[Poly] What's happening to Polyhedron/Dungeon?
- Thread starter Macbeth
- Start date
Vocenoctum
First Post
BryonD said:
I"m not sure what timeframe that is. The spelljammer Poly is the first I picked up, and that's a flip issue before monthly, Poly is 69 pages (including ads and such).
We'll (AFAIK) be getting less than that (and, for the record, Dungeon in that issue is 110 pages inclusive) per issue. The same cost analysis as people applied to Dungeon applies to Poly.
The magazine is now monthly, and smaller overall. Factoring in the price, it's less of a bargain than when it was bi-monthly. I myself still feel it is a good bargain though, and hope that it remains so. But, for price, we're getting less Poly.
BryonD
Hero
I'm not clear if you are disputing my claim or not.
My Dungeon 89 is 112 pages of 100% dungeon
My Dungeon 90 says “Free Polyhedron D20 game inside!” It is 112 pages of Dungeon and 62 pages of Poly. So Poly was smaller and free and an add-on to Dungeon. (The Polyhedron cover as says “A publication of Dungeon magazine”, clearly implying a hierarchy)
My Dungeon 91 is 112 pages of Dungeon and 63 pages Poly. So Poly remains smaller and free, because I still got all of the Dungeon I paid for.
My Dungeon 92 is 100 pages of Dungeon and 69 pages Poly. (This is the Spelljammer issue)
My Dungeon 93 is 113 pages of Dungeon and 65 pages Poly. (Still getting all the Dungeon content that I subscribed for and Poly is a free add-on)
My Dungeon 94 is the first Paizo Dungeon. It is 94 pages Dungeon and 61 pages Poly. Dungeon is a bit slim. But that has been covered. I’m satisfied that the transition was an issue. Clearly Poly did not grow at this point. It remains a free add-on.
My Dungeon 95 is 97 pages Dungeon and 65 pages Poly. Same as 94.
Dungeon 96: 89 pages Dungeon and 67 pages Poly. Dungeon shrinking, Poly stays the same.
Dungeon 97: 115 pages Dungeon and 65 pages Poly. Back to the old free Poly ratio.
This represents over a years period (Nov/Dec 2001 issue through Mar/Apr 2003 issue) during which Dungeon subscribers got what they paid for (approximately 100 pages every 2 months), plus Poly was added for free at a approximately 65 pages every two months.
Dungeon 98 is the first monthly issue. 59 pages Dungeon and 40 pages Poly.
Dungeon 99: 69 pages Dungeon and 47 pages Poly
So at this point the breakdown has started to shift. 128 pages Dungeon and 87 pages Poly in the two-month period. About +10% on Dungeon and +30% on Poly. Total cover price: $13.98 (compared to $7.99 for the previous bimonthly issue). So +10% Dungeon content for +75% price. This is where I started to say I would drop out.
Dungeon 100 rocked. Lots of Dungeon material and just great stuff across the board. No complaints at all on that issue. However, that was a special, non-representative issue.
Dungeon 101: 73 pages Dungeon and 44 pages Poly. That is the last issue I have.
So only in the last 3 issues (ignoring 100, in which Poly was quite small, so it can’t help the Poly is now shrinking – no fair argument) has Poly been up to 80-88 pages per 2 months. During that time Dungeon buyers have been paying more for about the same amount of Dungeon, subsidizing Poly. For better than a year prior to that it was all the Dungeon that was paid for plus free Poly. Anyone who subscribed during that period purely in order to get Poly was subscribing to get approximately 65 pages of Poly every two months, because that was what existed at the time. So for a few issues they got MORE than they were promised. Now Poly is going back down by some undefined amount. Only if it goes back to below 65 pages per two months will there be any justification for complaint from people who subscribed before the Poly expansion.
I am sure there are a handful of people who subscribed recently to get the expanded Poly. These people have a legitimate complaint.
Paizo is offering refunds, so no one is getting ripped off.
