Rant About Recent Dungeon Magazines

[Eosin the Red]

Alright now I am teed off

I cancel my FLGS subscription no more than 3 weeks ago then Eric comes in and starts talking sense. Now I have to go back and look like an indesicive dummy. Not that I mind.

Eric - thanks, and good luck on the promotion. You [and Piazo] just solved 85% of my gripes. [Subscriber bonus, declining content quanity and sometimes quality, and frequency of games that I won't use.]

No comment should go without finding something good - I love Christopher West maps. I hate "Gith" anything but found Incursion to be well done to my pleasant surprise.

I like the idea of "Critical Threats" but could we have something that is vaguely human now and then?

Here is hoping to your smashing success.

 

[Iron_Chef]

Iron Chef, I understand and appreciate that you don't care for Polyhedron. That message has definitely come through loud and clear. But I would suggest that just because _you_ don't like something does not make it "consistently awful." --Erik Mona

To clarify, I meant that IMO Poly is "consistently awful." Let me explain what I mean by calling it "consistently awful": By that, I mean I find Poly to be consistently uninspiring and useless for my group's gaming needs now and in the forseeable future. The word "awful" may sound like hyperbole, but if let me explain the context I was using it in, which I did not make clear...

If I don't like something, yet am forced to pay money for it anyway (if I want the rest of the issue's D&D adventure content, not that Paizo is holding a gun to my head), and the content I dislike (Poly) is crowding out more of the material I want (D&D) that I feel SHOULD be in the magazine (because it always was before), then I consider it to be "awful." As in, "I think it's an awful shame" that Dungeon is not the magazine it used to be, and has moved so far away from its roots as to be something I can no longer purchase (let alone subscribe to) in good faith.

Because I only play D&D (FR or homebrew), I can't use any of the mini-games, and none of the SW or most of the LGJ content. The only thing Poly has even limited use with me is the occasional third party product review, third party d20 product release chart or third party d20 insider interview. That amounts to *maybe* 2-3 pages of useful content to me in every Poly, max. Not a good value. I approve of retaining third party d20 coverage in Dungeon, though I believe it would be more apropriate, and of more use to a wider audience if it were in Dragon, instead.

I love Dungeon, I just hate what it's become, and feel the magazine has been done an unintentional disservice by the well-intentioned people at Paizo, who in their desire to keep the magazine alive, have turned it into something I can no longer support and have little desire to even look at, because looking at it in most cases makes me angry, frustrated and sad all at the same time. Dungeon has always been a hit or miss prospect under TSR/WoTC, but under Paizo, it's becoming more and more of a "miss/miss," esp. since the change to monthly.

I do not believe that a significant majority of the Dungeon readership wants Poly in their magazine--that's my gut talking; I'm not privy to any facts or figures, but Paizo has not provided us with any to my knowledge, nor have they conducted a poll or survey to find out what its readership actuallly wants. I do believe a significant, vocal minority (including the Paizo staff) want Poly to continue and to keep including it in Dungeon if it can't be made viable as a separate entity (which I believe they have said it can't).

I sincerely hope some way can be found to make Dungeon be viable again--both financialy to its publisher and creatively to its readership. I'm not sure how that can be done, but I'm sure you'll give it your best, Erik... However, short of the removal of Poly, I doubt it will be a solution that will make me want to buy or subscribe. The removal of epic mega-adventures (page wasters, IMO) and subscriber only content is a good first step. Good luck!

 

[Ranger REG]

Re: Genres

You mean to say genres which no large group of people care to play, support or deal with.

Must the size of fan base dictates which genre the magazine should support or offer?

I think that is the faulty logic here - RPG's are about playing, not about reading some flakey concept on how to have a Soap Opera RPG that will not recieve any kind of mass appeal.

You're right. It's about playing, but not necessarily fantasy RPG that is D&D. That shouldn't be Poly's format. That's already been done with Dragon and Dungeon magazines.

Dungeon magazine was a raved-about magazine for a long time - it should have been left alone. I want to play D&D, not read about Teenage Kangaroos in Space.

With all due respect to everyone, I didn't think Dungeon would last this long. I mean it's a magazine filled with adventures, and not everyone is going to play all of them. So basically, you're lucky to to play one of them for the full price of the magazine.

The same with Dragon. Some rules articles may appeal to your own individual games, some may not. Sometimes, an entire issue can be a complete hit or a complete miss.

But that's the thing with us gamers, we have a wide range of preferences. I may like certains element that the majority would want, then again, I'd like to see certain topics be explored that I am in the minority.

