# An Open Letter to Dragon and Dungeon Readers



## Keith F Strohm (May 14, 2004)

Since the launch of Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition, fans of Dragon and Dungeon magazines have rolled with a lot of changes. Absorbing the rules “shock” that came with the new edition of D&D occurred simultaneously with an all-new look and format for the magazines. Add on top of that the changes that came as Paizo Publishing, LLC took over the development and sales of the magazines, and you’re talking about one wild ride!

   Change can be very difficult to go through—especially if it involves something for which you have a deep passion. Looking beyond the tumult of the past two years, however, I believe that the company has managed to continually improve the overall quality of Dragon and Dungeon magazines. Though they might be a little uncomfortable with my sharing this, the editorial staff of Dragon and Dungeon go above and beyond the call of duty to provide the best RPG magazines possible—often working late nights and weekends to do so.

   Over these years, we have learned a lot about our business, ourselves, and you, our customers. We’ve had successes . . . and failures—both of which you’ve been eager to let us know about.

   And we’ve been listening.

   You see, Paizo Publishing has recently gone through its own set of changes. Old friends have left the company and new ones have joined. At heart, we’re still all gamers (just ask Dungeon Associate Editor James Jacobs about how the Australian funnel web spider became a fearsome D&D creature known as the Viper Spider). But, we’re gamers with a mission. It’s our responsibility to plan and build for the long-term health of both Paizo Publishing and the Dragon and Dungeon brands. At the end of the day, we have a business to run. We’ve done some exceptional things in the past, but we’re simply not content to be exceptional. We want to be the best, and the only way we can do that is by delivering magazines that meet or exceed the needs and value expectations of the largest segments of our audience.

   So, we’ve spent the last 6 months listening to you. Whether it’s been Letters to the Editor, threads on Internet newsgroups and forums, private emails, or Customer Service calls, we’ve sifted through your opinions and feedback, pored over our market research, and debated both our strategies and the fundamental ways in which we do business. During this process, we rebuilt the magazines from the ground up to make them useful and exciting to the widest segment of our audience. Our goal during this time was not simply to make a better Dragon magazine or an improved Dungeon. Ultimately, we labored to create the best two magazines devoted to Dungeons & Dragons that we possibly could. This was the same philosophy that I used as Brand Manager for D&D under Ryan Dancey during the launch of 3rd Edition.     

   The results of our efforts will appear this August when we release the “new” Dragon (with issue #323) and Dungeon (with issue #114) magazines. By now, I’m sure you’ve read the cryptic hints left by the editors in response to letters, email, and forum responses. Rather than continue to tease you about what the future holds, I think it’s important to share with you some of the details of the “new” Dragon and Dungeon magazines—after all, you’ve helped shape what these two magazines have become:

The “New” Dragon

   Starting with Issue #323, Dragon Magazine opens its pages to a new era of utility and excitement. In addition to its usual complement of material that provides D&D players with the tools they need to raise the level of their play experience, the new Dragon provides more information about all aspects of the D&D brand. Whether you knock down dungeon doors in the tabletop RPG, command warbands with the D&D Miniatures game, invade the Underdark online with your closest friends, or enjoy reading about the exploits of your favorite characters, the new Dragon is THE source for information about and content for Dungeons & Dragons. Also, starting with issue #323, the new Dragon presents a bonus quarterly catalog giving you the scoop on upcoming D&D releases from Wizards of the Coast, all gathered in one place.
   And lest you think we’re skimping on RPG content, our plans for the new dragon include having articles that present new spells, feats, magic items, rules advice, player tactics, a single prestige class, a new PC race, and an ecology of a monster in every issue--something for everyone, no matter what character they play! With features like the new Class Acts—which provides content for each of the eleven Player’s Handbook classes—and Coup de Grace—the last word in gaming, this column lets you hear from the people behind every aspect of D&D, from designers and developers to members of the marketing team—Dragon continues its tradition of providing the best D&D RPG content to its readers.  

