Why _DON'T_ You Buy Dragon Magazine?

[Emirikol]

How about sample adventuring parties in stat form with some light personalities.

Another gripe: why don't your prestige classes ever come with SAMPLE characters? There should be a set-up just like in the DMG. One at first, one at 5th and one at 8th (or so). Now, that would be REALLY helpful.

Controversial stuff is always nice too. Like the stats for various characters from books or movies. People still love to argue why Raistlin-DL has such a statistically high Con...



jh

 

[Emirikol]

How about sample adventuring parties in stat form with some light personalities.

Another gripe: why don't your prestige classes ever come with SAMPLE characters? There should be a set-up just like the NPC's in the DMG. One at first, one at 5th and one at 8th (or so). Now, that would be REALLY helpful.

Controversial stuff is always nice too. Like the stats for various characters from books or movies. People still love to argue why Raistlin-DL has such a statistically high Con...



jh

 

[DaffCon1]

I actually do buy Dragon, and I have for years -- since like '90 or so.

Having said that, I can say I've not been nearly as enthused over the magazine as I used to be. It's getting to be too crunch-heavy. New PrCs, new feats, variant rules for this and that...

I want my Ecology articles back. The new version of D&D tells us nothing more about a critter than how to slay it -- we get nothing of its ecology or anything like that, important details that added flavor and gave us real, non-CR reasons for including monsters. By knowing a bit on how a critter lives, we can use it far more effectively.

I want my fiction back. There's been some utter crap as far as fiction is concerned, but there's also been some true gems in there. I used to always look forward to reading the fiction... And while we're at it, go back to accepting submissions from unpublished writers! What's wrong with giving a new writer a chance?

I want more campaign-specific articles, particularly for the Realms. Campaign-specific articles are often very flavorful, and I draw more inspiration from that flavor than I do from yet another dry "Here's a prestige class for left-handed, near-sighted, red-headed paladins named Fred." If I need a rule, I can make it up or wing it, or both. Give me flavor -- that inspires me. Crunch bores me.

Lose the Gary Gygax column. My personal feelings about the man aside, I have drawn little pleasure and zero usefulness from reading those. (Please, no one attack me on this one. I'll not reply.)

I want it to return to being a magazine that I can't wait to read, instead of one I leave sitting around for weeks before I ever flip thru it. I want it to be entertaining, again.

 

[Christopher Lambert]

I'm about half-way through a much needed vacation, so of course I'm sitting here thinking about work.

I know many of you _do_ buy Dragon regularly, and for that I send you a hearty holdiay cheer and a simple statement: thanks.

But I also know that many of you don't buy Dragon, and I'd like to know why. Over my 20+ years as a D&D player, I've had "on" periods and "off" periods with the magazine, so I know what sorts of things went into my personal decision not to buy Dragon, but I'd like to know yours.

If I can make some changes to the magazine to make it a more attractive purchase, there's a chance we all go away happy.

So, if you're _not_ a regular customer of Dragon magazine (let's say you buy fewer than three issues annually), please take a minute or two to answer the following questions.

1. Why don't you buy the magazine?

Too expensive, and rarely is there enough useful material, for reasons generally stated above.

I'm also very tired of prestige classes. You used to have Class Acts for clerics of FR deities, for instance, where you suggested ways of multiclassing the characters so they could replicate their 2e abilities. The articles suggested not using prestige classes.

Sure enough, WotC later starts turning these concepts into prestige classes. It's probably more WotC's fault than Paizo's fault but it's very irritating. It's also too difficult to find specific Class Acts because of the lack of that index.

Only a small amount of material should be campaign-specific. It's pretty easy to generate material that pertains to a terrain type, character class, or what not without stepping on the toes of a campaign setting. (Say "desert" not "Athas" or "Anauroch".)

2. What sort of changes would make you more likely to give it another look?

I'd like to see themed articles, such as a "high-level fighter feats" article (well, more an entire issue based on that, really ) or "character concept of [insert Campaign Setting here]". I'm more interested in things that work within the core rules than new rules (such as new uses for skills), although in a few areas (like high-level fighters) more feats are needed.

