I agree with ASEO. As a buyer who has read, played and owns every issue of Dungeon from 1-119, Wil Save is a rare black mark against the otherwise impeccable record that Dungeon has maintained.
There was a count taken on the other Failed Wil Save thread (Sorry, ASEO, I checked it out) that revealed overwhelming support for Wil's article. I think it would be interesting to note on how many of the newbie buyer's (#80 up) liked Wil's article as opposed to the longtime readers.
Why DUNGEON? (I'd actually like to hear from Eric on this), and really hope the answer is not "We wanted to water down the game content of this great magazine." of cource I'm sure it will be much more politically correct in its wording. After all, aren't store baught cupcakes better if they have that fluffy three-inch high blue iceing?
If the answer was "It gets ASEO to come back to the site every day", that'd be good enough for me. : )
- rob
|
Are short stories next?
As additional content I would certainly like to read them. Most of my ideas (and the most interesting of my NPCs) have their origins in literature, so I wouldn´t mind it at all.
I think it would be interesting to note on how many of the newbie buyer's (#80 up) liked Wil's article as opposed to the longtime readers.
I began reading with the Dungeon's first issue. Though I stopped around #30 and #118 being my first new issue, I don´t count myself as a newbie buyer. And I like Wil´s article.
I think it doesn´t matter how old you are ore how long you play the game. It´s about how serious you take it. If you think the Dungeon's content should be purely game-related and nothing else matters, then you won´t like Wil´s save.
I have another approach: D&D is all about entertaining people and so are the magazines. While Dungeon is centered on modules there is (for me) no more value in it compared to the Dragon´s articles. With respect to my campaigns, an article like "Tomb Raider" or a story like "the Silverfish" (both Dragon 327) has much more value compared to the whole Adventure Path (though i loved its storyline and will be most enlightened to read the next one :) )
What I´m looking for (in both magazines) is entertainment. For me Wil´s save IS entertaining so why should i mind its appearance in Dungeon Magazine?
I don´t say that the "Purist" view of things is worse than mine. But i think for me there are more things to gain fun from and fun is the thing it's all about, right?
So, um... is this the right place for me to confess that I like Jar Jar Binks. :blush:
you... sick, sick man. you need professional help.
|
First I'd like to just mention that when I write a long post (say, spend more than 15 minutes on it), the "submit post" will often fail and I'll be taken to the online store. If anyone from Paizo knows why that happens, I'd appreciate it if it could be fixed.
So, I was writing a fairly long post last night before I left for the game in which I am a player, but it was lost.
I am of course in the camp that would prefer not to have Wil Save in the magazine. In order to justify that position I've spent much of my free time this past week or so reading Wil's internet blog (located at http://www.wilwheaton.net/ ).
One of the things I've heard a number of times in Wil's defense is his "humanity". Wil is very "human", and he brings him "humanity" to the article. I think that is certainly true. Wil has had a somewhat difficult life. In many ways it seems there are aspects of his job on "Star Trek: The Next Generation" that have hampered his current life and his professional development.
I really like Star Trek: TNG, and I never had a problem with Wil Wheaton's character, Wesley Crusher. I didn't know he had quit the show, I assumed he was written into a smaller role because it made sense. I'm not attacking a character that was played eighteen years ago. Wil has been quick to attack his critics as people who just can't get over Wesley Crusher. I really want to make it clear that I'm not in that category.
It seems that Wil would like people to forget about his role as Wesley Crusher, and instead treat him on his own merits. I currently live in Iowa, but I grew up in Southern California. I've eaten at the Hooters in Pasadena that figures prominently into his "web blog introduction". I'd also say that I don't get very excited about seeing famous people. It wasn't an everyday occurence, but it happened with alarming frequency. For example, I used to often walk past John Lithgow from "3rd Rock from the Sun" by the Anderson School of Business on the UCLA campus. Mr. Lithgow (sp?) walks his dog through there almost every morning. I've never been very impressed with celebrities. I recognize them as normal people who are "celebrated" by more people. As an entertainer you can make quite a lot of people happy, but you aren't going to be truly "known". The best you can hope for is that some of your characters are popular, and the masses think they like "you". Whether Wil Wheaton likes it or not, most people associate him with Star Trek. In a very real sense, that is the source of his celebrity status. I don't want to attack his portrayal of Wesley Crusher, but I do not to talk about his selection as the writer for the back page of Dungeon.
I think most of us agree that the column in the back of Dungeon would be fun to write (whether we think it belongs there or not). I never heard a call for submissions, or a request to create such an article. Although the editors need a free hand in getting content to the magazine (I don't expect them to run every adventure by me or anything) changes in format are certainly something the readership should be told about. In very general terms, we were. Now, with this new column, there are probably a lot of people that would have enjoyed writing it. How did Wil Wheaton get the job?
If he submitted a column idea to Dungeon and they took him up on it, I have no problem. In fact, if he put any work into getting the job, it won't really bother me. However, as an outsider it looks like the job sort of fell into his lap. Why? Because he is somewhat famous having played Wesley Crusher on Star Trek. Again, I have nothing against the character; I'm unhappy that someone unrelated to gaming was given a choice position simply because they are famous. I would be just as upset if the job went to Vin Diesel.
