peeping.
Are the prices for the other weapon charts correct (yes)

King of the tabletop: Hello again, Mr Wham. You have another game for us? How interesting. Let's see what it entails this time. Looks like he's getting all meta on us for a second time. Having covered the game development process, he now lampoons roleplaying itself. And wargaming, and economics. And still finds the time to make a workable game underneath the humour. He does have an interesting brain. The rules continue to increase in complexity, to the point where I really can't tell how the game will play without trying it. Lets hope that's a good thing, and the crunch creep hasn't reached the point where it gets in the way.

Valley of the pharaohs. Palladium once again expands their repetoire. Don't remember this one. Did it use the same rules as all their other stuff?

Wouldya like to take another survey? It has been over a year. Surely it isn't asking that much of you to fill it out and send it in? We want to know what's changed, so we can change in response. Is that so wrong?

Reviews: Harn is another thing that has been advertised for ages, and finally gets a review. A pretty positive one, too. Seems the designers already have a pretty solid idea of what their setting is like already, with plenty of geographical, sociological, and economic details, all well organized and indexed. It does get a bit of flak for being so blatantly based on middle-earth, but that's more a taste thing. It also has the problem that since it's all so tightly integrated, it may be tricky to change bits without messing up the game. I guess it depends if you like the idea of playing in someone else gameworld as written or not. Which is the same issue tekumel ran into. What makes good stories and worlds does not always make for good gaming.
Plague of terror is a generic adventure module. It gets a very critical review by Roger, who thinks it has too much plot detail and graphic content. Which, y'know, sound like pluses to me. I guess child abuse, torture and stuff is a matter of taste, and TSR prefer to tread a more family friendly line; plus what makes for good plots may make for railroady adventures, which would be particularly jarring when most modules at this point are location based rather than plot based. Can I get a second opinion on this one, as this review actually makes it seem perversely tempting.

What's new covers death in D&D. Fineous Fingers makes a cameo from ohio, calling out to all the pretty ladies around the world. Snarfquest features comical combat. Wormy goes back to the trolls plotline. Once again we are reminded just how slow time passes when you only have a strip per month to work with. The entire 10 year run is only about 3-4 days of events in setting. Dragonmirth is missing.

Rather a scattershot issue here, with lots of cool stuff, but very little theme, apart from random effects playing a strong part. I think they're doing it diliberately, to provide a nice contrast with the last few and keep us interested. Because they still seem to have a good idea what they're doing. And hopefully the info they get in the survey will help make it even better. (assuming what the public says it wants is also what I want, which they have a spotty record on at best. ) Eh, still time for tons of ups and downs before it's over. Why worry too much.
 

Dragon Issue 78: October 1983

part 1/2

100 pages. The request for psionic stuff half a year ago finally yields dividends in one of the more impressive themed issues in some time. Eight, count em, articles getting in on the act. That's even better than the Traveller special with the milk bottles managed. Hopefully none of these'll feel like they were whipped up and crammed in at the last minute just to make up the numbers. We also have another full size module, and several unconnected articles. Well, they have to have a few, otherwise complaints would be guaranteed. This should be pretty sweet.

In this issue:

Out on a limb: A letter asking what will happen to games that are neither sci-fi or fantasy after the Ares split. The hobby is getting ever more fragmented, and they don't like it. Kim apologizes at length, saying that roleplaying as a hobby is now too big for one magazine to do it justice. (so buy both ;) ) They can't please everyone, so they're not going to try anymore.
A letter asking for a proper official ruling on phantasmal force.
A letter pointing out the errors in their last index. There's always something, isn't there.
A letter asking about modules based off other properties, and how EX1&2 got past that. They reply that if it's in public domain, it's fair game, but if the author's still here, steer well clear.
A letter praising them on the well targeted nature of their adverts. No booze, cigarettes or porn here. Kim remains silent on this, and I suspect this may be simply because none of them pay to advertise here. We're not an important enough demographic for those ugly corporations to focus their beady little eyes on.
A letter correcting details on 19th century guns for boot hill.
A letter asking what the new monsters mentioned but not printed in the nine hells article were. They reply that they're found in the monster manual II. Out in all good hobby stores now! :teeth ting:
A letter asking them why they don't do an art book compiling issue covers. They reply that in most cases, they only purchased them for a single time use, and so this is not an easy option.
Plus some Q&A for king of the tabletop. Not big enough to give it its own page, so they put it here.

Mind games: We start off with a basic discussion of what psionics is, and what it's ramifications are. While magic comes from an external source, psionics is purely internal. Which means most people have untapped depths of power in their minds. But with no formalized system of training, development of those powers will of course be haphazard and unreliable. (until now, of course) It then goes into a reiteration of the rules quirks, trying to understand and justify them, and failing, in some cases. Yet another instance where the AD&D rules are examined and found wanting, with many contradictions pointed out and thought about. Having done that, it's time to think about cleaning them up, and fixing them. But that's a matter for another article. Because otherwise this would be one huge screed with no dividers. Still, this has been a solid lead-in, that hopefully helped assuage people's trepidation about using psionics in their own games.