But my main point is this:
The Dungeon people complained when their costs went up 75% along with an expansion of material that was supposed to have been “free”.
The Poly people are now complaining because their product is going back to where it was just 4 issues ago.
No comparison.
Edit: I said a few posts above that there would still be a lot more Poly than there was. I will retract that. But that does not impact my analysis regarding Poly people getting what they paid for.
My Dungeon 89 is 112 pages of 100% dungeon
My Dungeon 90 says “Free Polyhedron D20 game inside!” It is 112 pages of Dungeon and 62 pages of Poly. So Poly was smaller and free and an add-on to Dungeon. (The Polyhedron cover as says “A publication of Dungeon magazine”, clearly implying a hierarchy)
My Dungeon 91 is 112 pages of Dungeon and 63 pages Poly. So Poly remains smaller and free, because I still got all of the Dungeon I paid for.
My Dungeon 92 is 100 pages of Dungeon and 69 pages Poly. (This is the Spelljammer issue)
My Dungeon 93 is 113 pages of Dungeon and 65 pages Poly. (Still getting all the Dungeon content that I subscribed for and Poly is a free add-on)
My Dungeon 94 is the first Paizo Dungeon. It is 94 pages Dungeon and 61 pages Poly. Dungeon is a bit slim. But that has been covered. I’m satisfied that the transition was an issue. Clearly Poly did not grow at this point. It remains a free add-on.
My Dungeon 95 is 97 pages Dungeon and 65 pages Poly. Same as 94.
Dungeon 96: 89 pages Dungeon and 67 pages Poly. Dungeon shrinking, Poly stays the same.
Dungeon 97: 115 pages Dungeon and 65 pages Poly. Back to the old free Poly ratio.
This represents over a years period (Nov/Dec 2001 issue through Mar/Apr 2003 issue) during which Dungeon subscribers got what they paid for (approximately 100 pages every 2 months), plus Poly was added for free at a approximately 65 pages every two months.
Dungeon 98 is the first monthly issue. 59 pages Dungeon and 40 pages Poly.
Dungeon 99: 69 pages Dungeon and 47 pages Poly
So at this point the breakdown has started to shift. 128 pages Dungeon and 87 pages Poly in the two-month period. About +10% on Dungeon and +30% on Poly. Total cover price: $13.98 (compared to $7.99 for the previous bimonthly issue). So +10% Dungeon content for +75% price. This is where I started to say I would drop out.
Dungeon 100 rocked. Lots of Dungeon material and just great stuff across the board. No complaints at all on that issue. However, that was a special, non-representative issue.
Dungeon 101: 73 pages Dungeon and 44 pages Poly. That is the last issue I have.
So only in the last 3 issues (ignoring 100, in which Poly was quite small, so it can’t help the Poly is now shrinking – no fair argument) has Poly been up to 80-88 pages per 2 months. During that time Dungeon buyers have been paying more for about the same amount of Dungeon, subsidizing Poly. For better than a year prior to that it was all the Dungeon that was paid for plus free Poly. Anyone who subscribed during that period purely in order to get Poly was subscribing to get approximately 65 pages of Poly every two months, because that was what existed at the time. So for a few issues they got MORE than they were promised. Now Poly is going back down by some undefined amount. Only if it goes back to below 65 pages per two months will there be any justification for complaint from people who subscribed before the Poly expansion.
I am sure there are a handful of people who subscribed recently to get the expanded Poly. These people have a legitimate complaint.
Paizo is offering refunds, so no one is getting ripped off.
But my main point is this:
The Dungeon people complained when their costs went up 75% along with an expansion of material that was supposed to have been “free”.
The Poly people are now complaining because their product is going back to where it was just 4 issues ago.
No comparison.
Edit: I said a few posts above that there would still be a lot more Poly than there was. I will retract that. But that does not impact my analysis regarding Poly people getting what they paid for.
