[Poly] What's happening to Polyhedron/Dungeon?

[Olive]

I like both mags myself, and I only got poly before it joined (and when it was something different).

But it does apply. People acting as if their fundamental rights are being impinged because a magazine is being altered/changed/out of business is a little... excesive in my opinion.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

But it does apply. People acting as if their fundamental rights are being impinged because a magazine is being altered/changed/out of business is a little... excesive in my opinion.

I completely agree. I just get a bit annoyed when die hard Dungeon-only people scream and yell about thier magazine being ruined, when Star Wars Gamer just went boom. There was no Poly to save Gamer like Dungeon had. I think people should just enjoy what they have, and live with it. I've come to coping with the minimal Star Wars content in Poly...why can't Dungeon-only(or Poly-only, they just seem more rare) fans learn to just let things be?

 

[BryonD]

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.

That is a completely separate issue.

And I really don't now anything about it.

 

[BryonD]

I completely agree. I just get a bit annoyed when die hard Dungeon-only people scream and yell about thier magazine being ruined, when Star Wars Gamer just went boom. There was no Poly to save Gamer like Dungeon had. I think people should just enjoy what they have, and live with it. I've come to coping with the minimal Star Wars content in Poly...why can't Dungeon-only(or Poly-only, they just seem more rare) fans learn to just let things be?

So +75% cost should just be ignored with no comment?

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

That is a completely separate issue.

See? All depends on perspective. To me it ISN'T completely seperate.

But my point was simply that the situation with Dungeon/Poly is a much better one than what happened to SW Gamer, even though some people(on both sides) seem to be painting it like the world is ending because the magazine isn't 'perfect'.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

So +75% cost should just be ignored with no comment?

Of course not...at first. But Dungeon/Poly IS Dungeon/Poly now. I think this has just gone on for far too long. Things aren't going to change dramatically. People ARE just going to have to live with it. Its really a Catch-22 for Paizo, and its a painful one to watch. They'll definatly find the perfect balance eventually...but sometimes it seems like no one will give them the chance to.

 

[rounser]

why can't Dungeon-only(or Poly-only, they just seem more rare) fans learn to just let things be?

Because we had it far too good for far too long, and took that for granted? For a long time, Dungeon was, IMO, hands down, the best RPG supplement in gamerdom. It was pure meat...undiluted D&D campaign material free of rulesy nonsense - maps, plots, encounter locations, and NPCs presented as complete adventures (as opposed to "Critical Threats", "Agents and Allies" etc.). For those of us who dug modules, and practically useful (as opposed to theoretically useful) setting material, the magazine was almost too good to believe.

Paizo did what they did in an attempt to save it, but when the past editors said that the best thing they ever did was not meddle with the format, they weren't wrong, IMO (although Adventure Path was welcome). I think that to see it fall afoul of the crunchphilia which the rest of the industry is obsessed with, and have it's pages incorporate Dragon-esque filler is like watching the last bastion crumbling, to a certain degree. It had to be done, though, although I think I'd rather have seen it revert back into Dragon for a while (as an adventure or two per issue or something) if there was a storm to be weathered.

 

[BryonD]

Well, you are the first person I have ever heard mention Star Wars as an issue in the whole Poly/Dungeon thing, much less a significant one.

I can understand that you are disappointed about that.

But that does not make it a visible issue in the Dungeon/Poly debate.

 

[BryonD]

Of course not...at first. But Dungeon/Poly IS Dungeon/Poly now. I think this has just gone on for far too long. Things aren't going to change dramatically. People ARE just going to have to live with it. Its really a Catch-22 for Paizo, and its a painful one to watch. They'll definatly find the perfect balance eventually...but sometimes it seems like no one will give them the chance to.

At first?

It has only been 4 issues since the change occurred. This still is "at first". It took this long for it to become clear that a sufficent portion of the subscriber base was dissatisified and to implement the coming change.

And now it is the Poly people complaining about a change JUST announced in this very thread. So while I may not agree with their position, if complaint is allowed by you, "at first", then you should be allowing it now. Re-hashing the last round of the issues is, unfortunately, part and parcel of discussing the new changes.

 

[Kaodi]

d20 Adventure Magazine

Whoever said that they should make Dungeon/Polyhedron into a d20 Adventure Magazine:

While it might be a nice sentiment, in light of the fact that there is a vehement Dungeon/Polyhedron argument going on, I feel quite comfortable saying that such a move would hands down kill the entire magazine.

No one is going to want a magazine that gives them 20-25% of the content they want, on a good month. The only adventures that should be run in Dungeon are ones that fit the name. Fantasy adventures that are compatible with Dungeons & Dragons, and even these only one every two to four issues. Any more would just kill the amount of useable content for core D&D players, which is the group the magazine is supposed to be for. And the Poly readers would complain even more that there wasn't enough Poly.

1 in 4 Fantasy d20 Adventures MAX. Same ratio for current to such Polyhedron.