I'd like Paizo to tell us how Wil was chosen. I'd also like to hear his comments, if he has the time to come read this thread. Even if you feel Wil writes well, is there the possibility that someone else could do better? If that is the case, ought the magazine change for that purpose? If the column is going to be retained, I'd like to see it written by a gaming insider.
Wil Wheaton really seems like a great guy, but he isn't the gamer I think we should read about. The man has played just about every Steve Jackson game, and not nearly so much of Dungeons & Dragons.
If it seems to you that the column could be better with a different writer, then this doesn't have to be a pro-Wil, anti-Wil disagreement. If the column is only kept because of Wil, we should also consider the possibility that it should be replaced.
I think if we each thought about it, we could think of something we'd rather see in that spot. Try it. If they could print any (1) thing, what would you like to see? Remember that they won't, so you can say anything. I wouldn't mind seeing an Elmore painting, or even a Julie Bell & Borris Vallejo collaboration :drool. Even Keith Parkison, or really, any really great fantasy artist. There are other things I'd rather see there too. Now you try.
I think this was a very thoughfull and eloquent exposition on Wil Save. I would really like to read a similar one on why he should stay. Thanks DeadDMWalking
First I'd like to just mention that when I write a long post (say, spend more than 15 minutes on it), the "submit post" will often fail and I'll be taken to the online store. If anyone from Paizo knows why that happens, I'd appreciate it if it could be fixed.
So, I was writing a fairly long post last night before I left for the game in which I am a player, but it was lost.
Your session times out after one hour of inactivity. If you want to compose super long posts, you can work around this limitation by composing in a Word processor and pasting it in when you're done.
If you firmly believe it is timing out in less than an hour, please let us know at tech.support@paizo.com
Best regards,
Rob
|
|
I think if we each thought about it, we could think of something we'd rather see in that spot. Try it. If they could print any (1) thing, what would you like to see? Remember that they won't, so you can say anything. I wouldn't mind seeing an Elmore painting, or even a Julie Bell & Borris Vallejo collaboration :drool. Even Keith Parkison, or really, any really great fantasy artist. There are other things I'd rather see there too. Now you try.
I see two problems with your argumentation.
First : I admit there are things I´d rather see instead of Wil´s Save. I´d like to see this column written by Robert Jordan, beloved author of 'The Wheel of Time' and former DM, as he states in the WoT-Handbook´s introduction. Alternatively,I´d like to read the column written by Gary Gygax, Ed Greenwood or Monte Cook. Problem is this wouldn´t change anything. As long as this column is not game-related but just entertaining, People like ASEO will complain for the same reason they do now.
Second: I could use the same argumentation with respect to the printed modules. I´d rather see modules written by Gary Gygax than by "insert any name you like" . Though this won´t happen, why not to drop all those modules actually printed?
See my Point? I think just anything can be replaced by something better ("better" being a highly subjective judgement) , but as long as nothing better is found we should be content with the (in my opinion good) things we have.
By the way, wasn´t it you stating that it actually was a good deal to replace something enjoyed by 50% by something enjoyed by 90% ? Good point, but if Medesha´s count holds there are ~75% of the readers enjoying it (or at least don´t mind it). And 75% seems a quite high percentage to me, since I´m not sure that there are many modules printed in the Dungeon which would get the same percentage, if a poll asked how many readers actually found a specific module useful.
It´s your turn again :)
I would love to see a monthly Critical Threat. Whatever happened to those?
People like ASEO will complain for the same reason they do now....
Absolutely true!
Second: I could use the same argumentation with respect to the printed modules. I´d rather see modules written by Gary Gygax than by "insert any name you like" . Though this won´t happen, why not to drop all those modules actually printed?
Absolutely False!
No matter who writes an adventure, it has game use. Some of the best adventures I've played from the pages of DUNGEON have been written by nobodys (not intended as any form of insult) while some of those written by the editors of the time have blown. While I'll admit that some authors are better than others, I personally don't top my list with Gygax just because of his name (Wolfgang Baur is a strong contender for that top spot though). Just because you have a big name in Gaming doesn't make your work is great. Just look at Fast Forward Games led by Jim Ward...Pure tripe. And Greenwood's self glorification of Elminster has become nothing but pathetically comical. Still, a coloum by any of them, that provided alternative classes, as Monte Cook is so fond of doing, is something I'd welcome to DUNGEON...because it would have game impact.
If the answer was "It gets ASEO to come back to the site every day", that'd be good enough for me. : )
I'll come back twice a day if you kill Wil Save ;-)
ASEO out
oh, and...Wil Save is DUNGEON's Jar-jar Binks.
|
|
Absolutely false!
No matter who writes an adventure, it has game use.
