Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 6034205" data-attributes="member: 27780">Dragon Issue 296: June 2002part 1/10124 pages. Year 26. Eh, it's just another number. We'll have to wait until 30 before they can really make a big deal about that again. Unless they join the 27 club, but we know in hindsight that doesn't happen. There's a dragon on the cover, but given their current trend of zooming in closer and focussing the humans, we only get to see a small part of it. Will the contents be focussing on dragon hunters more than dragons themselves as well? Would it be so terrible if they did? Let's see if they can keep the quality up. Scan Quality: Excellent, searchable (the only non archive issue that has fully word searchable innards, actually) In this issue:Wyrms turn: Another year, another reiteration of the things that they want in their writers. And as before, creativity comes second to the ability to fit the formats and formulas of the company in general and gameline in particular, listen and react to editors, and get your work in on time. Which explains a lot. The only real notable point this time round is their reminder that they still require physical copies of manuscripts, even though the internet is more than big and fast enough to send them over. I wonder when that'll change, before or after the magazine itself goes electronic in 5 years time? Big wheels keep on turning, and even if the company as a whole is behind the times, it will keep on changing as new people come in and old ones leave. Once again, I guess we'll keep rollin down the river, watching out for signs of change. Scale Mail: Our first letter, not too surprisingly, is from someone who thinks the april issue this year mixed useful stuff and humour decently. Only one of the articles didn't have some usefulness to him. This unsurprisingly makes the writers happy, since april is quite stressful for them. They don't get off completely unscathed though. The beefcake on the cover draws mixed reactions. Turnaround is fair play, and this time it's the guy's turn to feel jealous and/or exploited. Not so funny now, is it? I hope you've learned something. We should all let go of worrying about gender and nudity and just have huge bisexual orgies. (while using proper protection of course) <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />The gender issues continue with the Gamers vs Girlfriends article getting a fair number of complaints, one of which is actually funny in it's own right. Curiously, it's the letter by a man that's the most hostile. Ahh, overprotective white knights. What are we to do with them in this bold new online world where the difference in physical strength between genders is pretty irrelevant? Wolves also have their defenders, with a letter a little peeved all the elemental wolves in issue 293 were evil. Where would we be without some good old-fashioned froofy animism? Also, where would the magazine be without it's special features. The tiles get praised again. Hopefully this means some more physical stuff to cut out and use in your game in coming years. The final three letters are more generalised praise, once again showing how most people have enthusiastically leapt on the new edition, even ones that lost interest at some point in 2e. The gaming population as a whole is definitely younger and less conservative than it will be in 10 years time.</blockquote>

Verification