[Poly] What's happening to Polyhedron/Dungeon?
- Thread starter Macbeth
- Start date
Hodag
First Post
I only read the Poly stuff...
I usually tear the magazine in half so I have less paper to store and give the "Dungeon" section to a friend who actually runs D&D. (I prefer Science-Fiction over fantasy). I'm going to miss the minigame-a-month club, but the decision has been made. I stopped buying Dragon when it became D&D exclusively, guess I'll wait and see what happens with Poly...
I usually tear the magazine in half so I have less paper to store and give the "Dungeon" section to a friend who actually runs D&D. (I prefer Science-Fiction over fantasy). I'm going to miss the minigame-a-month club, but the decision has been made. I stopped buying Dragon when it became D&D exclusively, guess I'll wait and see what happens with Poly...
Emirikol
Adventurer
Rounser started with some suggestions. Here's what I'd like to see:
DUNGEON (best magazine for your buck if you're a DM)
-Continue with the Critical Threats and make more non-monster NPC's for DM's to use as opponents. Highlevel spellcasters and other characters are a big burden on a DM who is design-time-crunched (aren't we all?)
-Do some more things along the lines of what the "Book of Challenges" started allowing them to either be in a scenario or 'generic.'
- Scenarios: A reason why Demihumans are in a scenario, instead of 'let's just throw in some DH's because they're cute..or because the author can't think of a decent background/personality for the character
-Be THE breakthrough publication on design of scenarios for d20 (maybe don't always stick to the 'standard DUNGEON/RPGA format.' (This is just an idea, if it doesn't work, don't hate me..if you don't already.)
-I don't agree with some of Rounser's eval's, but I do agree that the 'Comic's just don't do it for me and may be an area where you guys could save some $$$ and put it elsewhere.
-The COVER ART continues to astound me. You guys always do a good job. If you can, get some more art from Daniel Horne. I love his stuff.
-Adventure path: yes, this is a good idea. Series adventures are cool and memorable locations or NPC's (not always generic) are a good way to put those adventures out. I think DM's feel relief when they have a couple of adventures lined-up, knowing that it's less work for them.
Dungeon has a purpose. It's to help the majority of DM's out there who play in standard D&D worlds. Focus 95% of your energies towards that, and it will continue to be great.
POLY
-Do variant D&D campaigns instead of variant d20 campaigns. I think that the ones presented so far were well put together, but not subject-specific enough (D&D) to the vast majority of players out there (D&D)
-If you do more variant d20 campaigns focus on the most popular settings with ideas on converting to other settings. E.g. if you do D&D with a section on converting to MERP, KALAMAR, or something like that.
-Do an article on how to convert some of these adventures to popular computer games, such as "NWN," "SW Galaxies" or what are the other ones?
Jay Hafner
..
DUNGEON (best magazine for your buck if you're a DM)
-Continue with the Critical Threats and make more non-monster NPC's for DM's to use as opponents. Highlevel spellcasters and other characters are a big burden on a DM who is design-time-crunched (aren't we all?)
-Do some more things along the lines of what the "Book of Challenges" started allowing them to either be in a scenario or 'generic.'
- Scenarios: A reason why Demihumans are in a scenario, instead of 'let's just throw in some DH's because they're cute..or because the author can't think of a decent background/personality for the character
-Be THE breakthrough publication on design of scenarios for d20 (maybe don't always stick to the 'standard DUNGEON/RPGA format.' (This is just an idea, if it doesn't work, don't hate me..if you don't already.)
-I don't agree with some of Rounser's eval's, but I do agree that the 'Comic's just don't do it for me and may be an area where you guys could save some $$$ and put it elsewhere.
-The COVER ART continues to astound me. You guys always do a good job. If you can, get some more art from Daniel Horne. I love his stuff.
-Adventure path: yes, this is a good idea. Series adventures are cool and memorable locations or NPC's (not always generic) are a good way to put those adventures out. I think DM's feel relief when they have a couple of adventures lined-up, knowing that it's less work for them.
Dungeon has a purpose. It's to help the majority of DM's out there who play in standard D&D worlds. Focus 95% of your energies towards that, and it will continue to be great.
POLY
-Do variant D&D campaigns instead of variant d20 campaigns. I think that the ones presented so far were well put together, but not subject-specific enough (D&D) to the vast majority of players out there (D&D)
-If you do more variant d20 campaigns focus on the most popular settings with ideas on converting to other settings. E.g. if you do D&D with a section on converting to MERP, KALAMAR, or something like that.