You are absolutely right, but this wasn´t the point I tried to make. Instead I tried to turn DeadDMWalkings argumentation against him. Inviting us to think about better contents than Wil's Save may eventually lead to some results. But it is no reason to stop printing Wil's Save NOW. And if it was, I could use the same arguments against any printed module, being sure that there is a better one which deserves the place more than the module in the Mag (and there is always a better one). I used Gary Gygax' name as an example (I admit that I love the old modules - look on the "30 greatest D&D adventure" listing, discard Ravenloft and, well, you´ve got a good impression of my personal taste ), but if you prefer Wolfgang Baur, I´ve no prob with that, I like his works myself.
Besides, you don't have to like Gygax, Greenwood & Co.; but without them you should have a real problem how to kill your time, D&D being no option simply 'cause it did not exist ^^.And cursed be HE who scoffed at Elminster's Power and Glory :D
Who gives a s@!!? It's ONE PAGE. IMO it would fit better in Dragon, but this is fine. Truth is I thought I'd hate the column but I enjoy it. I'd still toss it in a heartbeat for another critical threat or map of mystery, though.
So, um... is this the right place for me to confess that I like Jar Jar Binks. :blush:you... sick, sick man. you need professional help.
Well, yeah - but you already knew that before my confession. ;)
|
|
I see two problems with your argumentation.
I hate it when I have problems. But having them pointed out to me is *far* superior to having them sneak up on me. I hate being surprised by problems. Anyway....
First : I admit there are things I´d rather see instead of Wil´s Save. I´d like to see this column written by Robert Jordan, beloved author of 'The Wheel of Time' and former DM, as he states in the WoT-Handbook´s introduction. Alternatively,I´d like to read the column written by Gary Gygax, Ed Greenwood or Monte Cook. Problem is this wouldn´t change anything. As long as this column is not game-related but just entertaining, People like ASEO will complain for the same reason they do now....
I think you raise a valid point, but it isn't really a problem with the argument I presented. The article has two issues. The first is whether it should exist or not. While that is something that should be debated, we can try to work out other issues, and then use the information gleaned from that process to reflect on whether the article should stay or go. I think that my major point was, "if the article remains, should it continue to be authored by Wil Wheaton?"
I think that it appears the job was given to him because of his fame from "Star Trek". He doesn't want to be judged now for his work there. If we take his desire seriously, he shouldn't be given the job of writing this article for that reason only. If he was chosen because his is now a writer, that would be a different story. I'm responding to what is only my perception. I'd like to encourage Paizo to be a meritocracy, not a club for famous people. The fact that it allows a forum for any of us to attempt to become published, to enter the game industry - that is GREAT! Besides having gotten this job simply because he is famous (as I said, as it appears to me) there are really only two other criticisms of Wil Wheaton.
1) He is not terribly familiar with Dungeons & Dragons, having played mostly Steve Jackson games.
2) His articles reference gaming peripherally, if at all.
Others might want to argue that he doesn't write well - but I see that and other such issues as simple preference. They don't really matter since they cannot be considered as "factual". We can discuss the two points I delineated from a strictly fact-based perspective.
Second: I could use the same argumentation with respect to the printed modules. I´d rather see modules written by Gary Gygax than by "insert any name you like" . Though this won´t happen, why not to drop all those modules actually printed?
The modules are accepted or rejected on their own merit. I am as likely to have an adventure published as Gary Gygax. Or at least, I should be, assuming our writing ability is equal. See the above comments about meritocracy. Why would you rather see adventures by Gygax instead of just the "best" adventures?
See my Point? I think just anything can be replaced by something better ("better" being a highly subjective judgement) , but as long as nothing better is found we should be content with the (in my opinion good) things we have.
Striving for improvement is a strongpoint of both Dungeon & Dragon magazines. There are particular core issues that should remain untouched. Obviously Dungeon is designed on providing a magazine that provides adventure for Dungeons & Dragons. If I want the magazine to provide me Needlework information, the editors would do well to advise me to pick up a different publication. Wil Save is peripheral to the mission of the magazine. It can be removed and the MAGAZINE won't suffer. However, if you took the adventures out of Dungeon, it wouldn't EXIST.
By the way, wasn´t it you stating that it actually was a good deal to replace something enjoyed by 50% by something enjoyed by 90% ? Good point, but if Medesha´s count holds there are ~75% of the readers enjoying it (or at least don´t mind it). And 75% seems a quite high percentage to me, since I´m not sure that there are many modules printed in the Dungeon which would get the same percentage, if a poll asked how many readers actually found a specific module useful.
An argument based on the numbers responding to this thread may not be representative. They may, however, be completely correct throughout the readership. Again, the magazine exists to provide adventures, so subscribers at least should be happy with adventures, whether they're useful or not. That is indeed why the magazine exists. I don't know how I could expect to use an adventure from EVERY magazine at the time of publication. What I do find is that I can always use an adventure from issues several months ago. Dungeon is useful to me because I have dozens of issues, not because I have the latest issue.
It´s your turn again :)
Right back at you.
At the risk of beating a terribly dead horse:
There are obviously some readers of Dungeon who strongly dislike Will Save. At the same time, I think that the amount of energy and emotion being expended on reviling the column is really out of proportion to the "offense" of its presence in Dungeon.
