My 3 questions:
1. Why Wil Wheaton, as opposed to any number of people involved with the gaming community, or other semi-famous gamers?
2. Why DUNGEON? Especially in the face of the fact that Wil Save rairly even references D&D, and has no in game relevance.
3. How long is the Wil Save contract? Kind of like having Chicken Pox. I know I'm stuck with it, I'd like to think I can at least look forward to it eventually ending.
ASEO out
"Die Wil Save Die"...It's German for "The Wil Save The"
Aseo, you go boy.
Another insulted Dungeon Fan with Wil's column
ASEO:
1) I suspect cost and writing ability. Of those writers Dungeon can afford to pay enough to keep them writing, Wil was probably the best choice.
2) I find Wil's articles relevant to D&D. In fact, taken in total, I don't find any other magazine that's more fitting.
3) I don't really know. Hopefully for longer than that Downer comic.
Actually I find that Wil Save is horribly written. It misses the target audience of the D&D, and only D&D, magazine it is published in. It is rambling and has no central theme other than that the author is somewhat famous and plays games which might as well be baseball for all their relevance, or lack there of, to the DUNGEON.
I rather thought the central theme was "life as an RPG gamer."
Still you seem to be saying that he is at least better than someone who you deem horrible. Not much of an endorsement there. The only things you compare Wil Save to are things you think suck.
I'm remarkably difficult to please, apparently. I think RA Salvatore sucks. I think the Dragonlance books suck, too. Now Narnia, that's decent. The Red Badge of Courage, that's good.
Wil's not really classic lit, but he's better than Gygax.
You evidently have a great love for Wil Save. But even you seem unconvinced that it has any connection to say, me. And you are correct. I play D&D. I buy DUNGEON because for over 10 years it has been a D&D magazine. I don't need an existential look into the want to be nerd life of a B actor turned writer who likes playing Hack Master or some other non D&D game. Making a D&D esk reference won't win anyone my loyalty. Writing an adventure that gets published in DUNGEON, that will. Giving me something that I can use. You bet. But not shairing your dice with your own kids... Whining because your munched out character bites it at first level...dronning on about SJ Games in a D&D magazine...Complaining about being too famous to enjoy things other than playing poker in vegas with millionaires... Way of target.
I suppose Wil needs to be a bit more obvious to cater to you. I find the variety refreshing. Wow. Something that's actually more than 1 layer deep.
Interesting tactic. Divert the obvious non applicability of Wil Save against Downer. Which I agree could go, even though I like it. Downer is, however, nothing but D&D. Flip through the Monster Manual and the players are all there. The jokes are D&D. The plot is D&D. I'll admit, Downer is no Wil Save. Thank gawd.
I don't think so. None of it is necessarily D&D. For all we know, Downer could be using D20 Anime. You can model the D&D Monster there, you know. It could even be d20 Modern. This is especially true as Downer's foot gets blasted off, which can't happen in d20 anyway. No hit locations.
As far as flavor is concerned, Downer is off, too, IMO. He's much too friendly and likeable to be Drow. If he's really Drow, he should be Evil and depraved to the core. As in enjoying torturing random other people kind of depraved. He isn't even much of an anti-hero. Even John Lee of the Replacement Killers is a darker character. In fact, I don't see as much of the sick scheming and blackmailing and double dealing as I'm used to expecting in the Underdark.
By the criteria you place, Wil is definitely in D&D, especially the D&D-style narration he had. I mean, that had all the trappings, didn't it? Would you actually prefer a column always done in that style? That would be insufferably boring, though.
Really.
DeadDMWalking:
There are plenty of "famous" gamers known for their writing ability. Some of them write fantasy fiction (Tracy Weis, Margaret Hickman, or R. A. Salvatore come to mind). Others are more involved in game design (Monte Cook) or comics (Rich Burlew or Tony Moseley). Well, I'm not so sure about Tony's writing ability, but the others are all rock solid. In any case, I can like Wil Wheaton and still believe he is a poor choice for this column.
Monte's stories of Pholtus are so mind-numbingly boring, I can never stand reading it for more than a few seconds at a time.
Most of both Margaret's and Tracy's works are trivial in content and flippantly but plain in style. I've never been impressed by anything they ever wrote. Including the so-called Dragonlance Saga.
I think Rich Burlew can be an entertaining columnist based on his comic, but I'll have to see. His comics are beginning to be a little too predictable, though. It's getting old. Wil demonstrates depth.
The difference between an insult and an opinion is the statement "I believe", or "I feel". You have insulted Gary Gygax. You might feel this is "different", but I don't.
The difference between an insult and an opinion is that the insult is meant to demean or hurt another person. I have not insulted Gary Gygax. I said he was a terrible writer, and any English major will tell you the same. For that matter, any discerning Classics fan will tell you that Gygax isn't exactly classic writing. The most damning part of this is Gygax's inability to "hook you in." He simply isn't an interesting read, which is partly why D&D is such a niche hobby.
Now, I don't think that insulting people is necessarily bad. You're trying to make a comparison about facts you believe are obvious. I think that Wil Wheaton's article in Dungeon is not nearly as good as his blog. I've been reading that regularly. I don't feel annoyed when I read his blog. I do feel annoyed when I read his article in Dungeon.
I think insulting people is always bad, because you mean to hurt and injure. You can be critical about a person's work without insulting the person himself. I never said Gygax was a terrible PERSON. I said he was a terrible writer. I'm commenting on his writing ability, not him.
I don't know that it draws me in. I would suggest using the word "one" instead of you. Generally, it is more correct. The reader is allowed to determine what is true for themselves. The word "you" takes that choice away. I often find it insulting when I'm told what I think, what I feel, or what is obvious.
Shrug. I was replying to Taricus, not you. If you have issues with his words, take it up with him.
So what? Every gamer I know eats food. That makes food relevant to gamers. The inclusion of a recipe at the back of Dungeon would also not sit well with me. If I want a recipe, I'll look in a cook book. I want adventures and DM tools in Dungeon. That's why I subscribe. I read Will's blog to get that little dose of "humanity" that he "displays" in his writing.
I think diversifying magazine content is beneficial for the magazine. While every gamer does eat food, the foods gamers eat don't differ significantly enough for it to properly fit. Allow me to make a parallel. Not too long ago, Dragon featured an article with a monster called "Significant Other," and another article called "Using your Feats." These articles are about gaming life, they don't actually contain anything you can use in the game. They belong because they contain material that's applicable to gamers in general, not because they were statted out in D&D style, though that was part of the joke.
At this point it sounds like you're telling me that I don't understand Wil Save, and therefore I'm stuid. I do understand it. I'm not interested. I don't think it fits in with the rest of the content of the magazine. There are as many reasons people game as there are ways people game. I don't have step-children. Even if I did, his "experiences" are not presented in a way to instruct me on the best way to go about it. If it did, I would have to consider it a useful tool for DMs, and therefore appropriate. He is relating a story. The point is to tell us about something that happened. If you draw parallels to your own life, that's fine. It doesn't mean that I have to care. It doesn't mean what he's saying is relevant. It doesn't mean that it is something all gamers should take to heart. There are a lot of things it doesn't mean.
You're missing the iceberg for the tip, apparently. The article is about more than step dads playing games with their step children, though that is the nominal form.
So yes, I do think you're not understanding the subtler points of this particular article reference.
This article is about passing the game along. All games, including D&D. It's about teaching people who don't know how to game to do so. It's about teaching them the game in a manner that endears the game to them. It's about a central element in the life of games and gamers. The fact that he used Magic instead of D&D to illustrate may be factual, but it also reflects another point, which I'll leave you to try to figure out.
I agree. I'd go one step further. He should have made it about D&D. Look at the front cover of your magazine. 100% Official Dungeons & Dragons content. Now, I didn't look to see if it said that, but my Dragon does. Magic the Gathering is not D&D. Even if every player of D&D has played magic at some point in the past; even if it is something every gamer can relate to; even then it has nothing to do with Dungeons & Dragons.
I don't believe it would be good for the article. Yes, it'll bash people with the point a little more bluntly, but it'll lose some of its message and also a good deal of the subtlety.
Here's what I think: Just because it doesn't seem to be talking about D&D in particular doesn't mean it isn't talking about something important to DMs as DMs. Monte's article is entitled "Dungeoncraft" so that apparently hits people over the head bluntly enough, but as you can read for yourself, he talks about things like personal relationships, boundaries, and yes, food. He talks about tables, negotiation, arbitration, about gamesmanship in general. In fact, I can exerpt whole sections of his articles into articles about things not D&D and you wouldn't notice very much.