-Do an article on how to convert some of these adventures to popular computer games, such as "NWN," "SW Galaxies" or what are the other ones?
Jay Hafner
..
Emirikol
Adventurer
BTW, Daniel Horne's artist website is at:
http://www.geocities.com/danielrhorne/index2c.html
You can contact him through the webmaster.
..He made the cover of Spectrum 9 this year too.
Jay H
http://www.geocities.com/danielrhorne/index2c.html
You can contact him through the webmaster.
..He made the cover of Spectrum 9 this year too.
Jay H
ByronD said:
>>>
Boy, if I had known that stroking Poly and calling Dungeon "useless", "DUNG", for people "with no imagination", etc... was what it took to make Erik a happy person, I would have taken a different approach to communication over the past months.
>>>
It shouldn't be surprising that I'm happy when people stand up for the work I do and offer their support.
Nor should it surprise you that I'm somewhat less happy when people tear down the work I do, calling it "useless" or what have you (take a look over the last few months of threads--there are more insults there than I care to remember, most of them far more offensive than calling Dungeon "Dung").
I don't understand where you got the idea that I'm feuding with you. I'm not interested in setting up a rivalry with a reader or unintentionally making anyone angry.
The changes we're making to the magazine are at least in part due to opinions you personally posted to these threads, and as I believe these changes will make Dungeon/Poly a better magazine, I appreciate that you made those suggestions (if not always the way in which they were worded).
There's really no need to keep picking the scabs of old fights.
All I'm saying is give peace a chance.
--Erik
>>>
Boy, if I had known that stroking Poly and calling Dungeon "useless", "DUNG", for people "with no imagination", etc... was what it took to make Erik a happy person, I would have taken a different approach to communication over the past months.
>>>
It shouldn't be surprising that I'm happy when people stand up for the work I do and offer their support.
Nor should it surprise you that I'm somewhat less happy when people tear down the work I do, calling it "useless" or what have you (take a look over the last few months of threads--there are more insults there than I care to remember, most of them far more offensive than calling Dungeon "Dung").
I don't understand where you got the idea that I'm feuding with you. I'm not interested in setting up a rivalry with a reader or unintentionally making anyone angry.
The changes we're making to the magazine are at least in part due to opinions you personally posted to these threads, and as I believe these changes will make Dungeon/Poly a better magazine, I appreciate that you made those suggestions (if not always the way in which they were worded).
There's really no need to keep picking the scabs of old fights.
All I'm saying is give peace a chance.
--Erik
Last edited:
BryonD
Hero
That is fair enough.
However, I myself have never insulted Poly in any way, much less in a manner that approached the vitriol Ranger REG spewed toward Dungeon. On at least two occasions I commented on the irony of his being "on Pazio's team" while slamming the other half of the product.
So I'll hope you understand that I find it more than a little ironic that you hold me (a Dungeon fan) accountable for other people's words, while giving Ranger REG (a Poly fan) a total free pass for his own.
And yes, I have complained about what I have perceived as unprofessional behavior. But never once did I claim Poly was a bad product. I have stated numerous times that it simply does not interest me and I will not buy it.
I am forced to wonder why you perceive anything less than praise of Poly as an insult while remaining oblivous of direct insults to Dungeon (to the point of praising the insulters).
The apparent conclusion is that you yourself are far more enamoured with Poly than with Dungeon. And please understand, that isn't me trying to attack you and claim that you are some anti-dungeon jerk or anything like that. I'm just stating my opinion that the evidence available suggests that your pride and dedication goes first to Poly.
Just today you pledged your undying dedication to Poly. I have never been under the impression that the same personal devotion exists toward Dungeon. Professional desire for a successful and quality product, sure. But personal commitment as shown for Poly, apparently not.
Oh, and when I got the idea you are feuding with me.....
That would start in January. Johnny started a thread here asking for feedback regarding the (then) new 50/50 plan. I was among the first people to say I did not like it. (Even then I wished you luck and just stated that I simply would not buy a product I did not want). Next thing I know you are replying directly to me in a hostile and indignant manner. Repeat this basic scenario 3 or 4 times and it starts to seem like a feud.
Lastly, please recall that before Paizo took over WotC promised that the addition of Poly to Dungeon was a GREAT deal for us Dungeon fans because we would still get all the Dungeon pages and soem bonus Poly pages as a free addition. VERY shortly after that time Paizo takes over, and proceeds to ignore the promises that WotC made. To my mind (and I daresay, a few other Dungeon fans) when one acquires a publication, they acquire the obligations and promises of the publication. At least a polite, formal, we are sorry but we can't do what they said would have been nice. Instead we got, Here's the new plan, anybody who doesn't like it is a mean jerk.