To paraphrase Erik Mona slightly:
It's difficult for me to get bent out of shape about the fact that you don't care about _1_ page in the entire magazine. It's not for you. That's ok.
I think this is really the crux of the matter: Will Save is _one_ page per issue. Obviously, Erik and the Dungeon crew see a reason to keep it. Whether that's feedback that doesn't make it to the letters page, or the highly unscientific like/dislike numbers that've emerged from this thread, or just the fact that they like the column and it's a page of guaranteed content each month from a reliable writer**, we don't know. We're not privy to Paizo's internal decision-making process. Frankly, I'm inclined to trust them to do their jobs. It's in their best interest to keep Dungeon's sales and quality high, and they seem to be doing well so far.
I'm not telling anyone that they can't say they dislike Will Save, or any other part of Dungeon. If a feature is truly unpopular, the editors should know so they can replace it. These guys are the most engaged magazine staff I've seen in a long time, and ultimately, if you don't like Will Save, they're the guys you need to convince, not your fellow readers. And at this point it's plain that they’ve heard the readers who dislike Will Save. And for whatever reason, they don’t agree with you.
So can we stop beating this dead horse, please? It’s getting kind of gooey...
**: Speaking as someone who used to do editing and production on tight deadlines, content from a reliable writer is worth its weight in gold. Seriously.
|
|
I think that it appears the job was given to him because of ...
...
1) He is not terribly familiar with Dungeons & Dragons, having played mostly Steve Jackson games.
2) His articles reference gaming peripherally, if at all.
I don't know why the job was given to him, but I think there were two prerequisites when choosing the author: the column had to be entertaining and it had to be well-written. I don't think the purpose of this column is to add directly to the game itself. And as I see it, Wil Wheaton can write and he is entertaining. So I will gladly admit that he is doing a good job so far. If such a column should be allowed to "waste space" is another thing. My Answer is : "Yes, it should! ", thinking that entertainment is much more important than usefulness (we talk about a game, don't we? )
to 1) In my opinion it doesn't matter which game he played. What matters is him being a gamer, so he understands the gamers perspective and he knows the public perception gamers often are faced with.
to 2) I agree, but I find no fault with it.This column isn't designed as being "purely game-related", but it is "referencing gaming peripherally", so it fullfils its purpose.
Why would you rather see adventures by Gygax instead of just the "best" adventures?
This being a highly subjective matter, I have to admit that in my opinion, "Gygax adventures" and "best adventures" are synonyms.That's why I used his name here. And I never suggested to throw out the printed modules but to replace them by better ones, being sure that this would improve the DUNGEONS content ;-).
But to be honest: I like most of the printed modules. Most of the time they are not useful with respect to my campaigns, but they are entertaining to read and therefore I'm happy with them. Maybe I belong to a minority, but i don't look for game materials when reading the DUNGEON; I look for entertainment (what I strongly believe to be the true "mission" of this great magazine).An argument based on the numbers responding to this thread may not be representative.
I am aware of that. But most of the time, It´s the critics which raise their voices louder than the admirers (or the Do-Not-Carers respectively). So I'm quite sure that the percentage of people with a strong opinion against this column is much lower than the 25% count we got from this thread. So I suppose that we are not so far away form the 90% you suggested for a feature worthy to be printed in DUNGEON.
By the way,Alec, we're not beating dead horses. We're discussing the general purpose of this magazine and the goals it should have. We have different opinions so far, but for the kind editor and his staff , there is nothing more important than to learn about his readers wishes and opinions, so even if our wishes don't come true, we help him to make up his mind.
Wormysqueue wrote:
What matters is him being a gamer, so he understands the gamers perspective and he knows the public perception gamers often are faced with.
What is this mysterious public perception that gamers sre faced with? Is it the Geek status? I think people do not fall into this category merely because they play games. There has to be other qualities that a person has that defines them. Wil is a gamer; is he a geek, yes. Vin Diesel is he a gamer; is he a geek, no. And if you thought he was would you say it to his face?
|
|
Is it the Geek status? I think people do not fall into this category merely because they play games. There has to be other qualities that a person has that defines them.
You know that and I know that, but (at least here in Germany) there are a lot of people who think adults playing games are a highly exotic (can they really be human?) race.
Vin Diesel is he a gamer; is he a geek, no. And if you thought he was would you say it to his face?
(irony on)Oh, man, now I'm afraid. You are absolutely right, Muscle Power is the best argument. Being just a weak creature, I wouldn't dare to face the mighty Diesel's wrath. By the way, he may be stronger than I am, But I'm quite sure that my Dexterity and Constitution Scores are much higher than his. (irony off)
Be glad if you have never received mocking comments related to your hobby, I've received enough for both of us. My point was that I don't care for those opinions but I'm glad to share my experiences with other gamers. And that's exactly what Wil Wheaton is doing.
