I've been thinking about some of the recent threads on this forum, such as the Massive Review and one about an RPG.Net thread. I made comments about the "usefulness" of Dragon articles, and made short comments on things that I liked, didn't like, and "most importantly" what I've used in my games.
It hit me that while I enjoy most of the magazine, there has been relatively little that I've actually been able to use. Yet, I still buy the magazine. I even have the 2001 annual Dragon d20 Special, which I *knew* I would never use. That makes me think that I don't buy Dragon for the reasons that I thought I bought Dragon.
So, if I don't buy Dragon expecting to find articles that I will use in my game, why do I buy it? I actually even taked to my mom about this (she's now in her 70's), and she gave me some insight... or maybe hindsight... about myself and D&D.
She told me that we were always excited about playing D&D back in high school (83-87, when I was introduced to the game), but we were often even more excited talking about the game. From her perspective, we had as much fun thinking about characters we never played as we did actually playing the game.
If that's still the case, and I know that it is, I can see that I buy Dragon for more than one reason. Sure, I buy Dragon to give me options for my game. Some options I'll use, others I won't, but most of them will be things that I'll wish I could use. I buy the magazine to read the fiction and comics, as well. But I can't ignore that I buy the magazine for the articles that make me create new characters in my head, and think about the fun I could have... and do have, just by thinking about it.
There's a lot more, too. But I think I buy Dragon expecting a good magazine, with articles that my friends and I will talk about around the game table or at work.
For a long time, I didn't buy. Then Erik Mona started promising big changes soon and I bought a subscription based on the great work he's done with Dungeon and the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer. I was imagining a return to form with the magazine going back to the sort of format it used in the "good" days under TSR. Turns out that was just wishful thinking on my part. It's the same lobotomized publication it's been since the start of the decade, and if big changes are coming, they're clearly in no rush.
My subscription has just run its course, and while I still like Dungeon, it looks like I won't be spending on Dragon again in the foreseeable future.
I do find many useful articles and bits of information in Dragon. I have found about a dozen new feats, spells and various other rules that I plan to use in my campaign or am already using.
However, mostly I get a lot of ideas from Dragon--the fiction, the articles I don't use, etc can all be jumping off points for adventures if I need some creative kick-starting.
The magazine's quality, relevance and usefulness to my game is about the same now as it has always been, at least to me.
I think that if you look at the price of other d20 products and "sourcebooks", you get a pretty good bang for your buck from Dragon over the course of a year.
...that is if you're willing to do a little work to adapt things to your specific campaign, which seems to be a dying art. Argue that point with me, but how many people here criticize Dragon because the magazine didn't publish something that was 100% immediately compatible with their campaign?
I think that's why the SCAP and AoW are so popular compared to the constant flak that Dragon gets--the adventures can just be played as they are, in a row, with little or no prep work by the DM except to just read the adventure before hand.
I think that people somehow "expect" the same thing from Dragon...which is not what Dragon is.
I read Dragon for a few reasons.
1. For the sake of reading it. I am a magazine junkie. I like being able to pick up an issue, flip to a page, and get something quick and easy to read. I like interesting articles that aren't too long, packed with fun little things I'd never thought of before. I find it enjoyable, regardless of the utility of the article.
2. For inspiration. I don't use much straight out of Dragon, but I do find myself constantly inspired by their articles. Something as small as a feat or a scrap of artwork is enough to set my mind working. Complete well-written articles I sometimes tweak to fit in my games, both as a DM and a player (I have benevolent DMs who include cool stuff if I make a good case for it).
3. To keep up with what's being written about in the industry. Useful for developing my writing career. I like to keep abreast of what other people are writing and how they're handling articles.
4. Pure utility articles. Drag 'n drop sort of thing.
5. As BigJake said, to give me something to talk about. It's enjoyable to pore over an issue and then discuss it with my friends. Makes me feel involved in the hobby even when I'm not playing.
6. To support Paizo, because I think it's a good company.
I think that's it...
-Amber S.
I do find many useful articles and bits of information in Dragon. I have found about a dozen new feats, spells and various other rules that I plan to use in my campaign or am already using.
However, mostly I get a lot of ideas from Dragon--the fiction, the articles I don't use, etc can all be jumping off points for adventures if I need some creative kick-starting.
The magazine's quality, relevance and usefulness to my game is about the same now as it has always been, at least to me.
I think that if you look at the price of other d20 products and "sourcebooks", you get a pretty good bang for your buck from Dragon over the course of a year.
...that is if you're willing to do a little work to adapt things to your specific campaign, which seems to be a dying art. Argue that point with me, but how many people here criticize Dragon because the magazine didn't publish something that was 100% immediately compatible with their campaign?
I think that's why the SCAP and AoW are so popular compared to the constant flak that Dragon gets--the adventures can just be played as they are, in a row, with little or no prep work by the DM except to just read the adventure before hand.
I think that people somehow "expect" the same thing from Dragon...which is not what Dragon is.
Exactly. Even if I don't find something immedaitely useful, it will be useful at a later date(Paizo, stop scrying me!), or if not, at least it's enjoyable to read.
WaterdhavianFlapjack
I buy Dragon for several reasons:
1.) I actually do use a sizable amount of the material in my game. One of my players is playing a stonelord, which first appeared in the pages of Dragon (where he found it). Another is playing a targeteer with the Dead Eye feat and I believe a few other archery feats from the pages of Dragon. Several characters have a ring of defense, also from Dragon. As the DM, I've used countless monsters from the magazine, numerous magic items, and many of the magical and non-magical items. I use some of the expanded/variant rules ("Power Fantasy" and the Swashbucklers issues are always present due to their expanded skills information).