Last edited:
Vocenoctum
First Post
BryonD said:
They're getting less per issue (since the issues are 100 pages total, and Dungeon will always get the lions share), but more per two months (assuming the two issues combined are more than the average 65 pages)
So, either they're getting less per single issue, or they're paying more for the same amount (by paying for two issues).
It's the same logic as the cost analysis for Dungeon, but you won't seem to accept that Poly readers fit in there?
To you, Poly is that free add on to Dungeon. For other people, Poly is what they're buying.
Their Poly price/ content ratio is worse than it was previously.
Now, as I said, I buy the magazine as a whole, so I'm not complaining about the magazine. It just seems that some of the Dungeon Only crowd don't seem to acknowledge that the Poly guys have a valid point.
I can't really say it any different than that, so if it's not clear... I give up.
BryonD
Hero
Sorry, but the Poly price per content is NOT going up 75% as Dungeon did.
The numbers are simply NOT there.
Further, unless Poly dips below 80 pages per 2 months, anyone who subscribed BEFORE the switch to monthly will still get what they paid for. So they have ZERO basis for financial complaint.
If you just want to ignore the numeric facts presented above, then that is your perogative. But the facts persist.
The numbers are simply NOT there.
Further, unless Poly dips below 80 pages per 2 months, anyone who subscribed BEFORE the switch to monthly will still get what they paid for. So they have ZERO basis for financial complaint.
If you just want to ignore the numeric facts presented above, then that is your perogative. But the facts persist.
Vocenoctum
First Post
BryonD said:
I didn't say it was identical numerically to the Dungeon content. I said it was the same arguement. Are you saying that they are recieving the same content for the same money? Perhaps the change isn't as big as Dungeon's was, but then, they're not saying "get rid of dungeon" like the Dungeon Only people were.
BryonD
Hero
Perhaps the arguement partially follows the same logic pattern.
But the scale remains dramatically different. So the claim that a reciprical response is appropriate falls far short of credible.
Add in that Polyhedron was simply an RPGA supplement that became tacked on to Dungeon (for free), with a promise that no Dungeon material would be lost, and then ended up being used as a basis for significantly increasing the price without increasing Dungeon material.
So part of argument is the same, but on a much smaller scale for Poly. And other parts of the arguement have no analog for Poly.
If you want to claim that Poly readers have reason to complain/be disappointed/whatever, then fine. No argument.
But the shoe is not on the other foot.
If Poly readers want to complain now, then perhaps they should think back with a bit of sympathy to the Dungeon readers who got hit five times as hard a few months ago.
But the scale remains dramatically different. So the claim that a reciprical response is appropriate falls far short of credible.
Add in that Polyhedron was simply an RPGA supplement that became tacked on to Dungeon (for free), with a promise that no Dungeon material would be lost, and then ended up being used as a basis for significantly increasing the price without increasing Dungeon material.
So part of argument is the same, but on a much smaller scale for Poly. And other parts of the arguement have no analog for Poly.
If you want to claim that Poly readers have reason to complain/be disappointed/whatever, then fine. No argument.
But the shoe is not on the other foot.
If Poly readers want to complain now, then perhaps they should think back with a bit of sympathy to the Dungeon readers who got hit five times as hard a few months ago.
Ankh-Morpork Guard
First Post
BryonD said:
But what about those of us who were FORCED into Poly? i.e. Star Wars d20 players. Dungeon readers have no right to complain, in my opinion, because you STILL have a magazine. Now my Star Wars content is being slowly brought down to nearly nothing.
Its all a matter of perspective.
Ankh-Morpork Guard
First Post
Olive said:
Like I said, all a matter of perspective.
Funny though, your comment could easily be used for either side of the Dungeon/Poly arguments. I truly do not believe it will ever be possible to return either Dungeon OR Poly to what they used to be. They've become very interdependent, and the readers just need to learn to coexist. It really isn't THAT hard. Just remember: You weren't forced.
Similar Threads