I never said you would not face Diesel's wrath, but it would probably be your mistake. The guy was a bouncer in a New York nightclub so I am sure he can handle himself. I wouldn't chance calling anyone like that geek to his face(nor anyone else for that matter).Why do Wil and yourself get it though?If people are giving you mocking comments, why tell them specifically you are a gamer? Avoid them. They are ignorant.I cannot say I have ever had this problem.
|
|
I never said you would not face Diesel's wrath, but it would probably be your mistake.
you haven't read my posting carefully. I didn't say I could beat him. I said I can run faster(Dex) and longer (Con).^^
And why should i avoid anyone? If someone has a problem with my hobby, it's his problem, not mine, I simply won't take him serious.
back to topic,please.
Hi, folks.
I'm not responding to anyone in particular, but this is just a reminder to steer clear of personal attacks.
This thread has a great healthy debate going. That's a good thing. Let's just keep the focus on the topic and try to avoid a flame war over conflicting personalities. : ]
You all rock.
Many thanks,
- Rob"Be excellent to each other."
- Bill and Ted
Once again, allow me to suggest that we turn down the accusations and turn up the courtesy, please.
Many thanks,
- Rob
One could assume your greater dexterity and constitution could mean you are faster(manual hand speed) and have greater endurance, two very important skills any fan of boxing knows.There is nothing wrong with my reading skills, thank you very much.
You are the one complaining about the jibes from others about being a gamer. If you don't take them serious then why are you complaining? It should not be an issue then.
|
|
@ Robert :Maybe I'm wrong, but since i felt adressed the first time you said this (having been admittedly overharsh in my reaction to ASEO), I'm not quite sure if you adress me again. I'm not aware to have attacked someone personally or to have been rude again, but if I was, I beg your pardon. Perhaps my english is not good enough so it sounds discourteous but it is not meant this way.
And if you did not spoke to me, then you will certainly forgive me that i made a fool of myself ;-)
@Paul: having some experience in martial arts, I know that as well, but i really meant it the other way. But please let us stop now, this thread is not about me and Vin Diesel.
By the way I did not complain. I said before that I don't care for those opinions.
Point taken, Wormsys. Your right, I could have taken it out of context with your wording. My apologies as well. Carry on, sir.
|
|
I cannot muster the same passion against Wil Save as those for Wil Save seem to possess.
You needed a lot of space to convince us of this sentence ;).
Be this as is may, you post had been worthy of a column in the Dungeon, as it has some of the qualities I like in Wil's Save (first of all it was entertaining^^).There is one problem I saw when i read your article.
In this way, I developed an ability to critique gaming products.
Granted, but that's what we others think as well, maybe with more or less right. And no one is willing to admit that other people could be right if that means that oneself is wrong. And if someone (as you did in your very last post) calls something "annoying" and "embarassing" what I prefer to call "interesting", "enlightening",and "entertaining" , there is a high probability that I will take this as offending my view of things rather than the article itself , be it meant that way or not.
Please don't misunderstand me: I do not comment on who of us is right (I'm sure we have different opinions on that :) ) I discuss style matters. Irony and Sarcasm is fine with me, but often it creates the impression that the writer doesn´t take his opponents seriously. No wonder if they get hold of the wrong side of the stick.
I remember Gary Gygax to have some strong opinions against Critical Hits (articulated in a soon Dragon issue). I could have been fine with that but what made me angry was the way Gary reacted to people with different opinions. sharp sarcasm, irony and things like that. Didn't seem he was interested in things other people had to say about the game he invented. And the blood rose high...
(in the meantime, Crits are widely accepted, so the example shows us that even the genius can err :) )
best regards,
WQ
P.S. Being devilish sometimes for myself, I'm aware that the text above should be engraved in the first side of my diary :)
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Everyone:
Chill out.
Now.
Enough about ancient history, online or otherwise. We'll not have old rivalries played out on these message boards. Stick to the discussion at hand--evaluation of the Wil Save column--or this thread is getting shut down.
This is a place for friendly discussion of Dungeon and Dragon magazine. It is not a place for accusations and demands. It's also not a place for personal insults against the writers of the magazine or the staff past or present.
Criticism is good. Criticism is healthy. And criticism helps me and my staff improve the magazines we all love.
But the current discussion stopped being healthy several days ago.
So everyone, please take it easy.
Thanks,
--Erik Mona
I have to go with Eric here.
This whole thread should only be about whether or not there should be a fluffy page of text that only has a passing mention of D&D or a slight reference there to, within the historically 100% useable in-game content of DUNGEON. I think we can agree to disagree on the quality of said fluff,but we all agree that it is fluff.
I seeing it as horrible even in content, will continue to post just as fluffy, but hopefully more positive and actually helpful, and definately more about the game versions of what Wil Save should be, here where Wil Save should be...On the web.
Besides, My posts would end up here (where fluff belongs) anyway because, hey D&D rocks and I like to talk about it.
I say keep DUNGEON fluff free regardless of author, page length or content of before mentioned fluff.
If you like a little fluff, then I say there are plenty of other places to get it. Try DRAGON or online. No need to put it in DUNGEON.