The thing about Monte's style is, he doesn't use applicability, representation, simile, and other techniques very much. His style is, well, extremely plain. He says EXACTLY as he means it, and no more nor no less. No references to other works, no fancy tongue-in-cheek jokes. For his column, it's appropriate.
I want D&D content. His page does not provide any. I want it replaced with something that does. Would that be so bad in a magazine for D&D?
Really?
Probably. A magazine that limits its content is a dying magazine. Even professional reviews feature things similar to Wil Save just to alleviate the monotone. Anaesthesia and Analgesia is supposedly a professional monthly, but it also features life interests that interests those professionals. Things like joke articles, reflections by editors and contributors on life and similar things. It helps to make the mag more interesting than a textbook.
I don't like Downer either. I wouldn't be so foolish as to claim that it is unrelated to D&D. It depicts characters in the game having adventures and using equipment in the game. It isn't for me, but it is D&D related. Wil Save isn't. It's just there.
Sure, it's D&D related. So is, like, half the things in the world by the same criteria. Bulleye Lanterns are D&D equipment. A treatise on real life bullseye lanterns would be D&D related. What about the Hobbit? D&D is even derived from the darned thing. I guess columns about the Hobbit are appropriate? What about columns about the writer of the Hobbit? His brothers and sisters? The life events leading to the Hobbit?
Really.
death from above:
And it makes you wonder if Wil's silence isn't some form of tacit agreement with the criticism, especially since this is supposed to be his big debut and he has chosen to remain aloof and above the fray of those people he claims to support and game among.
Maybe he feels the comments are just too inane to comment on.
Well, that's YOUR opinion, so don't waste our time hiding behind a perception of what Wil's might be.
In the meantime, let me restate mine: Wil Save sucks, plain and simple.
My subscription runs out in two months. If Wheaton is gone by then, I MIGHT consider resubcribing.
1) I suspect cost and writing ability. Of those writers Dungeon can afford to pay enough to keep them writing, Wil was probably the best choice.
Ahh, the “best we could get with our limited resources” argument. How about saving those resources for something with in-game applications and D&D relevance.
But then you think Wil is a better writer than Margaret Weis or Tracy Hickman. Nuff said
2) I find Wil's articles relevant to D&D
As a hole Wil Save is good. As a D&D relevant page of text it is horrible. What was the relevance to D&D in the "It's *%^$&ing magic" tirade, or in the “I gamble in Vegas using a +1 wand of winning” farce?
In fact, taken in total, I don't find any other magazine that's more fitting.
Hmm… You’ve never heard of DRAGON, or GAMER, or BOY’S LIFE. Heck it would be a better fit in GQ. Or, even better yet. Reduce it to the proper advertisement that it is, and leave it solely as the address to the Blog. That way fan boys can go there to read it, and everyone else can get something that has in-game relevance…
Hey I think I’m really on to something here! Reduce Wil save to just the address of his Blog and post it in the add section (which is all it is anyways). Make Wil pay to post it. Then use the proceeds to fund more Maps of Mystery, Side Treks (not to be confused with Star Trek), New Monsters, New Magic items, or New Spells.
3) I don't really know. Hopefully for longer than that Downer comic.
…And back to the diversionary attempt to re-focus attention away from the failings of Wil Save.
You might notice that I also started the “Is Downer a Downer” thread. Feel free to attack Downer there.
Here is a challenge for you:
You pick a episode of Downer and I’ll point out the D&D relevance (Although I agree that there is not much in-game relevance aside from using the events portrayed in the comic for inspiration in your home game)
I’ll pick a Wil Save page and you point out the D&D relevance. (And since we all agree that Wil Save has absolutely no in-game relevance, I won’t even have you waste your time attempting to vindicate the page on that point)
Any takers from the DUNGEON staff on my 3 questions?
As a DM resource, DUNGEON rocks and is the best source of adventures being published. Let’s not dilute that.
ASEO out
Wil Save is like a huge festering puss filled boil on the face of Angelina Jolie. Sure you can break out a paper bag, but wouldn’t you rather not have to?
Well, ASEO, that's your opinion, and you're certainly entitled to it. You're certainly one persistent guy.
(quote)
Ahh, the “best we could get with our limited resources” argument. How about saving those resources for something with in-game applications and D&D relevance.
But then you think Wil is a better writer than Margaret Weis or Tracy Hickman. Nuff said
(/quote)
Indeed. Better technique. More subtle. Less self-conscious.
(quote)
As a hole Wil Save is good. As a D&D relevant page of text it is horrible. What was the relevance to D&D in the "It's *%^$&ing magic" tirade, or in the “I gamble in Vegas using a +1 wand of winning” farce?
(/quote)
1. I already explained the Magic article.
2. What exactly do you mean by "D&D relevant page of text?"
3. For the Vegas article, the relevance is multi-tiered. You'll have to note that Vegas is a numbers game, a play on chance, much like D&D RNG (dice) in combat. This is just too good not to use. Indeed, he does. He uses his "magic wand" to influence the odds in a manner that can't be mistaken for anything other than an RPG Pen and Paper gamer's. In fact, the reference to a wand pretty much narrows it to fantasy RPG Pen and Paper, probably D&D. On the one hand, this probably is truly bizarre. No nongamer I know would either do this or understand the humor or relevance. On the other hand, you have to think about all those other weird things Vegas players are ALSO prone to doing that are practically as opaque to outsiders. Gets you thinking about why gamer habits of this sort are taboo, but gambler habits of the same sort aren't.
On another note, Wil is also recounting a string of really bad luck followed by a string of really good luck. Again, the paralellism is immediate. As suitors of Lady Luck, both gamers and gamblers are all too aware of her fickle nature. It reminds me of a saying: if a given string LOOKS random, it may very well not be. Truly random numbers have a tendency to clump. It might be your character or your money, but bad luck still happens in a string. The amusing play here is that Wil is using a humorous gamer superstition about luck enhanced objects. Who hasn't heard of holy lucky dice or enchanted pencils? In this case, it's a straw. While it's debatable whether the straw really made a difference, he sure seems to believe it, and lots of gamers do, beyond reason. Circling back to the Vegas location, gamblers are apt to "feel" their luck, too, to a certain extent.
Near the end of the article, Wil stays pat on his winnings and says "he's out of charges." It's a sensible piece of advice - for gamers and gamblers alike.
There are, of course, references to ultra-rich friends or acquaintances (who doesn't have those?), money stress, responsibilities and the like, most of which I can totally relate to.
The solid reference to a wand here, is a pretty pointed reference to D&D. He's pointing to DMs and saying "Hey! This concerns you." And indeed, it does.
That's one way and level of interpreting the piece. Of course, you could just interpret it as "I went to Vegas and gambled," but that seems a tad bit too superficial, don't you think?
Hmm… You’ve never heard of DRAGON, or GAMER, or BOY’S LIFE. Heck it would be a better fit in GQ.
GQ? Definitely not. Too specific to D&D gamers. Dragon? Maybe. The two mags have blurred very much anyway. Even so, I think Dragon has enough variety to spare, and Dungeon could use some lightening up. Gamer? No. Again, too specific. Boy's Life? Hm. Doesn't seem like you're even reading the darned thing.
Pick any Downer episode you like. It's not like they're one more relevant than any other.
Indeed. Better technique. More subtle. Less self-conscious.
Yeah…sure…I’m sure his next book will make the best seller list too
1. I already explained the Magic article.
If you say so. I’ve not seen anything that justifies that page.
2. What exactly do you mean by "D&D relevant page of text?"
Oh, I don’t know…feel free to take a look at anything else in DUNGEON for an idea what I’m talking about.
3. For the Vegas article, the relevance is multi-tiered…
Wow, that was deep. I had to hold my watch above my head so it didn’t get ruined. Are you sure you are not Wil’s publicist…or a politician. That is the weakest link to gaming that I’ve ever seen. You’d have done better to go with: He was playing Black Jack which has cards. Baseball players have their pictures on cards called baseball cards. Baseball players swing a wooden bat which is like a two-handed wand of ball smiting. Thus the page was relevant to Baseball. Oh yeah, and Will was gambling, and Peter rose gambled so there you have it, it was a story about how baseball relates to Wil’s life. And one more thing…Maybe Wil’s rich friend was a …dun..dun..dun…Baseball player!
