By posting in this forum you can tell I am a Dungeon subscriber.
I noticed in issue 120 a number of links from Dungeon back to Dragon and I hope this continues. I think this is a great idea of linking adventures to flavor/crunchy articles in Dragon and vice versa. Sending people to check out Dragon 329 for more information on Pazuzu and to Dragon 290 and 291 for Death Knights is great. I went to my local gaming store to check out issue 329 but it wasn't on the shelves yet. Did Dragon 329 have a mention of the latest dungeon magazine for an adventure pertaining to the Pazuzu article? It would be great to have Dragon readers whose interest is piqued by an article to check out dungeon to see how the material has been utilized in an adventure.
I think this a great strategy to cross-promote both magazines.
For the Adventure Path 2 if every month there was an adventure in Dungeon and a flavor/crunchy article in Dragon that related to it, I would have to seriously consider picking up a lot more issues of Dragon.
The two magazines used this strategy very well with the adventure "Incursion". (I think that's what it was called.) There were githyanki themed articles in Dragon and a full scale astral plane adventure in Dungeon. All the strategies were layed out with lots of detail including Githyanki philosophy, tactics, cool prestige classes, etc. Having said that, the adventure was self-contained and could be run without the supplemental material in Dragon. I came very close to starting a campaign based around the Githyanki Incursion idea (still might). That's just the sort of synergy that I'd like to see the two mags continue. Pazuzu, Pazuzu, Pazuzu! Bring 'im on.
Creative Director
|
We are indeed planning on having more synergy between the two magazines. At the very least, you should find that the monster ecology that appears in Dragon is on a monster that can be encountered in an adventure in that month's Dungeon. In the case of the kenku, the encounter is major, but in others it'll be minor (as in the case of the will-o'-wisp).
At the same time, thoguh, we'll be sure to keep each magazine self-contained. We want readers of one magazine to go to the other magazine because they're intrigued and curious about it based on information they see in the first magazine, not because they feel they HAVE to get the other magazine to see the whole picture.
At the same time, thoguh, we'll be sure to keep each magazine self-contained. We want readers of one magazine to go to the other magazine because they're intrigued and curious about it based on information they see in the first magazine, not because they feel they HAVE to get the other magazine to see the whole picture.
As long as you're serious about each mag being self-contained, then it's awesome. If you need both mags to use either one, you won't attract new readers and you'll definitely piss off and alienate existing readers.
Of course, you guys have been doing such a good job lately that I doubt I have to worry, but I just thought I'd throw my two cents in anyway. ;-)