I would like to inquire about the initial length of Wil's contract to produce Wil Save. If you've already committed to a period of time/number of pages, then I'd like to know. That way I can at least know how long I will be contractually stuck with said fluff (due to a editorial choice that I disagree with). This is particularry important to me because if Wil Save out lasts my barfing cat, I will have to find another cat that yacks at least monthly so that Wil Save will have at least a minor use in my house.
Wil Save is DUNGEON's Jar-jar Binks
ASEO out
I just happened to get my Issue 120 in the mail today and the FIRST section I checked out was Wil Save. I haven't read all the posts on this thread...seeing that the webmaster and editor both requested less flamings pretty much told me all I needed to know.
But...about the question at hand...
Wil Save is an excellent article, written in an entertaining and engaging format that I personally find very...well, entertaining. Wil's article "First Level Sucks!" was a riot and was one of the reasons I re-subscribed to Dungeon. His "Return of the Gamer" reminds me of when I got back into gaming after a six year hiatus (gaming not being well supported in the USMC).
Is this an article in the Purist Format of Dungeon...NO. But as Dungeon is a magazine aimed at and for the Gaming Community, it is as appropriate as the comics.
Just my two Coppers!
I'm a little sick today so if I'm not as coherent as I should be, I apologise. But here's what I've had stuck in the back of my head the last couple days...
Most of us read fantasy novels. We've all had the experience of reading a really fantastic book that sets your imagination on fire. We've also read books that are... fun, yes, but when you put them down you don't really think about it other than wanting to get to the next one. RA Salvatore, for example, is great at writing books that are entertaining and fun and exciting, but anyone who's found any profound insights in his writing really needs to improve their scope a little. ;-) Robert Jordan is another example: amazing scope, lots of excitement (in the early books -- I've given up on the series now), but when the book's done you're not going to think about the philosophical implications of various situations in the book. They're fun, they're exciting, they've got massive scope, but let's face it, they're fluff.
On the other hand, we have writers like Terry Pratchett. On the surface, his books are the epitome of goofy fluff: short, humourous, self-contained, and clearly absurd. After reading any of Pratchett's later work (basically book 3 and later of the Discworld series, or any of the Johnny series), you'll often find yourself just sitting there thinking. It's rare that people come away from Pratchett's writing without a new insight into whatever the book was about.
What's the difference here? Salvatore and Pratchett both write fantasy, obviously with a few differences. They both produce very entertaining work. Does Pratchett's work stick in the mind because it's funny rather than action-oriented? Not even close; it sticks in the mind because it's got a level of human content and a connection with our own lives that allows Pratchett to reach us on a level that Salvatore could never even dream of. Wulfgar (or whatever his name -- it's been a few years since I've read Salvatore's books) is a great barbarian, but compared with Cohen the Barbarian, he's a one-dimensional cardboard cutout. Throw in the deceptively-simple Carrot into the mix...
What does all of this have to do with Wil Save? Simple. Dungeon is all about fun, excitement, and adventure. Wil Save helps provide a connection between that fun, exciting adventure and our own lives. It bridges the gap between fantasy and reality, helping to bring the content alive. It takes Dungeon from a Salvatore level (goofy fun) to a Pratchett level (goofy fun that makes you think, too). ASEO's pseudo-article about using 9mm casings for markers in a D&D game did an incredible job in that respect.
Of course, not everyone can relate to Wil's stories. That's where he's really failing. I'm still enjoying the stories, but they're not really up to the level they should be. Wil can do better; it's a shame he's not improving. We'll see.
In regards to issue 120. I'd really like to know how many more issues Wil Save has been contracted for.
I know I'm on record for believing this one, single, measly page is the gateway to the Realm of Irrelevance through which I hope the great DUNGEON magazine will never slip. And I know that whether I like it or not, Wil Save will continue for an undisclosed contracted period of time. So, here I sit with this festering boil, and I find myself unable to keep poking at it.
You see, being stuck with it I can at least hope that it will have some relevance to either the Game of D&D, or DUNGEON, my faithful companion. Maybe, just maybe it will turn into something like the witty and informative editor's page. But alas, every issue I open up just drops an explosion dog in my lap.
I realize now that Wil Save is actually an advertisement for the Blog listed at the bottom of the page, so shouldn't it have the "Advertisement" header like the other pages of adds do?
Some questions:
1. What does playing Steve Jackson games have to do with this D&D magazine?
2. Does mentioning "Fighter/Cleric" make it D&D relevant?
3. What's with a bard with no ranks in Perform?
Someone must have spent all his ranks in Disguise and Bluff.
ASEO out
Die Jar-jar die!
(It's German for "The Jar-jar the!")
OK, I've only bought 3 Dungeon's in my life. Back when I had a subscription to Dragon (around issue 40 or so), Dungeon didn't exist. I'm going to buy more, and one of the reasons for that is to read Wil's columns.
My history with Wil, limited as it is: I am a geek. I watched every ST:TNG as it premiered, and couldn't stand the Ensign. I played D&D from about age 12 through high school. At the tender age of 38, I'm getting back into gaming.