There are, of course, references to ultra-rich friends or acquaintances (who doesn't have those?), money stress, responsibilities and the like, most of which I can totally relate to.
And back to the question at the start of this thread: I care why?
The solid reference to a wand here, is a pretty pointed reference to…
a thousand possible fantasy games or movies.
He's pointing to DMs and saying "Hey! This concerns you." And indeed, it does.
Ahhh, but indeed it does not...<snort>
Yeah, I’m not buy’n what you’re selling. I’m not smell’n what your’re cook’n. I’m not smok’n what you’re roll’n. And I’m not scoop’n what you’re poop’n.
Trust me. Nothing in Wil Save has concerned me other than by the fact that it is polluting a magazine which I enjoy with mindless dribble.
That's one way and level of interpreting the piece. Of course, you could just interpret it as "I went to Vegas and gambled," but that seems a tad bit too superficial, don't you think? .
Naw, that is pretty much all it was about. That is the problem…or rather one of myriad problems with Wil Save. It is about Wil Wheaton, about what he does and how he wants to be considered a gamer, because he thinks that makes him cool, and apparently in your eyes it does. So, I guess in you Wil Save has created a Borg that will try to mindlessly assimilate…
GQ? Definitely not. Too specific to D&D gamers. .
Wil Save is perfect for GQ because it is an article about what a semi-celebrity does in his free time…and nothing more
Dragon? Maybe. The two mags have blurred very much anyway. Even so, I think Dragon has enough variety to spare, and Dungeon could use some lightening up. .
Translation: I don’t have any idea why it isn’t in DRAGON where it belongs either.
Gamer? No. Again, too specific.
What it doesn’t fit in a magazine that caters to players of a variety of different games? Why not, it references Poker, Munchkin, Car Wars, Illuminati, Magic: the Gathering, and lest we forget…Baseball. Then how could it possibly fit in to DUNGEON, which only caters to players of D&D?
Boy's Life? Hm. Doesn't seem like you're even reading the darned thing.
What a better fit than BOY’S LIFE. Here a past child star shares his feelings and thoughts about random events in his life and how they should play games while they are young. This is perfect for the young readers of BOY’S LIFE.
Doesn't seem like you're even reading the darned thing.
Darned thing…that is a pretty good description of Wil Save. I think you hit the nail on the head. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
Pick any Downer episode you like. It's not like they're one more relevant than any other.
See, this is where you lose me. Downer is to D&D what the Lord of the Ring’s Trilogy is to Toklin’s books. It is what a Star Wars comic book is to the movie series. Is it an exact reproduction? No, but the characters are straight from the books, as are the locations, races, spells, creatures and well everything… Drow characters referencing exact pages from the monster manual…doesn’t get much more of a D&D applicable reference than that. Wil Save gave it a shot with his “Shaken” quote, but then fell flat it always does.
Does Downer have in-game value? None other than as a mine (however deep or shallow) for game ideas.
Please learn how to quote better. While I like what I write, I don’t really want to have to filter through absolutely all of it to find your hidden comments on this topic.
It is interesting to hear such a vastly different perception of Wil Save though. Would you be interested in buying my extra copies of that page…Most only have a little cat barf on them.
ASEO out
But alas, Wil Save is here until the contract expires.
DUNGEON oh DUNGEON Why hath thou forsaken me!
But alas, Wil Save is here until the contract expires.
What gives you that impression?
: )
rob
But alas, Wil Save is here until the contract expires.What gives you that impression?
: )
rob
Man, I'm a realist; I know how these things work. He probably has a one year contract with some option years. I just wish you'd let us know how long that contract is for.
That way I can plan the boycotting and picket lines to prevent the option year from being exercised.
Don’t think I’m not making all my “Wil Save is…” comments into T-shirts ;-)
I may not know what I like, but I know what I hate, and when I get stuck with something I hate it really makes my blood boil (as you might have noticed in this thread). So please don't hold my pit bullish refusal to let go on this topic temper your over all impression of me.
ASEO out
Wil Save is the worm in the perfect apple, and evertime I take a bite I get a mouth full of it.
It's one page in a 100 page magazine. Geez, next you'll be complaining that there was an AD on a page!
OMG!
I mean, really, get over it.
ASEO:
Yeah…sure…I’m sure his next book will make the best seller list too
There are numerous examples of bad poetry and literature that nevetheless get lots of mileage for various reasons. Basing the quality of an author's skill on selling books is frankly a bad way of gauging talent. An author who sells a lot of books is probably an excellent salesman, of else, hires one. I don't recall any literary classics being bestsellers, either, for that matter.
If you say so. I’ve not seen anything that justifies that page.
The blind cannot see, ASEO.
Oh, I don’t know…feel free to take a look at anything else in DUNGEON for an idea what I’m talking about.
Do you have a paucity in idea, don't really know what you're talking about, or are just plain lazy? I ask you to clarify a vague statement and you reply with an even vaguer one? How is that supposed to help?
Wow, that was deep. I had to hold my watch above my head so it didn’t get ruined. Are you sure you are not Wil’s publicist…or a politician. That is the weakest link to gaming that I’ve ever seen. You’d have done better to go with: He was playing Black Jack which has cards. Baseball players have their pictures on cards called baseball cards. Baseball players swing a wooden bat which is like a two-handed wand of ball smiting. Thus the page was relevant to Baseball. Oh yeah, and Will was gambling, and Peter rose gambled so there you have it, it was a story about how baseball relates to Wil’s life. And one more thing…Maybe Wil’s rich friend was a …dun..dun..dun…Baseball player!
Perhaps you need to expand your literary library a little more.
And back to the question at the start of this thread: I care why?
Apparently, you're unusual in that you don't experience many aspects of what is accepted to be normal life. Don't blame the rest of us for not caring back.
a thousand possible fantasy games or movies.
I could say as much for Dark Elves, you know.
Trust me. Nothing in Wil Save has concerned me other than by the fact that it is polluting a magazine which I enjoy with mindless dribble.
It's applicability and content for you certainly seems limited. That doesn't make it unsuitable for every other DM out there.
Naw, that is pretty much all it was about. That is the problem…or rather one of myriad problems with Wil Save. It is about Wil Wheaton, about what he does and how he wants to be considered a gamer, because he thinks that makes him cool, and apparently in your eyes it does. So, I guess in you Wil Save has created a Borg that will try to mindlessly assimilate…
Again. The blind cannot see. I'm afraid I can't perform miracles here, ASEO. If you willfully refuse to see, I certainly can't make you.
Translation: I don’t have any idea why it isn’t in DRAGON where it belongs either.
You should really refrain from putting words in other people's mouths, you know. You may not have any idea, but I already said my opinion on why not. If you didn't catch it, feel free to review for as many times as it takes for you to do so.
What it doesn’t fit in a magazine that caters to players of a variety of different games? Why not, it references Poker, Munchkin, Car Wars, Illuminati, Magic: the Gathering, and lest we forget…Baseball. Then how could it possibly fit in to DUNGEON, which only caters to players of D&D?
I rather think that Wil Save is a pointed attempt by the editors to inject a bit of "more-general" content into Dungeon. Don't interpret this the wrong way (though I'm quite sure you'll do so anyway). The article does cater to D&D DMs, it just calls to a wide background, too, for variety.
While it does reference other forms of pasttimes, I'm quite sure it's intentional. An article that focused exclusively on D&D gaming literally would be so boring it would barely be readable.
Except by you and others of your ilk, I guess.
Darned thing…that is a pretty good description of Wil Save. I think you hit the nail on the head. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
Your point in replying, being? This tangent you took in willfully misreading my message is both pointless and childish. Please minimize.
See, this is where you lose me. Downer is to D&D what the Lord of the Ring’s Trilogy is to Toklin’s books. It is what a Star Wars comic book is to the movie series. Is it an exact reproduction? No, but the characters are straight from the books, as are the locations, races, spells, creatures and well everything… Drow characters referencing exact pages from the monster manual…doesn’t get much more of a D&D applicable reference than that. Wil Save gave it a shot with his “Shaken” quote, but then fell flat it always does.
In a superficial sense, yes, and I'm beginning to understand that this is probably as far as you can go.
Other than the cheesy and gratuitous copycat remarks, how does it really aid your game and gaming life better than Wil Save? It doesn't. The comic could be placed in Gamer and it would totally be appropriate.
