Whatever happened to Dragon?

[Ogrork the Mighty]

I agree with the original poster. I bought the issue for the anniversary special, and everything was crap. I mean, total crap. I would never subscribe to Dragon in its current incarnation. I used to subscribe annually but it just became a combination of character toolkits and useless (and often bizarre) flavour articles.

When I look at the covers of Dragon today, it invariably has bold headlines of "New Feats!", "The new X-Class", or "New Powers that Kickass", etc., etc., etc.

OR

"Aquatic Celestial Elves of the Mountainous Ocean Realm of Zimoy" or some other similar useless article.

 

[Henry]

I agree with the original poster. I bought the issue for the anniversary special, and everything was crap.

Then I ask the same question: Can you name a previous article from the past that you DID get serious mileage from? I'm trying to get an idea what kinds of articles WERE well-liked, and seen immediately as useful.

 

[Alzrius]

Let's face it: there are enough "crunchy bits" out there to fill life-times of campaigns. That's not what I buy Dragon for. What I need from a magazine like Dragon is *inspiration* - something to get my creative juices flowing. I certainly don't need more statblocks, monsters, prestige classes, magic items, rulesets, etc, etc, etc. I've got enough of those.

Inspiration is harder to market.

For some people, inspiration comes in the form of new mechanics. They see the prestige class about the group that draws power from worshipping the Tarrasque, and are inspired for the next evil cult their PCs will have to face, etc.

Likewise, non-mechanical inspiration is harder to print because you have to compete with *everything*. Every book, movie, comic book, television show, etc. is all inspirational for a campaign. It's just easier and more sensible for Dragon to pitch the stuff you can't find so easily: new mechanics.

 

[Thotas]

I'm one of those people who always seems to find something at least interesting to read about in Dragon whether I have any use for it at the table or not. That said, I felt the anniversary issue had ... a nice cover. The following issue was more like what it's been and what I expect. So I'd say to anyone, whether they liked that issue or not, don't judge the mag by it. It's usually not that way.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Then I ask the same question: Can you name a previous article from the past that you DID get serious mileage from? I'm trying to get an idea what kinds of articles WERE well-liked, and seen immediately as useful.

I liked some of the ecology articles (the scorpion comes to mind). I liked Snarf Quest (the current comic series seems really repetitive). I like the Sage. I'm not fond of anything campaign specific (even if it is for a campaign I run, like Ravenloft or Dragonlance, I still think it takes away from the usefulness to others). I like DMing articles (problem is, the ones I find now seem so basic and obvious that they don't really do anything for me).

I like articles with random generator tables. Something like lists of stuff you'd find in an alchemy lab is much more useful to me than how to build a dragon character.

I like the basics. Ya' know, the stuff every DM needs at some point in the game but either doesn't have the time or the knowledge to find it on their own.

 

[cybertalus]

I have a subscription to Dragon, but admittedly some months I read the cover blurbs and don't even bother to take it out of the wrapper. I've found myself uninspired and often downright disappointed by it for a very long time. Although Dragon does have an annoying habit of putting out one or two interesting issues right about the time I decide that I'm definitely not going to renew my subscription again.

Case in point, that anniversary issue. I would've read it for the nostalgia trip anyway (which was actually kind of bleh as nostalgia trips go), but the notion of dragon PCs REALLY intrigued me, so I took a look through it and decided I'd totally jump at the chance to play a silver dragon if it ever came along.

Fastforward to last Tuesday when I decided to give the local gaming club a try. I got hooked up with a DM who had a whole stack of Dragons with stuff tagged with Post-It Note tabs, and said he wanted everyone to pick something unusual to play. While I toyed with a werebear or an ethereal plane dwelling elf who would make a super-excellent rogue, I settled on the silver dragon.

BUT.... in looking through the other issues at the articles the DM had tagged, I also wound up having a lot more respect for Dragon than I've had in a long time.

 

[Samothdm]

Inspiration is harder to market.