Sage advice: When do you check for psionic powers (when first created, and if your appropriate ability scores change)
Can you lose psionic powers if you suffer ability drain (yes)
How do you quickly assess if NPC's have psionics (roll D%. On a 00, they have psionics)
Which races can have psionics (humans, dwarves and halflings definitely can. Elves possibly can, depending which rules version you use. gnomes and half-orcs definitely can't)
Can a wish spell make you immune to psionic attacks (one wish will make you immune to one attack mode. You'd need 5 to become immune to them all.)
If you're surprised, can you still put up defense modes (yes)
Why aren't psionic attacks and defenses by high level creatures more powerful (for the same reason that regular weapons do the same amount of damage regardless of the wielders level. Not everything scales with level.)
Can you cast spells and use psionics at the same time ( You can have a thought shield up and cast spells as well, but otherwise no. They both require too much concentration to be compatible.)
Do successful psionic attacks disrupt spells. (only if they do real damage, or fully penetrate your shielding)
Can you raise a character killed by psychic crush (yes, but they lose all their psionic powers permanently. If they were an integral part of your character concept, it sucks to be you.)
Doesn't the players handbook say that thought shield is the only defense against psychic crush? (no, it says that's the only defense you can use while also using psychic crush. Read it more carefully.)
What does it mean when it says thought shield can be kept up at all times (exactly that. It's the only one you can use while fighting, spellcasting or otherwise being active. )
What happens to the points transferred back and forth in psionic operations. (they're expended. You'll have to recover them with rest as normal. )
What does page 77 mean. (if an attack reduces you to 0 psionic points, you start taking real hit point damage instead. Brain go splodey. )
Can psionic creatures sense other psionic creatures (only if they're actually using their powers at the time. If they're mentally shielded, not even then.)
If you switch classes, do you lose powers forbidden to your new class (yes, very much so.)
Can animal telepathy communicate with humans (no. They do not count as animals for the purposes of this power.)
Does cell adjustment let you know exactly how many hit points a character has (that depends on if you want the metagame and physics to be that closely connected. We'll leave this one to you.)
Can energy control negate any spell, even wishes. ((if you have the appropriate amount of power points to spend)
Does the table on page 60 apply to psionic invisibility (no. They're invisible because you're being mind controlled to ignore them, so no matter how good your other senses are, you won't pick up the clues.)
Can you attack someone and remain psionically invisible (no)
Can you use mollecular agitation through scrying (no. Line of sight means your actual, unenhanced sight)
Can you levitate yourself with telekinesis (no. That would make the other power redundant. )
Do magical protective items affect saves vs psionics (only if they boost all your saves, or specifically say so)
Do you gain XP just for using a power (getoutahere ya powergrubbing varmint. )
Do you gain XP for killing a creature with psionic blast (only if it was a threat, as with any other fight. Rigged games don't count. )

Ravenloft! What a way to mark this haloween. This is certainly one a lot of people remember fondly, and of course went on to get several remakes and be the centre of an entire campaign world. Let the gothic horror commence.

Overhauling the system: Back to the prose. Lets see what their suggestions for fixing this poorly designed and integrated subsystem are. 1: Proper progression, instead of starting almost as badass as you're ever going to be. An excelent idea. 2: use it or lose it. Not such a good idea. It conflicts with the general D&D design philosophy, and is way too likely to cause player/DM conflict. 3: Prevent low level characters from knowing the extents of their powers. Another not so good method that only works with novice players. Hmm. That's not a very good strike rate. Methinks this designer has a lot to learn about what makes for good game design. Not recommended, for annoying arguments may result.
 

Phew...FINALLY caught up on my Christmas vacation backlog! Good to see this thread is still going strong. My most pleasant surprise, though, was seeing Snarfquest already. That's my second favorite of the "classic" comics (classic being anything that started before I started my subscription about halfway through the magazine's run.) I'll let you know what my favorite is when you finally get to it. :)
 


Yep. Gems like this is why I find the shift in cosmology under 4e so unacceptable. Is anyone on WotC's current watch going to write anything this good that justifies me forgoing or shoehorning in classic material like this? No, I think not.

I don't understand. What about 4e cosmology would require any kind of shoehorning of this material? I've read Greenwood's article on the Hells many times and I don't see any reason you couldn't simply use darn near all the descriptive text in it wholesale. I think the identity of some of the archdevils have changed, but that happened way back in 2e.

Heck, you've picked one of the features of the planes (the Nine Hells) that is actually remarkably unchanged from where it's always been. The origin of the devils has changed, but their origin in the Greenwood articles are barely even a minor focus, IIRC. Some of the descriptions of the Hells may also have changed a bit from those days, but again, that happened back in the 2e/Planescape days.
 

I've read Greenwood's article on the Hells many times and I don't see any reason you couldn't simply use darn near all the descriptive text in it wholesale.

I guess we differ on this, then. 4e authors made the succubus a devil and eliminated the erineyes, and changed much of the backstory.

Heck, you've picked one of the features of the planes (the Nine Hells) that is actually remarkably unchanged from where it's always been.

That, I'll grant you. There are parts of the cosmology that are much more inconsistent between 4e and 1e-3e. Nonetheless, my point was not isolated to this article. The Nine Hells article had more detail than a lot of other planar material, really making it more sensitive to change.

but again, that happened back in the 2e/Planescape days.

To this extent? No. 1e-3e had a great wheel.
 

I strongly suspect any DM using the Greenwood Hells article is going to have more trouble dealing with the changes introduced during 2e than 4e, for example the deposing of Tiamat, Geryon and Moloch from their positions as archdevils, as well as turning Avernus into a eternal battlefield for the Blood War. These changes actually do change something dealt with closely in the article: the heirarchy of Hell. Erinyes are mentioned in the Greenwood article only somewhat more than malebranche. I suspect readers wishing to make use of the article will find about as much trouble dealing with each mention of an unfamilar creature.

I would definitely encourage anyone with an interest in inspirational material for the Hells in 4e (or any edition), particularly for those wishing to fill out the infernal aristocracy of unique devils. It's an excellent article and could definitely prove very useful.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top