Does Downer have in-game value? None other than as a mine (however deep or shallow) for game ideas.
I'll match every game idea you can derive from Downer with one derived from Wil Save.
It is interesting to hear such a vastly different perception of Wil Save though. Would you be interested in buying my extra copies of that page…Most only have a little cat barf on them.
It's a life and times page, man, not a gaming tool. I don't need extra copies.
But alas, Wil Save is here until the contract expires.
DUNGEON oh DUNGEON Why hath thou forsaken me!
It's one page, ASEO. It won't kill the mag. If you like, you can simply rip out the last leaf of every Dungeon mag if it improves the content, as you view it. And what's wrong with that? If I can ignore 2 pages of shockingly bad comics, you can ignore 1 page of life discussion that you can't understand.
|
I could say as much for Dark Elves, you know.
Actually, Dark Elves are proprietary. There are very few creatures that are not Open Game Content, and drow are one of them. A lot of your arguments is that Wil Save is no worse than Downer. Aseo has stated he thinks Downer belongs in Dragon magazine. I don't like Downer. I'm drooling over three pages of useful content (after Downer and Wil Save go bye-bye). On the other hand, the editors have clearly stated that Downer will be around for a while. Erik says he likes Downer. I have yet to hear the same level of support for Wil Save.
I rather think that Wil Save is a pointed attempt by the editors to inject a bit of "more-general" content into Dungeon. Don't interpret this the wrong way (though I'm quite sure you'll do so anyway). The article does cater to D&D DMs, it just calls to a wide background, too, for variety.
You see, that is a problem. I don't like the idea of more general content. I don't subscribe to the magazine for more general content. I swear if they add another single page of this material, I won't renew my subscription. I enjoy reading the adventures they have and I like using them when I'm not prepared. But when I get to Wil Save (and I always read it) I get annoyed. Earlier I stated my level of satisfaction with Dungeon is around 70%. I think if Wil Save were gone, it would be closer to 90%. If Downer were gone, it would be in the high 90s. At least, if the page count was retained and more relevant materials were included.
Now, I don't see anything in Wil Save that is more applicable to DMs than to a general gaming audience. That should pretty clearly indicate that it doesn't belong in Dungeon. If you had to describe Dungeon in one word it is: ADVENTURES. It isn't entertainment, or DMs. The core is providing adventures. If something is in the magazine and it doesn't give you an adventure (even if it is as small as a single encounter) or try to help you improve the way adventures are presented to your group (most of the articles) then it probably isn't essential to the magazine. Of course there are adventures that I'm not going to like, or columns that deal with an aspect of the game that I've already mastered. I have no problem with articles that aren't specifically useful to me if I can easily identify how it would be helpful to a new DM.
I can't find that in Wil Save. I was just re-reading several of his articles. The one in issue #116 actually seemed particularly good. That might be the only one. It still didn't belong in Dungeon. It was about how playing D&D was as much about hanging out with his friends as it is playing the game. More on this in a moment.
While it does reference other forms of pasttimes, I'm quite sure it's intentional. An article that focused exclusively on D&D gaming literally would be so boring it would barely be readable.
I'm sure it is intentional. Now, there are a lot of things Wil could have learned by playing D&D. It isn't his fault that Nolan or Ryan (or both) would rather play Magic: The Gathering than D&D. But how can he talk about "passing on the torch" when he isn't even playing D&D with them? Now, there was one article (and only one) in which he indicated he was playing with his step-children. If he had repeated the experience, there should be a well of information he could relate to us - but he doesn't. We get his con experience "written as an adventure". I've got to say that was the worst of his articles. I suppose it might have provided in game ideas (I'll make an evil wizard based on Gary Jackson who rolls lots of d6s) but they're all stupid. I mean, anything directly inspired from it.
Now - regarding every comparison between Downer and Wil Save, it doesn't really help. I think it is obvious that Downer is directly inspired by D&D. It doesn't really matter. If Downer doesn't belong in Dungeon, than Wil Save doesn't either. This thread, though, is about whether you support the existence of Wil Save, or if you would prefer to see it pulled. There is another thread for discussing Downer's fate. The staff has made it clear that Downer is going to be "reformatted" to better suit Dungeon. Wil Save shouldn't be retained if it is simply "not the worst" feature. If an argument can not be presented that it should stay based on its own merits, there is a problem.
It's one page, ASEO. It won't kill the mag. If you like, you can simply rip out the last leaf of every Dungeon mag if it improves the content, as you view it. And what's wrong with that? If I can ignore 2 pages of shockingly bad comics, you can ignore 1 page of life discussion that you can't understand.
Dungeon is something that many of us subscribers are passionate about. Whether we should or not, many of us feel our opinions matter. The staff says they'd like to hear our opinions. I don't know if we've run this topic into the ground or not (I think there is still some ground that can be covered) but I'm still going to try to present my views as persuasively as possible. I don't think anyone should ignore what they don't like in the magazine. Feel free to complain. Now the staff can address your complaints. They may say "we're changing it, so stick with us for a few more months" or they may say "You're ridiculous. We're not changing so take your subscription and shove it." I haven't gotten a clear indicator from them which side of the fence they fall on. I think they would prefer to keep it, but I think they must be at least considering other options. They're going to be swayed by the bottom line - if Wil Save draws extra subscribers, it stays. If it alienates existing subscribers, it goes.
I really think it is obvious that it is alienating a large number of long-time readers. If there is anyone here who would cancel their subscription if it is removed, let them speak now!
Now, my last criticism of Wil Save is that it doesn't really sound like he plays D&D at all. It sounds like he might have played once or twice, or watched someone else playing it. The stories about D&D are few and far between. The two that stand out in my mind are "don't take my dice" and "my friends and I reference Star Wars and Monty Python" during the game. Both of those were "too easy". If he had done some interviews or watched some movies on "gaming" he could have written those articles. They don't really seem to have any genuine story behind them. On the other hand, it seems like he genuinely does play Steve Jackson Games, and Magic the Gathering.
Considering the rich well of stories I can present from my own gaming experiences, I think he could narrow his focus and still keep any applicability that you think he has. And some might be sad, or happy, or funny, but they could all deal with gaming.
There are situations that I'd like to see discussed in a column like Wil Save (though authored by someone with genuine experience in these cases). Death of a Player - A real life death in the gaming group - how was it handled. Breaking up is Hard to Do - A gaming friend and their gaming significant other have a breakup - how does that affect the game. I don't know what else, but things like that might be good. And then things that focus on D&D and not using other games as a metaphor for life. D&D is rich enough that it can be used exclusively.
Now, I think that Wil Save could probably be improved to a level where it might be retained (in DRAGON) but it isn't there yet. And I'd much rather see it dropped. No offense to Wil - I think he is doing the best he can. I just don't think it is good enough.
|
Just to give the argument against Wil Save a little more steam in the financial department, my subscription to Dungeon came up for renewal last month…it has now expired. The loss of two of my favorite sections, Maps of Mystery and Critical Threats hurt, but replacing them with Wil Save was the most atrocious insult. A few months back on another Wil Save thread the editors at Paizo promised that Critical threats would come every OTHER issue and it was not gone forever, yet it has not appeared since. They broke their promises to me, and now they ignore the requests of a large group of readers on the issue of Whiny Wheaton. I have no more to say, my subscription is canceled and they will never get another buck from me until he is gone.
|
They're going to be swayed by the bottom line - if Wil Save draws extra subscribers, it stays. If it alienates existing subscribers, it goes.
You're right, that's the bottom line, and it would be interesting to learn about the development of the sale numbers since Wil's Save first publication in the DUNGEON.
I really think it is obvious that it is alienating a large number of long-time readers. If there is anyone here who would cancel their subscription if it is removed, let them speak now!
Second first, naturally I would NOT stop buying the mag only because of the lack of this column. But readers who are so alienated that they stop buying the mag are clearly overreacting: they stop making use of around 80 pages of really useful stuff just because of one page they don't like. Clearly said, I think the Dungeon can do without them.
But i will admit that I would rather abandon this one page if the magazine's existence was at stake. Eventually, the editorial staff will have to decide (and I have no reason so far to mistrust the actual staff).
I will also admit that I wouldn't mind losing the column in favor of more directly D&D-related stuff. But be aware that the mag is in need of a constant flux of new readers; it's a fact that old readers will finally stop reading the mag for one or the other reason and if paizo is to keep the sale numbers they have to do something against it.