Any new crunch needs playtesting. A lot of it has clearly not been playtested, or it wasn't tested enough, or perhaps no munchkins got to look at it. You should visit the WotC boards, find out who the best munchkins are, and have them playtest your material. They will find every loophole and point them out to you. You could use an MSN or Yahoo group for this. If you're doing psionics stuff, I can recommend ... err... myself

There should be standards ahead of time for how powerful new crunch should be so you don't end up with a lame feat on page 8 and a super-powerful feat on page 10. (I saw stuff like this in the Book of Iron Might... that wasn't exactly a joyous occassion.) These standards should reflect the power level of the core rules to prevent a general powering-up of the options.

I'm not averse to psionics, D20 Modern or even fiction, but such stuff should be used sparingly to avoid alienating the fan base.

 

[Zaukrie]

Erik, thanks for asking. I am a subscriber, and have many of the magazines since the the issues were in the 50 range. I've let the subscription go a few times, and I think I'm about to let it go again.

I'll actually take time if you want to go through the last couple years and let you know what worked and didn't, but the fact I can remember articles from the 80's and 90's better than I can almost any since 3rd edition should be a warning sign.

Like many here, I miss the fluff. I remember someone mentioning that the minis handbook should have explained what a shambling mound really was. Someone pointed them to the MM (or whichever book has it in this version). I'm still not sure that person would understand what a mound was, as WoTC has removed most of the interesting stuff from their monster books, a trend that has been echoed in Dragon.

If you want to know what would keep me subscribing, go back and find that thread where you asked us what our favorite articles were. They were all fluff, with crunch in there as notes.

I think your job is hard. Most of us older gamers have seen a million books and articles on elves and dwarves, but newer players haven't. You need to reach both groups. Good luck, and I mean that because I love this hobby.

I thought this idea was interesting:

"I'd almost like to see Dragon be the D&D National Geographic. I'd like to see articles on historical settings, unique places, creatures and races, etc. Ideas are what drives the game IMO, not new PrC's and feats. "

Think about articles on magical, mystical places, the people that live there and how they are affected by what is going on around them. There are a million rules books, we need ideas (or at least I do) that can be used in many ways. I think back to articles on fantasy castles, the Nine Hells, AKA, Ecology, Sheens, you get the idea.

Increasing comics and fiction won't bring me back. Depth of articles is your only chance to compete against Phil Reed (great work there) and free content on web sites. I think I rambled here, sorry for that. Good luck finding Dragon's soul again. It seems sterile and rather boring (thanks for bringing back Bizarre of the Bizarre - if I could have, I would have cancelled my subscription the moment I saw that letter to the editor). Where's the fantasy in my fantasy?

 

[quindia]

Ditto... for the most part

I agree with a lot of points made here, but many of the things people wish for are more DM material which now belongs in Dungeon - and the reason almost everyone is saying "...but I do buy Dungeon!"

I still do buy Dragon but like many of the other posts I read (I stopped after three or four pages) I just don't need anymore prestige classes, feats, or spells and have been considering not getting it any more.

What would make me more interested in Dragon? Hard to say actually. I am a DM 90% of the time and most of the articles that I am drawn to are in that category. Unlike most of the posts here, I also don't mind non-D&D articles. I miss the Ares section from the old days. I guess I would like to see full articles along the line of Robin Laws' "The Play's the Thing" column (while I'm on the subject of columns I'd like to see Dungeoncraft grouped together under one cover... maybe the kind of thing we're going to get with the DMG II?).

Anyway, good luck, Erik. I sincerely hope you'll be able to revitalize Dragon, but without the DM articles, you've got a tough job!

 

[Erik Mona]

The desire to tell you guys about changes I've _already made_ to the magazine is overwhelming, but I'm going to hold off for another day or so.

This feedback is enormously helpful, and I really appreciate everyone's time. Keep it coming.

--Erik Mona
Still on Vacation, Still Working

 

[fafhrd]

This feedback is enormously helpful, and I really appreciate everyone's time. Keep it coming.

--Erik Mona
Still on Vacation, Still Working

Erik, really, go have a margarita and turn off the computer. It's well earned. You couldn't stop us from giving you an earful at this point, and we'll be here when you've rested.

 

[Erik Mona]

Nah. Listening to all of you agree with me is too fun.

--Erik

 

[MerricB]

Which is the first issue we'll see your changes in effect, Erik?

Cheers!