In the mean-and-between-time, I've learned a lot about computers, enough to work in the field. One of my outlets inthe downtimes is reading Fark.com. One day, Wil appeared in a thread about himself, and did a damn fine job defending who and where he is (a difficult thing to do among Farkers, if you know the breed).
So: Respect!
When I noticed that Wil wrote a column in the back of Dungeon, I began reading them. Nice work, a bit rough around the edges, but nice stuff. Fluff? Sure, if you call everything but new spells, feats, classes, and monsters fluff. Frankly, to a n00b like me, 3.5 has plenty of crunch, too much to chew in one sitting, IMHO. A single page of fluff isn't going to hurt, and it'll help a whole lot as I digest all this crunch.
Finally, if Wil's column has become, like Marla in Fight Club, "...the little scratch on the roof of your mouth that would heal if only you could stop tonguing it, but you can't", then perhaps you should (to totally mix metaphors, genres, and artistic styles) read the lyrics to Tool's "The Grudge" and "Let go."
Telas, atempting to disbelieve he just wrote this screed.
When Wil save was first announced, I groaned and thought ill of it. After reading the first one, I realized that Wil is indeed one of 'us' (gamers) and really have enjoyed reading the article.
I hope Wil does not get the axe, but if I had to pick between Wil and maps of mysterry or terrain tiles. Terrain tiles wins first choice, followed by maps and then Wil, sorry Wil.
Hmmm... well, I personally like the Wil Save column. I unfortunately haven't been able to read the one where he was talking about all the people saying "Wil Sucks." If we're removing all 'fluff' from the magazine, how about Downer? That's two pages, instead of one. How about the other articles that aren't modules? I'd personally rather have an extra module.
However, I know I'm one voice among many. I hope to see more columns by Wil in the future. Does it belong in Dragon, instead of Dungeon? Perhaps. Perhaps not. For me, keep it in.
Squid
O.k. I did not like Wesley C. very much. I am not a big player of DnD, but I can alway find myself reading a DnD mag or book(I love stats). But the truth is Wil W. is a great writer. If you ever read his web site personal writings you would know this. But fudgey poo on the writers of Star Trek:TNG for writing bad Wesley plots. I think he should have written his own part. But I guess now he is. K
I'm with squid, i think you guys should axe downer and replace it with something that dosent cause seizures, or give wil those pages to fill, if he can.
(P.S.-Wil if your reading this, yes, it is a dare to fill two more pages with your great writing.)
I'm with squid, i think you guys should axe downer and replace it with something that dosent cause seizures, or give wil those pages to fill, if he can.
(P.S.-Wil if your reading this, yes, it is a dare to fill two more pages with your great writing.)
Aaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!! Twitch... twitch... whimper...
While I agree the comics are fluff, they at least deal with D&D. Eric has said that they are not going anywhere in another thread. Personnally if there is to be a fluff written page, I'd say lose Wil Save and give Eric a second page for his editor's column. At least that deals with DUNGEON and D&D.
Wil Save is DUNGEON's Jar-jar Binks
ASEO out
Why not give Willie Walsh a shot at the article? I can't think any one more deserving (a forefather of the magazine) and he has recently showed up on the board. You do not even have to change the name of the article (Will Save).
Would I rather read an article by Willie Walsh or Wil Wheaton? Willie has paid his dues more than anyone in this magazine and I am sure can provide us with more illumination into the nuances of adventure writing than a has been TV actor. Give Willie a shot, although I am sure he is too modest to say anything about it.
Ach. Everyone of these "articles" gets worse than the last.
Let's see, in his last column, Will barely addressed gaming whatsoever, but he did manage to exorcise some of his childhood/adult demons by confronting them head on. Since he is still carrying around that baggage of having been Wesley on Star Trek, I suspect this won't be the only time we are treated to his anxieties over career choices, but let's face it, folks: the article had little to almost no redeeming value for gamers, that is unless you yourself were a despised child-star. The most troubling thing is that this doesn't seem to register with Wil at all; he seems more than content to unleash his life story repeatedly upon the unfortunate soul that happens to wander into his part of the magazine.
But this month, we get less Star Trek and more excerpts from Wil's convention experiences. In his latest installment, Wil blurs the lines between fantasy and reality as the gaming convention he attends becomes his own private dungeon with personalized calling cards meant to make him the start once again...
"Wil Wheaton! That's me!"
Now, hearing about someone's good time is all well and fine in a vicarious I-had-to-work-this-weekend-anyway kind of way, but only if it has something else to convey to the reader, something other than "go out and have a good time... it's really fun!" But all we get from Wil is yet another attempt to sell gaming to gamers in a gaming magazine. Does he perhaps think we read Dungeon only for the editiorials? Serioously, Erik, we've already bought the magazine, do we really need to be hustled by the new kid on the block?
This is a magazine for gamers written by gamers, Wil. Not one of us needs to be reminded that conventions are fun, nor do we need to be reminded that playing D&D evokes memories of childhood. These are universally-shared experiences and you speak of them as if you just uncovered these wonderful facts all by yourself.
So, to sum up: Wil Save is worse than Jar-jar. At least he got shelved after one installment.