The “New” Dungeon

   Beginning with issue #114, Dungeon magazine becomes the ultimate resource for Dungeon Masters. Each issue will contain three adventures, one each for low-, medium-, and high-level play. So, no matter the experience level of your party, DUNGEON’S got you covered every single month. In addition to the high-quality adventures you’ve come to expect from the magazine, Dungeon will expand its offerings to include articles and other content written specifically to help DMs take their game to the next level. From old favorites like the ever-popular Dungeoncraft by Monte Cook, to new features like the Campaign Workbook—a section devoted to providing tools specifically designed to enhance a DM’s ability to create lively and adventurous campaigns—the “new” Dungeon offers experienced DMs and players interested in taking up the reigns of Dungeon Mastering everything they need to be successful.

   In order to provide this in-depth offering, Dungeon will now focus exclusively on Dungeons & Dragons—delivering even more high-quality D&D coverage. We listened to your feedback, and it was clear that by trying to serve D&D fans, the d20 market, Star Wars fans, and the RPGA, our magazine wasn’t completely succeeding at delivering the highest quality experience for any of those groups. We know that many of you subscribed to Dungeon for the complete mini-games and articles about Star Wars d20 and D&D Modern.  Unfortunately, there weren't enough of you to offset those who left the magazine due to the decrease in the D&D content each issue.  The D&D players felt we weren't giving them enough D&D content, and the Polyhedron readers felt that we shorted the d20 stuff. For this reason, after careful thought and some soul searching, we’ve decided to end the long run of Polyhedron Magazine and focus on being the best resource for Dungeon Masters. Regular RPGA updates will transfer to Dragon magazine to reach the largest number of D&D gamers around the world, and we’ll continue to include RPGA Player Reward adventure codes for each Dungeon adventure. With Network material in both magazines, Dragon and Dungeon will support the RPGA like never before.

   Finally, each issue of the magazine will feature Wil Save, a regular column of gaming observations penned by none other than Wil Wheaton of Star Trek: The Next Generation fame. 

   Being a part of the D&D 3rd Edition launch, I know firsthand the depth of passion and commitment our audience has toward both D&D and our magazines (I share that commitment, as does Lisa Stevens, our CEO and another member of the 3rd Edition team). We’ll be reading and responding to Internet discussions, and if anyone would like to discuss the relaunch further, you can reach me at Keith@paizo.com.

   I also know that many of you have experienced frustration over the years regarding subscription fulfillment. As many of you know, we recently moved our fulfillment of subscriptions in-house. Although we have had more than our share of logistics hiccups along the way, I want you all to know that we, as a company, find such "hiccups" unacceptable. We are already at work on building better internal processes to insure that subscription fulfillment runs more smoothly. However, I want you to know that I will be working personally on this issue until it is resolved.

   Finally, I want to thank all of our readers who have helped make Dragon and Dungeon magazines so successful throughout the years. Without you, and your input, the future success of these magazines would not be possible. And, if you haven’t taken a look at Dragon and Dungeon in a while, I encourage you to pick up Dragon issue #323 and Dungeon issue #114. I know the experience will be a positive one.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Lazybones (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> For this reason, after careful thought and some soul searching, we’ve decided to end the long run of Polyhedron Magazine and focus on being the best resource for Dungeon Masters.



Well, looks like I may be subscribing again.  This is what people like me were asking for, and they delivered.


----------



## buzz (May 14, 2004)

First off, I want to say that I have been more than happy with Paizo's tenure as keepers of _Dragon_ and _Dungeon_. I heartily thank the staff for all of their wonderful work, and for making the kind of tough decisions explained in this letter in order to keep the titles profitable and of maximum utility to widest audience. Kudos, Paizo.



			
				Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> In addition to its usual complement of material that provides D&D roleplaying gamer with the tools they need to raise the level of their play experience, DRAGON will widen its coverage to include articles and information about all aspects of the D&D brand.



I admit I'm not nuts about this, as I don't have much interest in the minis game nor online/CRPG D&D. That, and there are already other magazines, such as _Undefeated_ and the myriad of PC magazines, that cover this ground already.



			
				Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Starting with issue #323, Dragon will contain a bonus quarterly Catalog detailing upcoming D&D releases from Wizards of the Coast, so you’ll have the scoop on the latest products all gathered in one place.



Okay, this is pretty darn cool. Though I guess it makes it more than official that _Dragon_ is primarily a WotC marketing device... 