 

[Kenpo Wolf]

A few comments.

We're cutting Mini-Games to four per year. This allows us to focus on making them as close to perfect as possible and allows us the space to cover other topics such as LG, Star Wars, d20 Modern, CoC, etc. A lot of this content will be dictated by the number of high-quality submissions I get, but I have high hopes. Issue 103, which we're working on now, has all kinds of stuff in it and is a good model for the direction I want to take the magazine (it's not there yet, but it's getting there).

I'm working on the subscriber section.

--Erik

From a fan of the mini games, most of them that is, I don't like the idea of having only four a year. Another thing is I don't want to see is D&D material, and that includes the Greyhawk stuff, in Polyhedron. That should remain in the Dragon and Dungeon magazines. I had high hopes when the Dung/Poly went monthly but have been greatly disappointed. The straw that broke the camel's back, to use a old saying, is the recent Incursion issue of Poly. You called it a Minigame but all it was was another D&D supplement. And with it being a even numbered issue, 100 if I recall, it should have had at least one Star Wars article which was not the case. At least the latest issue had a great minigame, ILOJ, which I'll definitely be using.

 

[Iron_Chef]

Flakey concepts should be left to third party publishers and fan sites like Malls & Morons, where my gaming dollar is not forced to subsidize such non-commercial concepts with every issue.

Another reason the mini-games fail to work for me is that there is no support. Make them OGC, and let them grow or die on their own with third party and fan support. Another stumbling block to use them is that there are no adventures to make them easier to run! My group has no time for one-shots. If the games were of interest to us and were supported, we might try some as a campaign. I stress *might*, because most of the ones I've seen fail to make me want to have anything to do with them. I've never felt the urge to roleplay Josie & the Pussycats, Doc Savage, World War 2, Giant Robots, Cannonball Run, Buffy, TMNT, etc.

Now, for the remainder of this post, I'll try to inject some ideas I just had with as little of my trademark "hyperbole" as possible...

Here's an idea to keep Poly alive AND make the D&D crowd happier... Make Poly for variant fantasy d20 games, and make the material OGC. Introduce new rules, feats, spells, etc. Create mini-games that could be used in a D&D campaign. Some ideas that have not been covered yet by WoTC are low magic worlds or no magic worlds (maybe even a real medieval historical setting). Another idea instead of the mini-games is adventure locations! Put in an entire fully statted D&D city with buildings and NPCs described that suggest adventure ideas to DMs but do not actually contain any specific adventure. Or put in an entire neighborhood, village or city block in microscopic detail. Or even just a tavern, inn, guild or temple. Or a rogue's gallery with dozens of fully statted and illustrated NPCs (preferably villains).

In short, make Poly useful to D&D players while encouraging readers to expand their ideas of what makes a D&D game. Put in some thoughtful, RP-intensive stuff to balance out the brain-dead hack-n-slash "back to the dungeon" nonsense WoTC's bee pushing on us since 3.0. Show us what D&D can do outside the dungeoncrawl, like AEG's brilliant "Dynasties & Demagogues" recently did for political adventures. If I could actually use Poly material in my D&D games, I would be a lot happier about its inclusion in Dungeon.

I'm thinking Dungeon should be revamped into the "DM's Magazine"... not just for adventures, but for addressing variant D&D rules, settings, ideas, etc. Everything to make the DM's life easier, which means fully statted/equipped NPCs (with spells prepared), locations, advice on how to challenge PCs, cool ways to bend or break the rules to create the game you want, etc.

 

[d20Dwarf]

The joke in my gaming group (and I hope you've read George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series, or this joke will fall flat) is that when someone creates a Game of Thrones game, there would be a one-handed sister-er Prestige Class for those who wish to play a Jaime Lannister-esque character.

It's funny because it's so true

There is in fact no such class.

Oops, did I just break my NDA?

 

[Bob the Reaver]

Well since Dragon/dungeon is fast vecoming my only DND outlet (not D20) i feel I should tell ya what I want out of it as well.

I really like it. Esp the Poly side. Its really cool and very very cheap. Please be sure to keep it. If you are only doing 4 mini games a year you should most certainly expand on some of the coolest you have made already in the "off months".

The things I dont like. The readers forum or whatever it is. This is the perfect place for those people to whine. Dont waste ink on them. I dont like Star wars stuff either, but hey.

I really dont like all the format changes and subscription changes and content changes. Man this is annoying. I belive your problem here is that you listen to us to much. Really man stick with a plan!!! For at least 6 months to a year. Unsatisfied customers are much more vocal then us folks who think the magazine is fine(or even great).