I flipped through Dungeon 120 at my FLGS this weekend. I didn't end up picking it up because I don't have time to convert these adventures into my Eberron campaign. If someone else would do this, perhaps as a web supplement then maybe I'd buy it but until then I'll just keep waiting until there's more Eberron material for me. (I did pick up Dragon 328 though; I think the Saurian shifters will find their way into my campaign.)
I read Wil Save. It was horrible. Can anyone who enjoys Will's writing or Return of the Gamer please explain why it belongs in Dungeon?
And for those of us who agree that this is a stinker, which do you think was worse, part 1 or 2? I would say part 2, because it was such a let down. After reading part 1 I thought "Man, this can't be less relavant to D&D...but maybe when he actually gets to the convention he'll start talking about an RPGA event or a miniatures skirmish or a D&D game or something." What a letdown! That alone would make part 2 the winner (or loser, however you want to look at it) but he also throws in an inconsistent writing style (which he makes fun of), pompous sounding half sarcasms and an utter lack of any useful descriptions for someone who's never attended a convention.
Wil sounds like the dentist from Seinfeld: He converted to D&D for the jokes (and this article). Maybe he's a true gamer at heart, but it sure doesn't come across that way in his articles.
Well, My what Wil Save could have been rant...um...post is under the "Your First Time" thread this month.
Wil Save is DUNGEON's Jar-jar Binks
ASEO out
I will agree with the anti-Wil Save people on one point:
I would really like to see him talk less about Steve Jackson games and more about D&D. I've never, ever played a SJ game in my life. And even if I had, I buy Dungeon for D&D stuff.
-- Z
I haven't commented on the article yet because I've been on the fence and wanted to give it a few months. I don't share some of your strict requirements of relevance ... I'd be happy being entertained by an article that was very, very loosely related to D&D.
I'm also an admirer of Wil Wheaton and his job on Star Trek. I never had a problem with Wesley Crusher. Maybe to hard-core geeks, the character hit a little too close to home.
So I was pretty receptive to the idea of an article by him, and I enjoyed the first few. Introducing his stepkids to D&D - an interesting topic. The second one was entertaining, although I don't remember what it was about.
Then it started going downhill. These last few fall so sorely short of their potential. A celebrity of Wil's status (both positive and negative) trying to approach a Con as a gamer ... that could be a really interesting article. And I agree with the sentiment that if Wil is going to get specific about games, steer it towards D&D.
I used to read Wil Save first, because it was an interesting, quick, detached read. Next month, I think I go right to Prison Mail.
If previous columns by Wheaton weren't evidence enough of the fact that Wil Save needs to be discontinued, this month's offering should be more than enough to seal the deal.
I'll be honest: I look for something of value or interest when I read Dungeon, and usually I find it, but my frustration with Wil Save lies in the fact that there is little or nothing I can take away from the artciles, be it instruction or entertainment. It is, in my opinion, utterly devoid of ANY redeeming qualities.
What has Wil offered us in these last few articles? A chance to peer into the troubled psyche of an aging child-star? A chance to peer over his shoulder at a gaming convention? This does not make for good reading, people. Not even dentist waiting-room reading. If I want to know the day to day thoughts of Wil Wheaton, I will read his blog. Otherwise, give me something I can enjoy, because reading this article is like having one's gums scraped.
When Wheaton deigns to talk about gaming, he barely touches on D&D at all, preferring to go on and on about his hero Steve Jackson, who, by the way, does NOT deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the all-time greats of RPG game design. To date, Wil Wheaton has managed to dodge the subject of his articles more effectively than anyone entrusted with such a column, and remarkably, he keeps his job. Go figure.
I was lost on the merits of this article from the beginning, but now it seems like a perverse joke to keep it going, like painting a giant bullseye on Dungeon's forehead and waiting for the vitriol to come rolling in.
I'll be honest: I look for something of value or interest when I read Dungeon, and usually I find it, but my frustration with Wil Save lies in the fact that there is little or nothing I can take away from the artciles, be it instruction or entertainment. It is, in my opinion, utterly devoid of ANY redeeming qualities.
Ah, but the problem monkeybone, is that I do find something redeeming and enjoying about it. And I'm not alone. I am, however, beginning to get really annoyed that many of the people in this forum don't think that it's okay that other readers enjoy it.
I enjoyed this months article, and am looking forward to the next one. I will however credit you with this... I would like to see him steer a little more towards D&D, or at least d20 system games... Steve Jackson games were never my thing.
- Ashavan
Ah, but the problem monkeybone, is that I do find something redeeming and enjoying about it. And I'm not alone.
Monkeybone's opinion that the article be scrapped is no stronger or more important than your opinion that the article stay. The board is for voicing opinion, whether group or individual. That doesn't discount the people that don't like the article.
The only time I'd recommend getting rid of something is if I was considering not buying the magazine as a result, and Wil Save is by no means that detrimental. I used to look forward to it, and now I may skip it. I'd like for it to be more interesting or entertaining to me, but if it isn't, so be it.