Was there a "classic run"?

[Vartan]

I might not be qualified to answer this poll, since I read from #14x to #26x, read only a few Paizo issues and have just caught up on the DDI issues...but I got a LOT of mileage out of the run from #180 to #224. I'd guess that two thirds of the issues during that time contained material that had a major impact on my play.

To this day I still regularly re-read more than a few of those feature articles because they offer great RPG tips that don't revolve around new "crunch" (or even specific systems). In the days before EN World forums, RPG blogs and the internet at large, a four page magazine article about "how to organize your DM notebook" was a major game-changer.

Why do I stop at #224? Issue #225 marked a change in format that seemed to accompany an adjustment of content that I didn't get much out of. I wouldn't say that it went downhill at that point, but it was different in a way that wasn't so helpful to my game.

And #200 wasn't just a big issue, it was a great issue. There was a lot of tasty meat on that Dragon's bones

 

[grodog]

My first subscription to Dragon started with issue #63 or so, after buying #58 at a local bookstore that carried D&D BITD.

My sense of the "best" run of the magazine started c. TD#17 (with EGG's "Faceless Men & Clockwork Monsters" of D&D PCs transported to Metamorphosis Alpha's Starship Warden) up through Dragon issue 80 or 90 so. Somewhere soon thereafter is when I wrote my first (and only) letter to Kim Mohan or Roger Moore (don't recall who was editing then), raising complaints about the drop in quality of the content. (To which one of them replied with Writers Guidelines ). In general, I consider issue 100 to be sort of a cut-off, and I find that there are few issues after that one that I have to open regularly in the Dragon Archive, other than to check out Greyhawk-related articles. I kept up my subscription for another three or four years or so, until the 130s-150s-ish, but let it lapse somewhere in there since I was less and less happy with the content.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I agree with the OP that the classic run began in the 60s, and ran through ... maybe 100 or so? Remember those Denis Beauvais covers (especially the chess covers)? The psionics/Deryni issue? The Elmore and Parkinson art? Remember the orcish citadel shaped like Gruumsh's spear? The racial "Point of View" articles? Truly classic D&D stuff.

That said, I think the Paizo years were the best years, in terms of quality and content. "Classic" and "best" aren't synonyms, I guess is my point.

 

[Henry]

Like everything else at TSR, I'd nominate end of the classic era Dragon not long after Gary left - in truth, the departure of Dave Trampier (& Wormy) is the start of the end of the classic era, and maybe sometime in 100 to 110 is the end period IMO - Definitely include #100 in it, because of the City beyond the Gate module and the Gary Gygax Gord Fiction (and Dragon Chess) included.

 

[Celebrim]

Like everything else at TSR, I'd nominate end of the classic era Dragon not long after Gary left - in truth, the departure of Dave Trampier (& Wormy) is the start of the end of the classic era, and maybe sometime in 100 to 110 is the end period IMO - Definitely include #100 in it, because of the City beyond the Gate module and the Gary Gygax Gord Fiction (and Dragon Chess) included.

We seem to have two differing definitions of 'classic' governing how people answer this question. Does classic mean 'best' or does it mean 'defining'?

 

[Henry]

We seem to have two differing definitions of 'classic' governing how people answer this question. Does classic mean 'best' or does it mean 'defining'?

I'm not sure "defining" fits for "classic" Dragon, because it was defined for the majority of its run as "Fantasy D&D". However, the kind of content released in the run before Gary and Dave Trampier left TSR was very much a whirlwind time of new content, expanding avenues of the game itself, and defining all the different genres people tried to take D&D into as the game grew. There were even modules for different games than D&D in the early print runs. By the mid-80's, there was a definite shift in the kind of content the game covered, they moved modules to a separate magazine after that period, and content became more exclusively defined as "Fantasy" not long thereafter.

Dragon was definitely a "TSR fanzine of all genres of gaming" in its original period.

 

[(un)reason]

Hmm. Looking back on it, so far it seems my favourite eras were from 24-50 odd, when they were expanding meterorically, and it seemed nearly every month would have some small improvement in formatting or a new significant face; and 72-100, from when the ecologies started, to shortly before Gary got kicked out, they got rid of the ARES section, and the proportion of repeated topics and special issues with lots of filler went up quite a bit. Ask me again in a couple of years for a hopefully complete answer.

 

[grodog]

Classic as "defining" is also complicated by the evolution of the system over time, as well as by time itself: even if you were around to play OD&D and AD&D in the days of "The Dragon" the article content is probably less useful for you if you're playing 3.5 or 4.0 these days. And vice-versa: the classic Paizo Dragons probably hold less interest to OD&D, AD&D, and Holmes Basic DMs.

 

[carmachu]

Depends on what parts of Dragon you consider classic.

60-90 are a good choice because they contained (I think I have the range right as I don't have my books handy to check but I think range contains

* the preview material for Unearthed Arcana, by Gygax
* the first rulers of hell/abyss articles
* the beginnings of the ecology of... series, by Ed Greenwood
* the racial point of view articles by Roger Moore.

All of those are core parts of what D&D was in the mid-80s and beyond. YMMV.

There are also several adventures in that range of issues, including yaga baba's hut.

 

[Psion]

I'll echo the 60-90 range, though 150-200 also inpired me a lot.