My point is,I really doubt that they would gain more readers if they concentrated on their core topic only. We had the controversy before, what's more important: content or entertainment? Some of you state they don't search for entertainment in the Dungeon; I'm fine with that. But in my opinion DUNGEON wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the fact that the content is offered in such an entertaining way. I like reading through it's pages even if I don't use it.
So it may be that they would gain some readers even without this entertainment factor. But there are quite some potential readers who would try it and would deny it because it was boring.
How does this adheres with Wil's Save? There may be a large group of long-time readers who don't like it for its overall uselessness. There may be a large group of readers who don't like it for personal taste. But there is a large (and in my opinion larger -remember Medesha's count?) group of readers who enjoy it for what reason ever and as I see it, new readers would rather belong to the second group.
I cannot force to like Wil's Save and honestly, I wouldn't even try to. But I don't think it unfair to ask for some tolerance about other reader's view of things. You have not to agree, but you have to accept that the magazine is not written only for you. And again it's one page out of one hundred, so any "pit-bullish refusal" may be a little bit too harsh a reaction. :)
|
|
First and foremost, I have this to say. If there is a product I use frequently and like to use, and it suddenly changes in a way that I dislike, I have the right to be a vocal as I want to be about it since the consumer ultimately controls these things. Now I know that you are not claiming the contrary but you are saying one other thing that is a little off base. We who dislike Wil Save honestly don't have to think about those that like it. Honestly, if some food product changed its formula and by doing so made the food taste like crap I really don't care how many other people tell me, "But it tastes good!" I will still think it tastes like crap and will still tell the company that my business is gone till it changes. It’s the same idea here, it does not matter to me honestly how many people like Wil Save, and it does not make me hate it any less.
Second, you speak of Medesha's count from a few months back. However, that count failed to take into account the number of people who said that they have changed their mind since then (there have been at least three such people in this thread alone) and it also does not count the huge number of silent people that never post here. Neither you nor I have ANY clue what those people think. They could all love Wil Save or hate it but it does not matter because as I said before, no amount of people loving a product will convince someone that thinks its crap to like it. I would also like to point out, that amongst the people posting here it seems as if more people that liked it are starting to get sick of it than people who hate it spontaneously starting to like it. Therefore, we will continue to shout about Wil Save, just like with Polyhedron, and it will eventually go down the tubes just like that waste of space.
|
|
Honestly, if some food product changed its formula and by doing so made the food taste like crap I really don't care how many other people tell me, "But it tastes good!"
I'm sure you can see the difference in both our points. In your example, the food as a whole will taste like crap. As far as DUNGEON is concerned, one page you dislike doesn't change the usefulness of the 90+ pages of the rest. (At least it shouldn't. If it does for you, you're overreacting, as I stated above.)
Second, you speak of Medesha's count from a few months back. However, that count failed to take into account the number of people who said that they have changed their mind since then (there have been at least three such people in this thread alone) and it also does not count the huge number of silent people that never post here. Neither you nor I have ANY clue what those people think.
You're right, I have no clue about the real numbers of Wil fans and I have no clue about the real numbers of Wil haters (btw., strong word for a piece of paper). Neither have you, ASEO or DeadDMWalking. But if they (as did you) can speak of any assumed large numbers, I have the same right to do so. And Medesha's count seem to support my point of view. Which numbers support yours, If I'm allowed to ask?
By the way, Medesha's count fails to take into account the number of people having stated their support of the column afterwards as well (for example myself, I entered the discussion afterwards).
Finally, you have made clear that you will ignore my opinion. If that's the way you like to discuss things, fine. But tell me, why should I care for your opinion then? It's neither on you nor on me to decide how to design DUNGEON MAGAZINE. It's on the editorial staff. And while you can ignore what you want to, I'm quite sure that Mr. Mona hears both sides, not only the one shouting the loudest.
We will see how it ends. If Wil's Save is excluded from DUNGEON's pages anytime in the future, I can live with that. If you can't live with the possible contrary, so be it. At least you will spare a fair amount of money. But to say it once more, if you abandon a whole magazine of interesting, useful and entertaining stuff because of one page you dislike, you're overreacting in my eyes.
I don't like Elminster. Should I therefore have boycotted the Forgotten Realms setting? I would have never come to know some really good friends, I would have had much less fun in the last few years. What I did instead is to ignore Elminster's existence in my campaigns. I'm quite sure you could do exactly the same with Wil's Save, but that's your decision.
Yours, Wormy
Hey guys I thought I would check back and see if anything worthwhile... was... going... on?
So that's still a no, huh?
Game, set and match to Wormy. I love a well thought out argument/retort and yours was well done.
I can relate to ASEO's argument as well - But really! Sean! One page?!? Just tear the stupid thing out or ask Paizo to refund you six cents per issue. You could save .76 a year plus interest, tax and needless typing.
I would really love to sit here and argue but honestly instead of squirming over one page I rather finish up a couple of proposals and get on with living. You guys/gals (who have written like a whole year's worth of articles in this one thread alone) might consider putting that energy to more productive use. If you don't like what you see you could always flood Dungeon with a page of your own "something betters".
See you in another 299 posts.
GGG
PS Wormy, I could never stomach Elminster either. He is such a twink. Chosen of Mystra indeed! More like Mystra's #@$*&. Shoot! Did I just say #@$*& on the boards? I best wash my mouth out. Bye. ;)
I think Wormy's been one of the most reasonable voices on the thread thus far, and I can only hope to emulate him. Having considered that he's presented best some of the finer points so far, please allow me, DeadDMWalking to simply reply specifically to you. I feel I owe you a reply after you went through the trouble of reading and replying to my admittedly somewhat acidic post. Sorry about that, by the way.
DeadDMWalking:
On Dark Elves: I seem to recall not a few evil Elves in Tolkien, so I can't believe Dark Elves are restricted to D&D. Variously colored elves are likewise all over. Some of my argument is that Wil Save is no worse than Downer, but a good deal of it is also that it caters to the D&D specifically; and the whatever else may be true, the writing is quite decent. That's quite a bit more than simply just saying it's not worse than Downer.
Writing style is, of course, taste driven to a point, yet there are stylistic elements and techniques that are applicable in an artistic manner and can be learned and detected. You can't study to be a Pulitzer Prize-winning author anymore than you can study to discover the Unified Theory of Everything, but you can study Physics, and if someone else makes the intuitive leap to The Theory of Everything a guy with Physics is best positioned to understand. I can't seem to write very well, but I can tell objectively if someone's any good at it, even if I detest the overall style.
So can anyone with a basic background in creative writing theory.
On general content: I firmly believe that magazines that diversify survive better in the market than magazines that don't. Barring a few publications that have captured markets, mostly professional journals and the like, most magazines need a good chunk of "general" to attract new readers. This is not to say magazines shouldn't have vision and form. Quite the opposite, the "general" content should have a place and a form in the mag's overall format.
If Wil Save is helping to draw in new readers (and new gamers!), why will you weaken the mag by withdrawing your subscription? Is this not a show of hostility to a mag that is nevertheless over 90% content you DO like? If it strengthens its position on the market by posting a self-ad for one page, would you mind so much? Why so hostile? What's the difference between a one page "self-ad" and an article designed to generate wider readership?
What if Wil Save and Downer were removed with no additional pages? Or at least more usable pages? Clearly, Wil Save isn't something meant to be used in a game as is. It's used for something else. For "casual" or "entertainment" reading. Something to cater to "entertainment" readers, maybe? If removing the pages outright without replacement improves the mag for you, why not just request Paizo to ship your mag pre-ripped?
Now, I don't see anything in Wil Save that is more applicable to DMs than to a general gaming audience. That should pretty clearly indicate that it doesn't belong in Dungeon. If you had to describe Dungeon in one word it is: ADVENTURES. It isn't entertainment, or DMs. The core is providing adventures. If something is in the magazine and it doesn't give you an adventure (even if it is as small as a single encounter) or try to help you improve the way adventures are presented to your group (most of the articles) then it probably isn't essential to the magazine.
Letters from the Editor don't provide adventures or add significantly to them in any manner more direct than Wil Save. Prison Mail doesn't seem like it can be made into an adventure, either. Almost all the ads don't help. The Portent is mostly just joke content that's peripherally related to D&D at best, even moreso than Downer. All of these together, and each individually take up as much as and mostly more space than Wil Save.