However what I realy really want is for you, ERIC MONA, to get your butt into gear and really get me some Mutants and Masterminds products! **Cracks Whip!** Yah MULE!

Honestly you guys do a fine job I'll always subscribe. Its cheap and you get a lot of D20 content. And its pretty too. MORE DOWNER!!!!!

 

[frankthedm]

Let us vote with our wallets!

Split em!

1 month poly

1 month dungeon

And let people pick if they want one, the other or both!

I'm thinking Dungeon should be revamped into the "DM's Magazine"... not just for adventures, but for addressing variant D&D rules, settings, ideas, etc. Everything to make the DM's life easier, which means fully statted/equipped NPCs (with spells prepared), locations, advice on how to challenge PCs, cool ways to bend or break the rules to create the game you want, etc.

Unfortunatly this might be the exact opposite way Paizo wants to take the magazine. Thing is, Dungeon always was a DM's magazine. There are fewer DM's than players, at least according to PHB sales. I have this sickening hunch the polyhedron content was added to make it more of a players magazine to increase possible subsciption base. Though it wasn't the first step twards making the magazine more 'sellable'. The Glossy paper led the way for the unneeded full color witch led to lazy color based art.

And yes I have to say

Get poly out of my Dungeon Masters magazine!

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Down with Poly, up with Dungeon!

I get Dungeon because I want D&D adventures. Not Star Wars adventures, not Modern adventures, not mini-games. I like LGJ content because it's D&D; the Incursion mini-game was tolerable to me because it is essentially D&D. But Thunderwhatzit and Hijinks -- blech! It's not that the Poly content is bad, necessarily; it's just not why I've been subscribing to Dungeon since before the merge.

There should probably be a generic d20 magazine that does all that other stuff that Poly represents; if it can't survive on it's own, why not combine it with Paizo's other gaming magazine -- whatsitcalled?

Then Dungeon will be pure D&D Dungeons. If Dungeon can't survive on its own at that point, combine it with Dragon. We'll have one D&D magazine, a bit longer, with 1-2 adventures per issue. I'll happily pay for the content I want if it means I don't pay for content I don't want.

Edit: To be fair, most of the things Erik has discussed so far sound like a step in the right direction, if not going quite as far as I'd like, yet.

 

[Glyfair]

As a newsstand purchaser of Dungeon I have to say the subscriber only adventures was one of the worst decisions they could have made.

Probably. Personally, as long as there is the equivalent amount of useful subscriber only content, I'll be satisfied (say a few side treks, critical threats, etc).

Unfortunately, Paizo painted themselves in a corner by announcing subscriber only adventures. I'm sure many bought their subscriptions with the understanding they'd be getting these (although it may not have been the most significant reason for the subscription).

To tell the truth, Dungeon isn't a magazine I'd pick up at the newstand. It's something I'd subscribe to, or page through on the shelf.

I admit to having mixed feelings about the changes in the magazine. I really didn't like Polyhedron as an RPGA member. It suffered too much from a lack of focus for my tastes and I found very little of use in the magazine. The Living Greyhawk Journal was much more of use to me (and much more focused). However, when they moved to Dungeon, the magazine jumped several points in my eyes. The removal of most of the direct RPGA coverage (which didn't add anything to me), gave more room for articles I found useful.

I really don't like the change to a monthly magazine. While I would have loved to get Dungeon/Polyhedron monthly (for the obvious increase in cost), what I'm getting is about 1/2 a Dungeon/Polyhedron per month. This certainly has left me with an unsatisfied feeling every month (well, except for issue #100, which was what I'd really like the magazine to be). I'd rather they go back to bi-monthly.

However, my biggest issue is when I do business with a company, I expect a certain amount of professional integrity from the company. If they announce something, I expect them to follow through. Sure, somethings may need to be modified (this article was late, so it'll be in next issue). However, promising things I would make buying decisions based on, and them removing it, isn't showing respect for me as a customer (indeed, someone who was a loyal enough customer to subscribe to the magazine since I returned to playing D&D)

Then again, Erik wasn't clear with what his intentions are. Maybe he's not eliminating the subscriber only adventures. Maybe he's just planning on dealing with the issue in some other way. I'm awaiting his clarification. Until then, I'm not renewing my subscription, though. I expect to know what the conditions of my subscription are.

(As an aside, the first renewal notice last month was for the old bimonthly issue deal - I found that odd they'd still be sending that out. My current one is currect, though.)

Glyfair of Glamis