My thoughts on 4e Dragon magazine

[MerricB]

If there was a magazine I got just out of habit, it was Dragon magazine during the 3e era, and I feel that became more and more true throughout the Paizo era. While Dungeon under Paizo was doing better and better things, Dragon just had too many articles that didn't interest me at all. To make things worse, I didn't like Paizo's take on demons much, so their highly-hyped "Demonicon of Iggwilv" articles were generally just dead weight.

There were occasion exceptions amongst the articles, but mostly I found them tedious and boring.

Then came 4e, and Wizards taking back the magazines and turning them into online versions. I'm not going to speak much about their online status; it has pros and cons. The biggest pro (and it's a massive one) is that they become available to everyone at the same time. No more waiting 2-3 months for my issue to arrive, hooray!

I haven't looked at 4e Dungeon much, mostly because I haven't been browsing from home. Adventures need more time to digest, and I'm not entirely happy with the format they've been using in the early adventures (and haven't seen the more recent ones).

However, 4e Dragon has been a revelation. All of a sudden, there are a bunch of articles that I find interesting and I want to read. What's caused the change?

Well, 4e being new, for a start. In the old days of Dragon magazine - and I'm talking about the 1e era - it was pretty much the only source of new materials for the AD&D game. Hardcover books? If you were lucky, you saw one a year. For this brief period, it is the same with 4e Dragon.

So, all the mechanics and monsters Dragon posts are new to us, and, given we're spoilt and used to the multitude of options in 3e, significantly expand on what we have.

That's the most significant point.

The other aspect, which has helped greatly, is the integration of mechanics and article. When I read Wish upon a Star, not only am I getting pretty good story-building material and advice, but I'm getting mechanics that directly relate to the rest of the article - and that are easily integrated into an ongoing campaign. That 4e explicitly allows retraining of characters is a great point as well - I adopted the 3.5e version immediately it appeared in PH2.

Will this love of the new material wear off as we get more 4e books? It may well. I'm not sure that the publishing schedule will be so packed as for that to happen, but there may come a time where "another warlock power" won't be exciting at all.

For now, I'm just enjoying my renewed love of Dragon Magazine.

Cheers!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

So, MerricB - Nice seeing you back to your optimistic self!

I like the "new" Dragon, too. The material is interesting and varied. Fluff and mechanics so far have been good.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Same here, same here. I never really bothered trying to get Dragon before since it was lots of effort to hunt one down (plus expensive). Now, I check each day to see what new articles are up, it is extremely convenient.

 

[ppaladin123]

I like that each individual article is released and essentially beta-tested by the forum community. So far, at the end of the month, wizards has been releasing final compiled pdfs in which broken feats, powers, and items have been readjusted/rebalanced. If this keeps up, dragon will be a source of material I can actually use in the games I play without feeling like a munchkin, and allow in the games I run without feeling like a player is trying to pull a fast one on me.

 

[WhatGravitas]

I don't think that the e-zines have the polish that they had under Paizo's tenure... but this mainly regards the style and presentation - like not having comics.

Content-wise, the new e-Dragon is top notch, the playtesting classes arenew and exciting. The other new articles are also full of good crunch AND fluff, I like the organisation articles - they strike a good balance between "stuff for the DM" and "crunch for the PCs".

That it's the main source for 4E material right now and more proliferant than any book right now also helps.

Cheers, LT.

 

[TerraDave]

Well, they are certainly doing a better job then in the "preview" phase before June.

I am reading Dragon more now then I have for years...part of that is having it free on my desktop. But I think the space the new edition gives them also helps. And they have used that space pretty well.

We will see if they can sustain it.

 

[Gothmog]

So far, I've been really impressed with Dungeon and Dragon, and their coverage of 4e. Towards the end of the Paizo era, I had pretty much quit reading Dungeon and Dragon- I found the quality of the adventures in Dungeon to be poor, and the Dragon articles just didn't grab me and inspire me. While I was saddened to see Dragon and Dungeon go out of print, the new versions of the magazines are MUCH better and more useful, and the online format is slowly growing on me. I also love the fact that the articles are reviewed and playtested after they are posted, and are corrected based on feedback, and have errata posted at the end of the month.

 

[SteveC]

Some good points. For me, the problem I always had with Dragon during the 3E era was balance. For as much as I was told how the material was "official D&D content," I never used it, nor did I know anyone who did, largely because it was poorly balanced and not playtested or vetted by R&D.

Has that changed with the new edition? So far, the vast majority of the articles have been written by the games designers, but the quality and power level has been a bit uneven. If the magazine starts to showcase new, freelance authors, I wonder if there will be any attention paid to whether or not the material is balanced with the core. I certainly hope that it is, since it appears that Dragon will be back to being just about the only way to get D&D material.

--Steve

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Has that changed with the new edition? So far, the vast majority of the articles have been written by the games designers, but the quality and power level has been a bit uneven. If the magazine starts to showcase new, freelance authors, I wonder if there will be any attention paid to whether or not the material is balanced with the core. I certainly hope that it is, since it appears that Dragon will be back to being just about the only way to get D&D material.

--Steve

As far as I understood, the Dragon material is supposed to be "driven by R&D". So they should keep an eye out for balance and the material might be better.

But it still remains my worry that this won't be the case. Let's face it, it's not like PHB II or the Completes were always balanced, either.

I think it is too early to tell whether it will work, overall.

 

[TerraDave]

since it appears that Dragon will be back to being just about the only way to get D&D material.

--Steve

This model--put the good, if roughish, stuff in Dragon, then refine and republish in the hardbacks--is a model I like. It may seem you are paying twice for the same thing, but this way you get it sooner, and then know there is a system of feedback for what is published latter.

There is also nostalgia. Since this is how it worked back in the Gold Age. (kids, what we grognards say about the Golden Age...its all true!). But it was a better model then what followed: take everything you can put in a book, any book, out of the magazine, and leave total dreck. Which was what Dragon became for a long time.