What does it help me to know that some people don't like so and so a feature of the mag? What do I care that the mag gets shipped to Iraq?
These features share similar functions, I think, and to single out Wil Save seems to ignore these aspects of the mag which, for some reason, don't seem to annoy, even though all of the objections against Wil Save can be brought against them as well.
This is not to defend Wil Save, really. This point calls into question whether people are even voicing genuine complaints about it, or are still skirting the main issue.
On Wil playing D&D: I'm pretty sure he plays, and I'm pretty sure the focus away from actual in-your-face game references are intentional as well. We get stuff like that from Monte Cook. I don't think more coverage of the same sort is really necessary. I think the point here is that he's using life and other games as a metaphor for D&D! Indeed, it would be pointless to compare D&D to D&D. It just wouldn't work. You compare D&D to gambling in Vegas, to Magic, even to a Con experience. You don't compare D&D to D&D. That would be like using Vodka as a chaser for Tequila. You can do it, but is it entirely sane?
It's completely clear to me that Wil can narrow his focus down to just D&D. To a writer with such obvious talent, it's literally a trivial thing to do. In fact, any idiot can do it. I'm sure you do have a rich well of experience from your gaming life, but I've heard altogether too many of those kinds of stories to really be interested. I mean after reading all those letters and adventures, of course.
Just to have a breath of fresh air, it would be nice to turn the tables, you know? To see how D&D affects the rest of our lives? I mean, who hasn't geeked out at some point and named a talisman his X of Y? My Wheels of the Zephyr for new mags? Isn't it appropriate for DMs to be talking about this?
While I think a colmun like you propose might be interesting, I still believe Wil Save as it is would be a superior contribution to the mag, just because it breaks the monotony more. A column like you suggest would actually be a nice counterpoint on a general RPG mag. Death in a game is definitely something all RPGgamers have to deal with and so with breaking up with someone else. Flavoring it "D&D" heavily would offer a nice striking feature in a mag that was otherwise general.
|
|
What if Wil Save and Downer were removed with no additional pages? Or at least more usable pages? Clearly, Wil Save isn't something meant to be used in a game as is. It's used for something else. For "casual" or "entertainment" reading. Something to cater to "entertainment" readers, maybe? If removing the pages outright without replacement improves the mag for you, why not just request Paizo to ship your mag pre-ripped?
It the event this happened, I would at first be elated. I would think I had scored a major victory. Then, as the next couple of issues came out, I'd start feeling like I didn't get any extra content the way I thought I would. No, the reason these need to go is so I can get a map of mystery or a critical threat. When I realize that I'm not getting the amount of content I want, I'll get upset.
When Dungeon got to the point of publishing two adventures per issue, the readership got up in arms. Three actual adventures is a good baseline, but the content should actually equate to four adventures. Either a special feature like a detailed city for use in an adventure (a la Cauldron or "Isle of Dread) or a combination of pages dedicated to short "plug and play" sequences.
We recently had a competition on the wizards.com boards to create an encounter.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=5608291
I would love to see things like this in the magazine. Now, this might not fit on three pages the way it is presented, but it would certainly be a good start.
If I thought Dungeon was perfect without regard to Wil Save (nothing should be added or taken away) I could ignore that one page easily. It is simply because I think Dungeon CAN be improved that I have been as vociferous about change as I have been. Since these boards have opened up, I've tried to give my detailed thoughts on each issue - indicating what I like and what I don't like. More than that, I try to explain why I don't like something or why I do. That way, instead of just telling the staff they did something right (or wrong) they can see why it worked so well and repeat the successes (or avoid the failures).
Dungeon is a niche magazine and I don't think the presence of Wil Save expands the market. There are other factors at work that make it harder for Dungeon to expand. This might be a fundamental problem that they should look into. Dungeon as it is presented, is useful for DMs. If your players access the magazine (say, through a subscription) the functionality declines rapidly - you can't run a published adventure if a player is saying things like "Shisrat the medusa has 52 hit points and the Fort save to resist paralysis is 19". It is possible you have detailed notes changing the adventure, but when players "know" or think they know how an advenutre is supposed to go, you have problems.
Long story short - Wil can't be bringing people in. The new format (with 3 adventures) might be.
And I'll say this - a lot of DMs refuse to buy Dungeon because they don't use pre-made adventures. They look down on them. If they won't use the content, they won't subscribe. But if Dungeon provided smaller "morsels" they might be really tempted - even if they won't use an entire adventure, they might have some pre-generated encounters with tactics already described in depth.
Actually, Dark Elves are proprietary. There are very few creatures that are not Open Game Content, and drow are one of them. A lot of your arguments is that Wil Save is no worse than Downer. Aseo has stated he thinks Downer belongs in Dragon magazine. I don't like Downer. I'm drooling over three pages of useful content (after Downer and Wil Save go bye-bye). On the other hand, the editors have clearly stated that Downer will be around for a while. Erik says he likes Downer. I have yet to hear the same level of support for Wil Save.I could say as much for Dark Elves, you know.
I beg to differ, but Drow are clearly listed in the SRD (under elf, not drow, but listed).
- Ashavan
Actually, Dark Elves are proprietary. There are very few creatures that are not Open Game Content, and drow are one of them.I could say as much for Dark Elves, you know.
Not to pick nits too much, but drow are in the SRD. They're a subentry under "Elf."
edit: darn it. Ashavan beat me to it by 10 minutes. This is what I get for not reading the entire thread before replying.
Whew, made the DC 25 Reflex Save to avoid the attempt to be drawn into a flame war.
There was a good point brought up, that I've also raised several times: Is their evidence that the funding for the Wil Save page is bringing increased readership?
If there is, I'd like to see it from an official source, along with having my 3 questions answered by someone on the DUNGEON staff.
If Wil Save is what is allowing DUNGEON to expand, remain all color, put out extra web based material (A great service I must say) then I might be less vocal about my distaste for it.
Sure, it is only one page, but to many of us with the (Subscriber) identifier next to our names, it is a gateway to the generalizing of DUNGEON (which many people evidently think is needed) that will eventually reduce this great D&D magazine to nothing more than a useless stack of paper that covers more games that I don't play than the D&D I have always purchased the magazine for.
DUNGEON rocks! It has always rocked. Does having one horribly written non-D&D related page in the magazine change that? No.
But I still have to ask the editorial staff: Why have Wil Save when you could have a page of material with in-game use?
I just don't get it, and the silence from the editorial staff on my reasonable questions is uncharacteristic for their usually superb costumer service.
Total side note that struck me as strange…
I did notice on Wil Wheaton’s blog that after reading his encounter with the large breasted Hooters waitress you can choose to either enter the site by saying “I love you Wil and want to be your friend” or Exit by pushing the button “I hate you, I hated Wesley Crusher…”
What? You have to hate Wesley Crusher if you dislike Wil? Seems to me that Wil blames a fictional character for any negative opinion people may have of him.
Could it be that there is someone on the Paizo staff that is a friend of Wil and is doing him a favor by putting Wil Save in the magazine in an attempt to help him establish himself as an author?
ASEO out
Wil Save is so obviously misplaced that, for all the wrong reasons, readers are drawn to read it just out of morbid curiosity.
I realize this discussion died down quite a while ago, but I just wanted to add my two cents: I don't like the Wil Save article. If the reader wants personal insight and out-of-game comments & opinions, we have those great editorials. I agree that I don't want or need to be "entertained" in my DUNGEON. I would rather be informed and inspired. DRAGON said it completely retooled its Ecology articles (a personal favorite of mine) because the past style was more "fluff and entertainment" than useful, practical, or informative. As much as I enjoyed reading past Ecology articles, I like the new form too (perhaps, ...gulp ... even better) because of their clear practicality. But if the writers recognized the trouble with Ecology, why are they so resistant towards a more critical eyeing of Wil Save? I'm not saying he doesn't do a good job writing. I'm just saying (under the original who cares sentiment) that perhaps his writing would be better devoted to more practical matters. I'd be happy to see the current article style vanish.
|
|
Dungeon is a niche magazine and I don't think the presence of Wil Save expands the market.
...
And I'll say this - a lot of DMs refuse to buy Dungeon because they don't use pre-made adventures. They look down on them.
