Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 5709987" data-attributes="member: 27780">Dragon Magazine Issue 251: September 1998part 1/8142 pages. So we've reached the end of the issues in the archive. From here on in, I've had to hunt the magazines down from various sources. Any missing parts are unfortunate, and if you spot any gaps, inform me and I will do my best to fill them in. This also means I'll be adding a new category to these reviews, looking at the scan quality of the issue, and identifying any problems with the transfer. Any trends in this over the years will be noted with interest. Anyway. Looks like once again we have a case of celebrating a big number a little too late, as the page count is boosted by a 16 page quick-play booklet in the centre, making this our third biggest issue ever. They're also making extra effort to distribute it to new venues, bring in new people. So this feels like them again trying to make this issue a new beginning, hopefully bringing in some new players. Of course, if the other articles aren't good as well, they may have problems keeping them. Scan quality: Good quality & resolution, colour slightly oversaturated. No indexing. In this issue:The wyrms turn: Here, we talk about the intersection of nostalgia and their new recruitment drive. Part of the D&D experience is the shared memories and the people we played with. As an inherently social hobby, the people and the way we interacted with them is inextricably linked to your memory, even if you played the same modules as millions of other people. And for a social hobby, word of mouth and player network are even more crucial than they are for other forms of entertainment. So get out there and recruit new people, create your own legends. Otherwise this hobby will slowly fade away, no matter how hard they try to promote it. Which really is just as pertinent a message today. Go to the effort, let today be as nostalgic as 20 years ago when you're another 20 years older. Are you ever too old to make a new beginning? For my own sake, I'd like to hope not. D-Mail: Our first letter is a complaint about books which need a whole load of other books to fully make sense, and a request that they do more straight AD&D articles. Ahh yes, the back to basics crowd. Given the direction they take in the next edition, I'm not surprised to see complaints like this mounting up. A letter from someone who really enjoyed seeing Jeff Grubb's PC's in action again and wants more, preferably prequels. I think that's an achievable request with him working for them again. Two little nitpicks about real world stuff. Aint physics a bitch. We can't constantly elaborate on all the disclaimers when we're trying to fit an article in a few pages. A letter of generalised praise from new zealand. They can be a bit cut off from the world there, so it's a good way to keep in touch with the rest of the gaming community. I'm guessing you haven't quite got the hang of the intarweb thing yet. A letter from someone else who doesn't entirely approve of Alternity articles in their D&D magazine. Is there really any demand for it? That's a very good question. It's becoming apparent that the negatives outweigh the positives. People here are more conservative about their roleplaying than a decade or so ago. Of course, they're still getting mixed messages, and the next letter is one from someone eager to see more Alternity material. It needs help to prove it's versatility, and that won't happen unless freelancers get in on writing articles for it as well. Bring back the ARES section! A letter from someone who's very happy with issue 248, and thinks it's the best one they've done in ages. If they keep this up they deserve to win new customers. A letter that thinks people who feel betrayed by the magazine because they included one non D&D article are being overdramatic. Get over it, get a life, grow a thicker skin, or you'll never be able to cope with the things the rest of reality throws at you. And finally, we have two more letters on the subject of Alternity coverage, one positive and one negative. This looks like it's settling down to be a long haul of a debate. We never used to have this problem about Gamma world, Marvel superheroes, and all the other bits and pieces they also covered. What changed?</blockquote>

Verification