Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 4485775" data-attributes="member: 27780">The Dragon Issue 26: June 1979Part 1/252 pages. Finally, the editor gets an assistant, the lovely Mr Jaquet, who's first name changes unpredictably from article to article. Now their staff is big enough to withstand one person getting knocked out temporarily, so we won't be losing months because of that. We also see a spate of new running articles start here. Mighty Magic Miscellany, Dastardly deeds and devious devices, Bazaar of the Bizarre. Ahh, alliteration, how you help make things memorable. What would we do deprived of opportunities to twist the lexicon of language in disturbing directions. They also say that this is your last chance as readers to save the letters page, as they still aren't getting regular letters, and they're tired of asking. You do know what a can of worms you're opening here, don't you? In this issue: Miniatures, meet boards: Tim Kask talks about his first experiences in wargaming, and recalls the problems with miniatures gaming in general. This then segues into talking about a new game, System 7, and how using cardboard chits makes things so much more accessable than shelling out for and painting hundreds of miniatures. He goes on to say he hopes it revolutionizes wargaming the way D&D did. But miniatures make up most of the companies profit. Yeah, so much for that idea.Napoleonics no longer mean a second mortgage: A proper review of system 7, with a pretty good assessment of its strengths and weaknesses. This is pretty good, not just a promo for the game.Necessity is the mother of invention: The designer of system 7 weighs in on the design process for the game, and the compromises they had to make in doing so. Another solid article that adds to this issue's big topic. The designer responds to first volley: Lotsa players questions, and the corresponding clarifications and errata. Again, this is a solid article, and rounds out this issues main feature. After this, you'll have a pretty good idea if you want to buy System 7 or not. Giants in the earth: Another article that is intended as a recurring one, this is where they stat out characters from various books for D&D. Of course, as D&D cannot properly emulate them, they have to break the rules that PC's are limited too to represent them. They are also disgustingly overstatted, with not a single attribute below 13. I just have to sigh at this. And what of the skinnies? An add-on to the Starship troopers wargame, giving the humanoids a power boost so they can match up to the humans and bugs, instead of being stuck in the middle getting slaughtered. Not sure how well this holds up mechanically, but it seems a decent enough article. Hopefully it was of use to someone. The placement of castles: A tactical guide for Lords and Wizards. More rules stuff that I can't really comment on, but seems decent enough. 35th aniversary of d-day remembered: Lest we forget. Of course back then, there were considerably more people who saw it in person still alive. A good reminder that behind the games, there were serious historical events, with people getting killed, and the same cannot be said for fantasy games. But lets not stay on a downer for too long, shall we. The solitary berserker for william the conquerer - 1066: Another fun rules expansion. Play Harold Hardrada smashing his way through the english. Maybe you'll even win this time around. Another article that seems ok to me. Chinese Undead: I think you know what to expect from this. Has a bit of crossover with the vampires around the world article from last issue, but not enough to be useless. And as ever real world mythology is easily as strange and considerably less optimised towards ass-kicking abilities than D&D monsters.  A load of general stuff for boot hill. This is stuff that'll mostly benefit players, at the cost of adding extra mechanical gewgaws to remember. All in all, this is pretty meh. Another view on D&D alignments: This one doesn't really add much to the pot, merely being a list of what individuals of a particular alignment probably would or wouldn't do. Which is not the best way to go about it, as it lumps a bunch of unrelated traits together, and thus adds to the perspective of alignment as restriction, rather than monitoring device. Which is not the way to go about things, in my opinion. I do not approve. Deck of fate: Tarot cards for D&D. Draw one of these, and stuff will happen, maybe good, maybe bad. Either way, it keeps things interesting, doesn't it. Not nearly as comprehensive or mechanically sound as the later bag of beans one, this is still an entertaining article, that I have no problem with. D&D meets the electronic age: Using a computer with an amazing 4K of memory! ( Damn, A page or so of typing here eats up that much, they must have been far more efficient with it back then.) to assist in the mechanical side of running a game, building to hit matrixes, monster stats and dungeon layouts. Goes to show, computers were coming into the range of affordability to ordinary people, and you could already do quite a bit with them back then. But if they weren't, they wouldn't have developed as quickly as they have, as there wouldn't be the money to put into development. It's like evolution. Creationists ask what use half an eye is, but even a single photosensitive cell offers considerable advantages to an organism. And if something offers an advantage, it rapidly spreads and gets built on and refined.</blockquote>

Verification