Yep, it is a niche magazine. And if it insists on being focused on its core audience, it will ever be. I don't say that Wil Save directly expands the market. But its the right direction; if they want to gain a new readership, they have to generalize a bit so as to open a portal for those new readers who aren't necessarily D&D-fanatics at the point they look into the mag. Maybe there's a better way to broaden the readership, but it will never be reached by the improvements you suggest. (I'm not saying that I would personally dislike those improvements.)
And those DMs looking down on the mag; they will ever do so and Paizo can do absolutely nothing against. If opinions are so firm nothing will change them.
Sure, it is only one page, but to many of us with the (Subscriber) identifier next to our names...
Wanna know why I haven't the subscriber tag next to my name? Because I live in germany and i would have no financial benefit by doing so. So I prefer to regularly support my local store when I buy the mag there.
So it's not this identifier what lets our opinions differ. It's the way we think about what we like. And while I like to think of myself as being tolerant enough to live with magazine pages, even if I have no use for , you seem not see any use for this specific kind of "tolerance". It's not meant offending, but it explains why we can't come together in this discussion.Does having one horribly written non-D&D related page in the magazine change that? No.
Would you mind to add something as "in my opinion" if you call Wil's Save "horribly written"? Just because it's your personal taste rather than the truth. There are people (me included) who think Wil Wheaton to be a good writer and there's no need to offend our taste and our literary knowledge by repeated and willingly ignorance.
If the reader wants personal insight and out-of-game comments & opinions, we have those great editorials.
I agree, those editorials are great. But those editorials have a minor flaw as far as new readers are concerned. If they have no profound knowledge about what it means to be a gamer in general and a D&D-player in particular, they won't understand the references Erik Mona is doing with respect to the days when our hobby still was young. What Wil Wheaton is writing about has much more connectivity to their real lifes, admittedly at the cost of direct D&D-relevance. But they'll have it easier to understand it and understanding is what attracts new readers and help to gain new players to our campaigns.
Finally, I understand that some of you insist DUNGEON to be a DM-Magazine only. I understand that DMs normally have some D&D experience bevore they start DMing, so they don't need this kind of "fluff". But if you insist on this special DUNGEON-DM-relationship, you should be aware that you insist on this magazine to stay a niche magazine as well. Maybe you'd like it that way, I'd rather like to have a bit of generalization and therefore to have it easier to gain new players for my campaigns.
By the way, i have no probs with my players to look into any sources I use for my campaign. They know better as to mix their player with their character knowledge. And they have learned that I never implement anything as it stands written whereever.
I've conducted my own little poll of Wil Save readership and guess what? Seven out of ten people think it sucks balls. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
There was a good point brought up, that I've also raised several times: Is their evidence that the funding for the Wil Save page is bringing increased readership?
Well, I can't say in the large scale, but Wil Save was the article that tipped the scales in favour of me subscribing to the magazine. I liked the direction that it was indicating for the magazine -- continuing hard content with a seasoning of more abstract content. Rather than just straight crunch or simply having nothing but adventures, the inclusion of Wil Save indicated to me that the magazine would also have material dealing with some of the more out-of-game aspects of running a game, such as handling players, having fun, enjoying life, etc. I want Dungeon to stay a DM resource, and I definitely want the full adventures to stay (even if I'll probably never use them intact), but if Dungeon was pure crunch, it would be completely useless to me. I'm able to perform basic addition, so I don't need someone else to generate my villains or encounters for me. Instead, I want to see the motivation for the adventures in the magazine, and preferably a certain amount of discussion around that kind of topic. The idea of Wil Save is something that definitely appealed to me.
ASEO, here's something to think about: You've complained that the old-timers all hate Wil Save while newcomers like it. Wouldn't that alone suggest that Wil Save is drawing new readers? ;-)
That said, while I did originally give in and get a subscription because of Wil Save -- and I almost never bought the mags at the newsstands because I have a hard time finding it, so this is basically purely added bonus sales for Paizo -- I've since changed my view and will continue to subscribe for the rest of the content. Wil Save isn't particularly valuable in its current incarnation (although I haven't seen 121 yet, thanks to Canada Post) and I'm getting less and less supportive of it. I quite like Wil as a writer, and yes, I definitely think that he's a better writer than Weis and Hickman (or Jordan or Salvatore or most other fantasy writers out there) but this may not be the best format for him.
|
|
I've conducted my own little poll of Wil Save readership and guess what? Seven out of ten people think it sucks balls. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Yeah, and when I did the same, ten out of ten thought it to be a great column.
You're buying what I said? No? You're right, I wouldn't buy it either. ;-)
ASEO wrote:
Does having one horribly written non-D&D related page in the magazine change that? No.
Would you mind to add something as "in my opinion" if you call Wil's Save "horribly written"? Just because it's your personal taste rather than the truth. There are people (me included) who think Wil Wheaton to be a good writer and there's no need to offend our taste and our literary knowledge by repeated and willingly ignorance.
Who said I was referring to Wil Save when I mentioned a horribly written non D&D related page? Hmmm... That you instantly thought of Wil Save provokes me to think that this is what you truly feel about the page. Could it be that you feel there is only one page in DUNGEON that could qualify as such?
However, if you would kindly follow your own advice and mention that it is your opinion that my opinion is not the truth, then I will kindly do the same.
For example when you said:
Would you mind to add something as "in my opinion" if you call Wil's Save "horribly written"? Just because it's your personal taste rather than the truth. There are people (me included) who think Wil Wheaton to be a good writer and there's no need to offend our taste and our literary knowledge by repeated and willingly ignorance.
It should have said: Capatalized text ment to show added "Polite opinion text" and not to be taken as shouting in any way shape or form.
"Would you mind to add something as "in my opinion" if you call Wil's Save "horribly written"? Just because it's your personal taste rather than WHAT IN MY OPINION IS the truth SOELY DEFINED BY ME AS MY OPINION. There are people (me included) who think Wil Wheaton to be a good writer and there's no need to offend our taste and our SELF PROCLAIMED (remember it is all just opinions) literary knowledge by WHAT I BELIEVE, IN MY OPINION TO BE repeated and IN MY OPINION willingly ignorance."
Actually scratch that. I think it is pretty obvious to all here, that anything that anybody writes is only that person's opinion, and should only be taken as such.
ASEO, here's something to think about: You've complained that the old-timers all hate Wil Save while newcomers like it. Wouldn't that alone suggest that Wil Save is drawing new readers? ;-)
It very well could be. That is what I've been trying to learn from the DUNGEON staff. Like I mentioned above, I'll still complain about Wil Save (if it continues to be non-D&D and non-game applicable) but I'll at least know why it is in DUNGEON.
If the DUNGEON staff comes on and posts that readership suddenly increased when Wil Save was added, and that that added income for the magazine is leading to an annual extra issue, the re-inclusion of Side Treks, Maps of Mystery, Critical Threats and the like, I'll say "Yeah!"
I've conducted my own little poll of Wil Save readership and guess what? Seven out of ten people think it sucks balls. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
While I'm there with you, this does not constructavely contribute to the discussion of the merits of Wil Save, and is likely to get the topic(which is evidently screaming to be discussed) pulled. As will the increased personal attacks. Remember, this thread is about the merits, or lack there of, of Wil Save. Lets keep on topic.
ASEO out
It's a good thing that I have a naturally high armor class and a natural resistance to flame.
Wil Save it seems brings out the worst in everybody.
|
|
Who said I was referring to Wil Save when I mentioned a horribly written non D&D related page? Hmmm...
Sorry for that. Must have mistaken you for this one guy who has complained for months about the existence of Wil's Save in the magazine. ;)
And thx for editing my text; I really appreciated this lesson in politeness (actually it was a threefold lesson with the additional contents of irony and mockery but more stuff means more to learn).I promise to restrict my further comments to posts like those created by DeadDMWalking. He has made some good points so far (some hard nuts to crack so to say) and for which reason ever I haven't felt the need so far to complain about the way he gives his opinion though I almost completely disagree.
My heartfelt apologies: I didn't intend to test your natural armor with my rusty daggers. So if you ever felt personally insulted by something I wrote, it was Wil Save's guilt. Seems that it brings out the worst in some people. So please don't hold my pit bullish behaviour to let go on this topic temper your over all impression of me.
So please don't hold my pit bullish behaviour to let go on this topic temper your over all impression of me.
Hey, I never hold a grudge. I honestly find it interesting to hear what merits others see in Wil Save, and it goes back to the questions of my very first post "Am I missing something?” and “I care why?”.