2.) I enjoy reading many of the articles, even if I don't have an immediate use for them. The haunted house and birth of the undead articles in this month's issue were great reads, even though my campaign has already went through an undead-heavy stage.
3.) Dragon is the true bearer of canon nowadays. Whereas each new WOTC supplement introduces new gods, organizations, etc. that have never appeared in the game before (the gods from the Environmental books, the Walkers in the Waste, etc.), Dragon gives us the Demonomicon and other articles that expand canon from all the way back to 1E (and even OD&D, in the case of the lupins and diaboli). Call me old fashioned, but I prefer the old stuff updated and expanded to something created just for the sake of being new.
4.) Some of the most daring material appears in the pages of Dragon. Parrying rules, archfiends, haunted houses...this stuff doesn't appear very often (or ever) in the gamebooks, but it is here. I'm actually fond of Silicon Sorcery, a Novel Approach, Divine Inspiration, etc. It is interesting to see a D&D twist on fantasy novels, games, etc.
5.) Trust. While I realize that everything found within Dragon isn't 100% balanced, I've overall had great results with the content when used in my campaign and others I've played in.
6.) It's official. I know it hurts my cred to not be anti-WOTC, but I prefer official material. Why? See #3. Only official sources can expand the canon and WOTC-only IP, like mind flayers, beholders, and many of the archfiends. Even if it is only once a year, this is the only place I'm going to see articles on Planescape, Mystara, Dark Sun, etc.
7.) Planar content. Since 1E, Dragon has consistently provided great content for planar adventures. Cities of the planes, the recent Far Realm article, the Demonomicon...these are the articles I most eagerly anticipate.
I don't buy Dragon for fiction, previews, or non-d20 content (such as the gamers' chair, console games, etc.) I also don't buy it for Eberron-specific material (but I won't begrudge others who enjoy it the occasional column). I wouldn't mind the occasional non-D&D d20 article, but if it isn't D20, I'm not interested.
I'm overall very satisfied with my Dragon subscription, and I definetely see steady improvement since the "Unleashed" fiasco. Unless it takes a radical turn for the worse, I'll resubscribe when this one's up.
1. For the sake of reading it.
Absolutely! I took one issue on a road trip, and enjoyed every article in it. I wasn't reading to see what to throw in my game, I just wanted something good to read on the trip.
For those times that I've run dry (creatively speaking). A Dragon article (or three) is enough to get the juices flowing and make for a great game.
To support my FLGS.
To be inspired by spiff artwork.
To see that I'm not the only one playing the game.
I think it's been an excelent source for new things. Little tidbits here and little bits there that help with the game.
That said, I've been really dissapointed in Dragon recently. Ever since they've gone to the new and improved format I've been less and less satisfied. Fully half of the magazine is advertisment now. There are whole sections in the front and in the back, just for adds, then whole page adds every 2 or 3 pages.
I'm starting to question the price I pay for a magazine with so little content.
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Fully half of the magazine is advertisment now.
This is not true. At best (or worst, depending upon your perspective), it's been about a third ads (even if you call First Watch ads, which I think is unfair, but whatever).
If the magazine was really half ads it would be cheaper, would be printed on better paper, and would actually have a lot more pages, because we could afford to print a thicker magazine.
--Erik
Even in the Internet age, I think the most compelling reason to purchase Dragon is that it still serves to link the roleplaying community together.
Gamers can come to the same place, the pages of Dragon magazine, where they exchange views (in letters), be inspired (by artwork and articles), catch up on the latest in rpg products (the ads), share a laugh (comics) or just kick back and enjoy a good read (fiction).
No D&D supplement can do the same. GenCon is but once a year. Organized play is non-existent in this area.
But Dragon shows up once a month, filled with a fresh batch of things my gaming group can talk about, debate and think about adding to our game. And we can kick these things around knowing that in Miami Beach, Cleveland, New York, Seattle, Lake Geneva and even on foreign shores, like-minded gamers are doing the same.
D&D is just a set of rules. Dragon is a community.
The highest percentage of advertising I've seen in my tenure as the Advertising Guru is roughly 35%. That's hardly "half". More often the percentage runs in around 30%.
That being said, any time we have a month where ads increase beyond expectations we always try to work with the staff to get an increase in pages as well. Keeping a healthy balance between ads and content is very important to me. No ads means no magazines. No content means no magazines. Somewhere in between there's a balance and I think we've achieved a healthy one.
(The exception being the one time a year we publish the WoTC catalogue - IE, Dragon 336. An artificially higher percentage of ads there, but still not 50%.)
I do find many useful articles and bits of information in Dragon. I have found about a dozen new feats, spells and various other rules that I plan to use in my campaign or am already using.
However, mostly I get a lot of ideas from Dragon--the fiction, the articles I don't use, etc can all be jumping off points for adventures if I need some creative kick-starting.
The magazine's quality, relevance and usefulness to my game is about the same now as it has always been, at least to me.
I think that if you look at the price of other d20 products and "sourcebooks", you get a pretty good bang for your buck from Dragon over the course of a year.
...that is if you're willing to do a little work to adapt things to your specific campaign, which seems to be a dying art. Argue that point with me, but how many people here criticize Dragon because the magazine didn't publish something that was 100% immediately compatible with their campaign?
I think that's why the SCAP and AoW are so popular compared to the constant flak that Dragon gets--the adventures can just be played as they are, in a row, with little or no prep work by the DM except to just read the adventure before hand.
I think that people somehow "expect" the same thing from Dragon...which is not what Dragon is.
Stole the words... and yes, the magazine is about as useful now as it ever was for me as well--pretty sorta useful.