			
				Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Dungeon will expand its offerings to include articles and other content written specifically to help DMs take their game to the next level. From old favorites like the ever-popular Dungeoncraft by Monte Cook, to new features like the Campaign Workbook—a section devoted to providing tools specifically designed to enhance a DM’s ability to create lively and adventurous campaigns—the “new” Dungeon offers experienced DMs and players interested in taking up the reigns of Dungeon Mastering everything they need to be successful.



Also quite cool.



			
				Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> For this reason, after careful thought and some soul searching, we’ve decided to end the long run of Polyhedron Magazine and focus on being the best resource for Dungeon Masters.



I can't tell you how sad this makes me, as _Poly_ was the reason I decided to subscribe to _Dungeon_.  Will there be any printed support for non-D&D d20 games at all, anywhere?

Also, I take it that this will mean the death of the d20 mini-game. :\



			
				Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Finally, each issue of the magazine will feature Wil Save, a regular column of gaming observations penned by none other than Wil Wheaton of Star Trek: The Next Generation fame.



Okay, this is ALMOST enough to compensate for my disappointment above. But not quite.

Thanks for posting this, Keith. I hope that this new direction works out.


----------



## Simplicity (May 14, 2004)

While I know many people are into Polyhedron, I'm happy that 
Dungeon is taking back its pages...  Good change, Keith.

Wil Save...  cute.  So, how long before Wil registers on ENWorld?
Any guesses?


----------



## morbiczer (May 14, 2004)

Well, thanks for the info first.

RE: Dragon

I obviously shouldn't complain before seeing a few of these new Dragons, but I really don't want to read about either miniatures or computer games in my favorite magazine. Those articles are absolutely useless to me. I understand to a certain degree miniatures, but computer games? I hope these articles won't form a big part of the magazine. And a new PC race in each issue? I fear some of these will be quite "funny". Are so many new races really needed? But let's hope for the best. 

RE: Dungeon

This sounds really promising. I'm already toying for a long time with starting to buy Dungeon too besides Dragon, issue 114 will probably be my first purchase.


----------



## kamosa (May 14, 2004)

Thanks for the update Keith.

Looks like maybe I'll be picking up my subscription to Dungeon again.  

Is there away to sign up today and start with just new issues onward?

{Dancing on Polyheadran's grave}


----------



## Henry (May 14, 2004)

I have a number of things to say, not all of them good, but most of them positive. The hardest thing to accept was the death of Polyhedron which, while vastly different from what it once was, was still a D&D institution which I'm sorry to see finally die.


The Good

I'm glad to see the new split. It seems that Dragon will become a Player's Mag, and Dungeon will become mainly a DM's mag. It does indeed to have articles like Dungeoncraft in Dungeon rather than Dragon.

The Bad

I'm sorry to see that according to Keith, Dragon may be devoting itself solely to new classes/feats/prc's, etc. I dislike seeing more player "candies" than players can possibly even consume as it is, so something original would be desired by me - supplements like Erik's drive a few months back to name the best Dragon articles (like Ed Greenwood's Hells articles, Lew Pulsipher's "Be aware, take care" articles, etc.)

The Ugly

I must admit I'm at a loss when it was stated quite unequivocally that it was ONLY the merging of Polyhedron and Dungeon earlier that saved both magazines. Now the Polyhedron content is leaving, I'm wondering how that fits into earlier claims that Dungeon "cannot stand" without this content.

I await the new changes with bated breath. (Since I'm not a fisherman, I can't wait with "baited breath," so that will have to do. )

Thank you, Keith, for you informative open letter!


----------



## Psion (May 14, 2004)

Dungeon: I am disappointed to see d20 modern material go, and there were some great minigames, it never seemed like Polyhedron's focus was steady. Such a change was probably overdue.

Dragon: OTOH, doesn't sound like you are improving that much. Tightening the focus on D&D and roleplaying is good; as long as pages are dedicated to fiction and the miniatures game, I feel you will have the same lack of focus that Dungeon was suffering from. I am really anxious to see what you come up with, but have difficulty not seeing those two items as space that, for the D&D player, could be better spent.


----------



## mmadsen (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Whether you knock down dungeon doors in the tabletop RPG, command warbands with the D&D Miniatures game, invade the Underdark online with your closest friends, or enjoy reading about the exploits of your favorite characters, the ‘new’ Dragon magazine is THE source for information and content about your favorite aspects of Dungeons & Dragons.