Several people have told me why they like Wil Save, but other than the nebulous "The must be trying to broaden their reader base" argument (which could very well be accurate, but I won't believe it until I hear it from the DUNGEON staff, along with evidence that the expanded reader base is bringing something beyond Wil Save to Dungeon, because if that increased reader base doesn't enhance the magazine, with in-game useable resources, then there is no advantage to it, and thus no gain, except to the firm's wallets, by having Wil Save)
I have seen no compelling reason to have Wil Save in DUNGEON versus DRAGON. Now it could very well be that Wil Save was originally slated for one of Paizo's other magazines, but when Undefeated (Which seems to me to have the best place to have put it) and Amazing Stories went on...um…vacation? That Wil Save because the contract with Paizo had already been signed, got shoe-holed into DUNGEON.
Not to get anybody started... I believe that there was only one shooter in Dallas, that the crash at Roswell was not an alien space craft, and that there is no hidden treasure of the Knights Templar.
ASEO out
The art for Wil Save still makes me shudder and gives me nightmares.
I've got to say that I liked it. Not entirely certain WHY, but nailing down the whys of it aren't really important to me.
Ditto.
It may not be a huge reason to buy the magazine but it adds something interesting to read when I'm in the porcelain library....Just as long as it doesn't become a series of autobiographical articles. We don't need or care why his life is however it is. If he sticks with articles on teaching the game (and I mean HOW to teach, rather than how it FEELS to teach) he'll do well. Dammit, now I'm analyzing.
|
|
I promise to restrict my further comments to posts like those created by DeadDMWalking. He has made some good points so far (some hard nuts to crack so to say) and for which reason ever I haven't felt the need so far to complain about the way he gives his opinion though I almost completely disagree.
That sounds almost like a compliment. It also sounds almost like an insult, but not without a dose of grudging respect. Or something.
What bothers me is how difficult this conversation is to talk about - almost like politics at the work place during a presidential election cycle. It is possible to dislike Wil Save without disliking Wil Wheaton. It is possible to dislike Wil Save and dislike Wil Wheaton, though the two should not influence each other. It is possible to like Wil Save and still agree that it doesn't belong in Dungeon. It's possible to like Wil Save, but still prefer that something else goes in its place.
I have a lot of issues of Dungeon sitting on a special shelf in my desk. I occassionally look through them - there are still a ton of useful resources there. I even enjoy looking back on the letters. Wil Save will not be the kind of article that I'll find myself looking back on fondly, thinking "those were the days".
Roxlimmn (sp?) has asked me why I don't complain about the existence of other "non-game relevant" features. As long as I'm posting anyway, I thought I might as well address my personal feelings on this.
First of all, the magazine needs to engage the readers. This is in some sense a matter of 'balance' that the staff takes responsibility for. If they get 1000 letters in a month, I would be upset if they published them all. If they include one or two pages of letters, I don't think that will be a problem. When a reader complains about something, it is important for the rest of us readers to know to respond as we deem fit. We can either agree or disagree with a point that is brought up. The letters page might be old-fashioned or superfluous now that the message boards are up and running, but they make sure that the entire readership is at least informed of what significant issues are. And it does it in a more constructive fashion than constant polling might. It does lack the ability to foster an in-depth discussion including dozens of points of view - but it can at least summarize the discussion that has occurred here. Not everyone can dedicate the time required to follow all 8 pages of this discussion. So, the letters allows us to directly engage the magazine as a community. Another critical difference between the letters and Wil Save is the letters accept submissions from anybody. Even if I don't write to it, it 'belongs' to me. If I write a column for Wil Save, I'm certain it won't be published. This feeling of "ownership" helps make me a dedicated subscriber.
|
|
That sounds almost like a compliment. It also sounds almost like an insult, but not without a dose of grudging respect. Or something.
No insult meant. I respect other opinions especially if i cannot prove them to be wrong. And you have raised some points I haven't been able to answer accordingly so far. I think it's clear that I'm not too happy with this state of affairs, but it's also clear that this is not your fault. Maybe that's where the "grudging" undertone comes from. ;)
Hm, seems time to have a break; my last three posts haven't added something topic-related so I'll lean back and wait for another inspiration ^^.
Yours, Wormy
|
|
I won't however, rail against the editors that I want it pulled, or even state it's a bad article/comic/waste of space. Some people like comics; I don't. Some people may find Downer great; I don't. I've tried reading and I just didn't like it. Just because I don't like it doesn't mean it's bad or that it should be pulled from the magazine. It serves a use to some people, just not me. I don't care it eats up 2-4 pages of potential "content" that could be better spent on other things I would like to see. I'm not the editor, nor do I have the time to submit articles I would want to see. Thus, I'm not going to attack it beyond stating this: It's irrelevant and moot to me and therefore I shall not read it.
I guess my biggest concern is that we have many people railing against Wil Save. Some of us like it, some of us don't. Why is it necessary for you and others to request that it be cancelled when some people out here like it? I won't complain about the Worm Turns or whatever new campaign is coming out and I won't complain about Eberron being focused on too much by Paizo, WotC, or whatannannywhonot. Wil Save's got my vote to stay until the designer's feel he's said what he's got to say and nothing more can be said about what he has to say.
...
Think we can all just agree to something along those lines here eh?
There is nothing wrong with people expressing their opinion on the material presented in the magazine, whether good or bad. If people generally like something, we can count on seeing more of it in the future. If people don't like something, we will probably see less of it in the future. However, for this to work as it is supposed to, it requires that those who have opinions (or thoughts regarding the direction of the magazine) express it to the editors. They seem to genuinely appreciate feedback.
This doesn't mean they will do anything I (or others) suggest. Still, this discussion is not without merit. The fact that you've gone on record supporting the article already does something constructive.
Now, I can't understand people who think that there is no point in expressing their opinion. If there is room for improvement, we should help that improvement occur.
Personally, I think the column in 122 is the best yet.
How could anyone have a problem with this month's column?
Great stuff.
nothing?
throw me a bone, people!
ROFL!!!
Awesomeness abounds in this thread!!
ROFL!!
Sweet!
BEST... THREAD... EVER!
LOL
But, seriously, being Wil's buddy is a gamble...
Edit: Which was a lot funnier when the title read (Wil's Gambling Buddy)
But, seriously, being Wil's buddy is a gamble...
Edit: Which was a lot funnier when the title read (Wil's Gambling Buddy)
Ya. The titles are randomized for each individual session.
This rocks more than anything has rocked before.
Rob, what can I say. . . .
You're a genius, man. But not in a Nobel-Prize winning kind of wayway, but more like a Crazy Mad-Scientist kind of way.
Where do the staff at Paizo keep you chained up?
Well done, very funny! :)
Where do the staff at Paizo keep you chained up?
Unleashing Rob is a tricky business. You have to unleash just enough of him to accomplish the mission but not so much that you, say, burn down the office.
*dons his asbestos suit*
Rob, what can I say. . . .
You're a genius, man. But not in a Nobel-Prize winning kind of wayway, but more like a Crazy Mad-Scientist kind of way.
Where do the staff at Paizo keep you chained up?
Well done, very funny! :)
Alas, the credit for making it happen goes to Gary, my partner in crime.
The credit for the idea was collective. I think it was Vic's, originally.
Which is not to say that I am not, in fact, freakishly clever. : ]
Great... It has me listed as Founder, Save Wil Save Foundation...greeeeaaat
LSHMBSOMN (Laughed so hard my beverage squirted out my nose)
I forgot what day it was and thought that it might be halloween and my worst nightmare was manifesting in this thread of terror.
I wil say that it is against my wil that I am stuck with the crappy Wil Save art for an unwiling avatar. Wil someone please make this day end. Wil it please be over. Wil looks very constipated in these avatar shots.
ASEO out
I wil return
Hi, ASEO.
Now my day is complete! : )
- rob
|
I actually like Wil Save and it is one of the first things I flip to when I pick up Dungeon. I was curious as to why the article wasn't running in the pages of Dragon instead.
While Wil's article may not be 100% D&D content, I feel that it is entertaining, and that is reason 1 I pick up the book. To enjoy my seven bucks worth of reading. I'm glad there's something in thete that makes me laugh because of word structure not comical art and snappy captions.
The folks hating on Wil's column are most likely the same ones that wear I hate wesley shirts at conventions. SMOF!