Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 4492552" data-attributes="member: 27780">The Dragon Issue 28: August 1979Part 2/2Conventions - The manufacturers view: Gary talks about the logistical problems involved in attending conventions, and how it really doesn't generate them as much profit as you'd think. Really. they're mostly doing it because they love what they do, and attending is good for the industry as much as it is for them personally. If they were in it for the money, they'd be doing something else. Which all seems pretty reasonable. Out on a limb: A letter bitching at them for not offering reprints. (frankly my dear, it's just not profitable)  A letter giving big chunks of errata for Cross of Iron. Talk of mutant animals in MA. And an epic rant from marc jacobs covering a whole bunch of percieved flaws in the system. That hit points inflate but healing is linear, and how annoying and unrealistic this is. Stupid results created by random generation, forgetting spells, ripping off ideas from other systems. Oh, and the use of goblinoids as a racial metaphor. Yeah, sounds like you shouldn't be playing D&D at all, if you have this many problems with the system and premise. But then they had far fewer systems to choose from back then. The rebuttal to this goes all over the shop, forward to page 46, then back to 11. It's all a bit silly really. The voyages of the ship znutar continue And yeah, here's the rules for the acompanying game. More amusing Tom Wham art abounds. This game is somewhat bigger than the snits one, as obviously they've had more practice in the last couple of years, and their design skills have grown accordingly. Looks like it should be fun. Bazaar of the Bizarre: Lots of stuff I remember, including that lovely joke item the apparatus of spiky owns. Most notable, though for introducing Leomund to us. One of the iconic old wizards who would put their names to a whole bunch of spells and magic items does so here. Level progression for players and DM's: Oh dear. This is one of those articles that would come back to bite them in the ass later. Each game you play in and things you do in them give you a certain amount of XP. You can then use this to determine your real world level as a player and DM. It's all presented pretty seriously, enough so that even I'm not sure if the original writer intended it as a joke. Which is a bit worrying. If this had made it into the DMG, how many people would have wound up ranking themselves officially. Ahh, hindsight. How very tiresome you are. Giants in the earth: More overpowered statting outs of literary characters, in this case Eric John Stark, and the ghost of Welleran. I'm really not liking this section at all, and hope it doesn't stay as a regular article for long. Monty strikes back: More epicness featuring the original obscenely overpowered D&D group getting challenges commensurate with their power (which of course includes plenty of the artifacts that would later become D&D legends. ) And when they beat even that, Monty throws a snit and kills them all by plant rape. Uh huh huh huh huh. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Reviews: Divine right, America BC, Sorcerer (they oughta sue Ron Edwards) All are primarily desriptive reviews, with little personal judgement in them. Which makes them a little dull. You have enough adverts. You need to make your reviews more opinionated, otherwise what's the point. An advert for a game set in the Dune universe. IiinterestingDragon's Bestiary - the Slinger. Little lizards that use the manticore trick of throwing their poisonous spines at people. Another monster that never made it to the official bestiaries, despite being one of the more realistic and ecologically integrated monsters they've come up with. Oh well, Can't win 'em all. Fineous fingers continues. Another high quality issue, with lots of cool articles, but curiously enough also many indicators of the things that would later contribute to D&D's stigmatism and decline. Again, hindsight reveals plenty of ways that things could have been changed if they'd been done differently, but fails to be particularly helpfull in dealing with our present problems. Still at least 4e is adapting, not stagnating. If the changes they're making work in the long run or not remains to be seen, but at least they're not pretending that their new edition is the perfect version of D&D, never to be changed or bettered again.</blockquote>

Verification