|
I do not like the new format of class acts. I really enjoyed the way that the articles used to be divided: by class, not the new Arcane, Divine, Adventurer, Warrior divisions you have now. I understand that space may be the issue, but those articles were the core reason I bought Dragon. I'm not a subscriber, I get my books at cover price, and I love dungeon and buy it every month, but Dragon I pick up once in a while. Fixing this fumble would be much appreciated.
Director of Games
|
I do not like the new format of class acts. I really enjoyed the way that the articles used to be divided: by class, not the new Arcane, Divine, Adventurer, Warrior divisions you have now. I understand that space may be the issue, but those articles were the core reason I bought Dragon. I'm not a subscriber, I get my books at cover price, and I love dungeon and buy it every month, but Dragon I pick up once in a while. Fixing this fumble would be much appreciated.
Hey there,
Although I appreciate your concern, I think the new format is here to stay, at least for the time being. Not only does it save us a few pages that we can then devote to features, the new format allows us to easily explore options for standard classes outside the players handbook. Add this to the fact that new format allows us to explore a concept with a bit more depth and we think we have a winning formula. You may not agree. We have made a lot of changes to the magazine over the past year to give you better content. Unfortunately, no change will please everyone. I hope you continue to give us a try and consider a subscription.
Jason Bulmahn
Managing Editor of Dragon
Yeah, that and the fact you're the only one I have seen that actually dislikes it. Everyone else loves it.
If it was the way it was before, you wouldn't have those Soulknife feats, Ninja feats, and Hexblade feats would ya? :D
I have to say the new Class Acts format shocked me when I picked up the March issue after having been away for several months. However, after the shock passed I thought about it and decided I can accept it. Here's why:
- Having a one-page article *every* month for *every* core PHB class probably turns into an editor's nightmare. "OH NO!!! The issue has to go out in 10 MINUTES and we have no C/A for the Sorcerer or Druid this month!!" Or maybe there's an idea perfect for a C/A, but it weighs in at 2 pages instead of one.
- The "Complete X" books have given us a lot of new core classes that could use some exploring, like the PHB classes were getting. I mean, C'MON!! I need some Warlock and Scout Class Acts!!! That is - the old formula no longer fit. Either writers and editors ignored the Complete X core-classes or the magazine expanded the C/A section by that many more pages - reducing *other* content by that many pages.
- Certain Class Act concepts could overlap several core classes.
I really liked the Class Acts format when it debuted and the new format was a major shock - especially since that was my *first* objective with the first issue in several months. However, I had seen some potential problems with the format early on and I think the new format goes quite a ways to clearing them up.
-Doc
The new format is much better. The old format was atrocious.
The old format was atrocious.
I wouldn't go that far. ;) The old format was great - at first. But most of the problems it presented have been hit on here already:
The format does a darn good job of fixing all those. Also, I get paid more to write articles in the new format. :D
Cardinal_Malik, what is it you dislike about the new style of Class Acts?
In my opinion, they're better now because the articles were too short and the class divisions too strict. If I write an article on variant summoning lists for sorcerers, shouldn't it apply equally to wizards? If I write up combat feats for a fighter, what's to stop paladins and barbarians taking a few?
I much prefer the new format.
I am very, VERY annoyed to have lost the long post I wrote. Long story short: alternate classes are fun and don't all have to be quite as good as the sidhe scholar, but they should be playable with just the core books as references; articles with nothing for core classes are disappointing, so please try to throw in a little something for them like the Guerrilla Trapsmith feat in the "Naruto" article or a useful sidebar (psionics are something of an exception since the relevant material is available in the SRD).
I prefer the new format.
* It offers more flexibility; larger articles need not be truncated.
* It tends to save pages even though the individual articles can be bigger.
* It avoids the "we must run every class every issue" syndome (which can lead even the best editors to printing weaker articles at times to fill a hole).
I prefer the new format too.
The old way was good though, it just didn't really give you enough for each class each month yet forced more pages to be used up.
Now we just need a two page article each month that expands on the ideas for a specific race, building off of what the Races series has done.
L