reapersaurus said:
A few observations/opinions:
1) I thought the Computer game pages were a waste of space. They didn't even say what platform the game(s) were for! (ignore that if they are available for every gaming platform)
That isn't the point of that recurring section. They use computer games as inspiration for suggestions for the table top game. Given the format of the article, not only is there no need to tell you what platform the computer game is for, it would be a useless waste of space.
2) I also noticed the incredible amount of ADS!
I was actually shocked near the beginning of the mag, as I thumbed thru TWENTY-EIGHT pages and only got the Table of Contents, a weak editorial or 2, mailbag and previews, and a comic strip.
Boo hoo. I had a subscription to Dragon for most of the eighties. Every few months, someone would write in the Dragon talking about how, in recent issues, there were many more ads than there were than previous issues. And guess what? Those assertions were for the most part hogwash, since if you went back and looked through the earlier magazines there were just as many ads.
The few times that there actuially was a modest increase in the number of ads, there was usually a larger increase in page count. And it was always pointed out (and it is just as true now), that ads make the magazine cheaper for you to buy.
3) I am quite surprised that this magazine sells for $5.99 an issue.
I'm not. It is a full color 130 page magazine with a decent binding. I'd expect it to be fairly high on the cost side for a magazine you buy at retail off the rack.
In addition, newstand prices are always high, much higher than subscription prices. I have a subscription, and the price is quite modest.
4) As for the contents, other than the Saurials and the spells, I was very disappointed.
They seem to making a distinct attempt to power down any feats, spells, monsters, PrC's, and magic items.
So? Are you saying they should make a concerted effort to power
up the feats, monsters, PrCs and magic items they put in the magazine? I'd prefer they err on the side of caution in that regard, it makes a DMs job much easier.
Personally I liked the prestige classes, the magic items, the Edo article and the monster-plants. I also liked the blood golem. Most of the other articles had interesting or useful stuff in them to a lesser degree.
5) That CR 20 plant, unless I missed it, could be blown apart by a mage just simply casting fireballs at it.
Um, which CR 20 plant? There wasn't one in the article in my copy of Dragon.
The quasi-artifact magic itmes seemed to be MORE expensive than if you made them yourself, and they were quite weak on the power scale.
They seem to use the standard magic item construction rules from the DMG. They may seem more expensive if you don't account for the increase in cost the results from stacking multiple powers in a single item.
[b[6) The class combinations was a complete waste of time, and the PrC's were extremely niche and fairly unuseable. I particularly thought it interesting that the Fiend Binder had nothing to do with orcs, flavor wise. And mechanic-wise, why would an orcish PrC 'require' CHA?
[/b]
Because the prestige class is rare? In any event, there is no Charisma requirement for the class anyway so you seem to be just making things up there. You have to be able to cast spells, but nothing about the class states they have to be Charisma dirven, none of the class abilities depend upon Charisma. Some class skills are Charisma based, but so what? Some of the class skills for the Tribal Protector are Charisma based, and no one seems to think that is odd.
As for why an orc based class? Why not? Who else is going to be retaining fiendish creatures as animal companions in most campaigns?
7) Also, why a OA, Japan-like sity (Edo) in the wilderness issue?
Edo isn't "Japan-like", it is Tokyo. In any event, you were expecting wilderness or something instead of a city? I'll note that not every article in a magazine ties into the theme of that issue.
).
LOL