So I think we deserve a LITTLE slack.
However, I myself have never insulted Poly in any way, much less in a manner that approached the vitriol Ranger REG spewed toward Dungeon. On at least two occasions I commented on the irony of his being "on Pazio's team" while slamming the other half of the product.
So I'll hope you understand that I find it more than a little ironic that you hold me (a Dungeon fan) accountable for other people's words, while giving Ranger REG (a Poly fan) a total free pass for his own.
And yes, I have complained about what I have perceived as unprofessional behavior. But never once did I claim Poly was a bad product. I have stated numerous times that it simply does not interest me and I will not buy it.
I am forced to wonder why you perceive anything less than praise of Poly as an insult while remaining oblivous of direct insults to Dungeon (to the point of praising the insulters).
The apparent conclusion is that you yourself are far more enamoured with Poly than with Dungeon. And please understand, that isn't me trying to attack you and claim that you are some anti-dungeon jerk or anything like that. I'm just stating my opinion that the evidence available suggests that your pride and dedication goes first to Poly.
Just today you pledged your undying dedication to Poly. I have never been under the impression that the same personal devotion exists toward Dungeon. Professional desire for a successful and quality product, sure. But personal commitment as shown for Poly, apparently not.
Oh, and when I got the idea you are feuding with me.....
That would start in January. Johnny started a thread here asking for feedback regarding the (then) new 50/50 plan. I was among the first people to say I did not like it. (Even then I wished you luck and just stated that I simply would not buy a product I did not want). Next thing I know you are replying directly to me in a hostile and indignant manner. Repeat this basic scenario 3 or 4 times and it starts to seem like a feud.
Lastly, please recall that before Paizo took over WotC promised that the addition of Poly to Dungeon was a GREAT deal for us Dungeon fans because we would still get all the Dungeon pages and soem bonus Poly pages as a free addition. VERY shortly after that time Paizo takes over, and proceeds to ignore the promises that WotC made. To my mind (and I daresay, a few other Dungeon fans) when one acquires a publication, they acquire the obligations and promises of the publication. At least a polite, formal, we are sorry but we can't do what they said would have been nice. Instead we got, Here's the new plan, anybody who doesn't like it is a mean jerk.
So I think we deserve a LITTLE slack.
I'm a little curious about the vitriolic posts you mention, but rather than call for a bunch of links I'm willing to let bygones be bygones and chalk it up to general crabbiness and miscommunication. I'm not a mean guy (honest!), and I'm sure you're not, either.
I have every intention of making Dungeon the best magazine it can possibly be, according to my own editorial sensibilities (which of course are informed by reader feedback). I do this not just out of professional requirement, but because D&D has been a hugely important force in my life and I'm excited to get a chance to work on the official D&D adventure magazine.
I strongly believe that we can achieve some sort of synthesis of the two magazines that makes most people happy with what they get. The previous mix was _not_ the correct one, and we'll keep tinkering until we get it right.
--Erik
I have every intention of making Dungeon the best magazine it can possibly be, according to my own editorial sensibilities (which of course are informed by reader feedback). I do this not just out of professional requirement, but because D&D has been a hugely important force in my life and I'm excited to get a chance to work on the official D&D adventure magazine.
I strongly believe that we can achieve some sort of synthesis of the two magazines that makes most people happy with what they get. The previous mix was _not_ the correct one, and we'll keep tinkering until we get it right.
--Erik
Bagpuss
Legend
Talking of adverts, the ones for RPG products and not computer games I actually welcome, I think not the only member of the readership that does, for folks that don't check the internet RPG sites regularly it's about the only place they are likely to hear of new products. I want to be informed about RPG products so I welcome those sorts of adverts, not to fussed about the CRPG ones (especially ones for PS2 titles that don't even get a UK release).
Sholari
First Post
Erik Mona said:
Hey Erik,
You definitely come across as a nice guy and I'm sorry if us Dungeon folks have been more than a bit insensitive at times. Personally, the reason I have fought so hard for more Dungeon content is I really see Dungeon as one of the last bastions of quality D&D adventures. Because of the economics of five or so players to every DM, splat books are a lot more profitable than adventures to publish. With a few notable exceptions most adventures published these days just are not the same quality as they used to be. Anyway, thanks for being professional and taking all of our flak to come to some sort of equitable compromise to this problem.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
