Way to get girls (?!): the new column for the new Dragon.

[mhacdebhandia]

On the other hand, neither did Wil Wheton's column and it had its fans. I don't have to like all the content.

Especially since Dragon being online means you're not "losing" something else so Shelly's column can appear. They have practically infinite "page space"; the inclusion of this column doesn't edge out any article that you might find more useful.

 

[WayneLigon]

That was a great column. I look forward to more of her writing. I saw her book at B&N - correctly shelved in the game section - and wondered if I should pick it up. I definately will, now.

 

[WyzardWhately]

Especially since Dragon being online means you're not "losing" something else so Shelly's column can appear. They have practically infinite "page space"; the inclusion of this column doesn't edge out any article that you might find more useful.

Unless they're, y'know, paying people to produce the content. In which case, they do have a marginal cost curve regardless of whether it's on paper or not.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Are we not allowed to dislike their offerings? Give me Erik Mona's editorials, in which he talks about playing D&D, and usually makes a good point using an anecdote from his gaming history. Stylistically, this article is pretty novel. Experimental, even. Sloppy, in my opinion. I understand why they might want to include it, but I'm not going to read it. If people like it, fine. They can read it. It's not my job to decide whether it stays. But I do have a right to say whether I think it's a good way to write an article.

Hear, hear! IMO fine for a blog but not for paid content of a magazine

 

[Rechan]

Especially since Dragon being online means you're not "losing" something else so Shelly's column can appear. They have practically infinite "page space"; the inclusion of this column doesn't edge out any article that you might find more useful.

Except that Dragon and Dungeon still have page counts, still have word restrictions. Check out their submission guidelines.

 

[demiurge1138]

Except that Dragon and Dungeon still have page counts, still have word restrictions. Check out their submission guidelines.

Yes, but they also have no adspace. This column could have appeared on a hypothetical full-page Reaper ad, f'r instance.

Demiurge out.

 

[Nifft]

Seems perfectly clear to me.

Dragon articles require that you sign-in to D&D Insider to view the content.

I especially appreciate the conclusion.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Matthan]

I liked it. I found it engaging and a fun little read. It didn't inspire my gaming in any particular way, but it is a feature that I would enjoy reading just like I enjoy similar columns in my newspaper.

Though I am curious what in the world happened to her teacher.

 

[wgreen]

Aw, come on, you guys...you didn't think this was at all interesting or useful?

And then like a charging orc, it hit me. New DM's faux antagonizing is part of what's making this fun. He's giving us a reason to invest in our characters, to strategize in battle, to keep coming back. He's giving us a villain -- himself -- sacrificing his cute dimples to give us something to hate. He doesn't want to kill us. He wants to keep us.

-Will

 

[FireLance]

Like the book, the column is amusing, but still more about personal reactions to the game than actual gaming fluff or crunch.

I've previously called the book the "the girly-girl's introduction to D&D", and the Dragon article seems to me to be the girly-girl's column on D&D.