For some people, inspiration comes in the form of new mechanics. They see the prestige class about the group that draws power from worshipping the Tarrasque, and are inspired for the next evil cult their PCs will have to face, etc.

The mechanics should go with the inspiration, to serve both types of people.

Start with an article about an evil cult that draws power from worshipping the Tarrasque. Give me seem unique tidbits on the organization, its structure, its history, heck, maybe even some sample rituals or something like that. Talk about some of the organization's goals, and drop hints about some other organizations that are its enemies. Get me interested and excited and make me think about how I would use this organization.

THEN, in a separate article at the end of that one, give me the stat blocks, the PrC and some feats.

Don't just throw a PrC in there with "kewl" powers and a bunch of new feats and then say, "They get their power from worshipping Tarrasques".

 

[Samothdm]

That said, there is *always* something I can use in each issue of Dragon. Even if it's a single magic item or PrC class ability, I find a use for it in my campaign.

Agreed. I might not even use it right away, but I can always find something that I think I *might* use in the future, even if I never get around to it.

Ad for some reason, Dragon has a high re-readability factor. I can pick up a issue 6 months old and discover some new tidbit that would fit my campaign perfectly.

Again, ditto. I still reread old issues from the 1980s and 1990s for inspiration.

Honestly, I'd prefer never to see another line of fiction in Dragon. Give me more stat blocks, please. Crunch makes me tingle.

This I don't agree with, but to each his own. This goes back to inspiration. While I can find inspiration from a really well-designed and unique feat or PrC, it more often comes from background material and story elements. A balance is nice. A 100% crunch-only Dragon would completely kill its uniqueness and readability for me.

 

[CarlZog]

I've read Dragon off and on for 25 years. Nobody's ever agreed on what should be in it, and that's probably good. Keeps the editors on their toes.

All the good, crunchy stuff available on the web has made all the gaming magazines a lot tougher sell than they used to be. Dragon is usually still pretty good.

Ideas that improve my game, mostly as a DM, are the primary things I look to Dragon for. Whether that's a rules technicality, or an inspiring plot line. And since inspiration can come from anywhere, there isn't much that I ignore.

There was a time early on when I liked that they covered all TSR's games -- not just D&D. I've wondered whether becoming a broader d20 magazine would serve them these days, but I kind of doubt it. Too much else out there, and most people seem to focus on one game.

Overall, I've always found the most value in the generic, mildly crunchy stuff --anything that can be incorporated into an average homespun campaign. Super specialized stuff specific to a particular setting usually doesn't do much for me -- although there have been times where Dragon's articles on some setting inspired me to add an element of that setting to an existing campaign.

I'm kind of overwhelmed with prestige classes and their ilk.

Endlessly rehashing basic how-to tips doesn't help me much, but I know it's good for beginners, so I'd hate to see it disappear from the pages. And reading them has occasionally brought me back in line when I start losing sight of the basics.

Fiction has always been a love it or hate it facet of Dragon -- with most hating it. Now that Paizo is resurrecting Amazing Stories, I'm guessing you'll see most fiction drop out of Dragon for the foreseeable future.

Comics? Depends on the artist. JD Webster set the bar pretty high. Except for Aaron Williams, nobody else has ever really raised it. I do like Foglio. Moseley, I can definitely do without, and I never could get into Darlene's or any of the other serious comics.

zog

 

[D+1]

What happened to Dragon is that it no longer has the degree of exclusivity it used to have for D&D material. The OGL is what happened. Of course, you can claim that Dragon was going downhill long before that, but then you can find such claims dating back to... probably letters to the editor in Issue #2 complaining that The Strategic Review was better.

But the fact is that D&D has been changing for a long time, even before 3E came around and Dragon has to keep up with that. It has to continually find what it is that readers WANT out of it and then deal with those readers who wanted something ELSE. No matter what it is they DO put into it they have competition from other magazines, sourcebooks, websites, and so forth.