Sounds reasonable.  Not for me, but I wasn't buying _Dragon_ before.


			
				Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Beginning with issue #114, Dungeon magazine becomes the ultimate resource for Dungeon Masters. Each issue will contain three adventures, one each for low-, medium-, and high-level play. So, no matter the experience level of your party, DUNGEON’S got you covered every single month. In addition to the high-quality adventures you’ve come to expect from the magazine, Dungeon will expand its offerings to include articles and other content written specifically to help DMs take their game to the next level. From old favorites like the ever-popular Dungeoncraft by Monte Cook, to new features like the Campaign Workbook—a section devoted to providing tools specifically designed to enhance a DM’s ability to create lively and adventurous campaigns—the “new” Dungeon offers experienced DMs and players interested in taking up the reigns of Dungeon Mastering everything they need to be successful.



Sounds excellent.


			
				Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> For this reason, after careful thought and some soul searching, we’ve decided to end the long run of Polyhedron Magazine and focus on being the best resource for Dungeon Masters.



D'oh!

I'll miss the mini-games.  (I won't miss anything else from _Polyhedron_, but I will miss the mini-games.)


----------



## Elodan (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> The “New” Dragon
> Starting with Issue #323, Dragon Magazine opens its pages to a new era of utility and power. In addition to its usual complement of material that provides D&D roleplaying gamer with the tools they need to raise the level of their play experience, DRAGON will widen its coverage to include articles and information about all aspects of the D&D brand. Whether you knock down dungeon doors in the tabletop RPG, command warbands with the D&D Miniatures game, invade the Underdark online with your closest friends, or enjoy reading about the exploits of your favorite characters, the ‘new’ Dragon magazine is THE source for information and content about your favorite aspects of Dungeons & Dragons. Starting with issue #323, Dragon will contain a bonus quarterly Catalog detailing upcoming D&D releases from Wizards of the Coast, so you’ll have the scoop on the latest products all gathered in one place.
> 
> And lest you think we’re skimping on RPG content, the ‘new’ Dragon will have something for every RPG’er, no matter what character they play. With features like the new Class Acts—which provides content for every core D&D character class EVERY issue—and Winning Races—a column that offers a new PC race or monster class progression each issue— Dragon will continue its tradition of providing the best D&D RPG content to its readers.



I like what I'm hearing here.  I was definitely going to let my subscription lapse, but now I'm taking a wait and see approach.




			
				Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> The “New” Dungeon
> 
> Beginning with issue #114, Dungeon magazine becomes the ultimate resource for Dungeon Masters. Each issue will contain three adventures, one each for low-, medium-, and high-level play. So, no matter the experience level of your party, DUNGEON’S got you covered every single month. In addition to the high-quality adventures you’ve come to expect from the magazine, Dungeon will expand its offerings to include articles and other content written specifically to help DMs take their game to the next level. From old favorites like the ever-popular Dungeoncraft by Monte Cook, to new features like the Campaign Workbook—a section devoted to providing tools specifically designed to enhance a DM’s ability to create lively and adventurous campaigns—the “new” Dungeon offers experienced DMs and players interested in taking up the reigns of Dungeon Mastering everything they need to be successful.



I think this change makes a lot of sense.

It's good to see that Paizo listens and makes changes according to what the customers want.  Makes my decision to keep subscribing easier.


----------



## Cyberzombie (May 14, 2004)

Well, I will withhold judgement until I see the finished products, but I'm not too thrilled about the announced changes, myself.  I don't give a rat's behind about the miniatures game or the CRPGs, so more content on them doesn't exactly thrill me.  Polyhedron is the main reason I keep subscribing to Dungeon, 'cause most of the adventures aren't useful for me.  (I'm not saying they're bad, mind you.  I just don't have the same style of DMing as most of the adventure writers.)

Again, I'm withholding judgement until I see several issues of each.  I'm hopeful that you will be putting out good stuff, but these announcements do worry me.


----------



## Rokonin (May 14, 2004)

Well, I think I'll be picking up a subscription to Dungeon soon.

The Dragon change gets mixed feelings from me.  While I do use D&D miniatures and Neverwinter Nights (and other such computer games), I would rather Dragon be solely a RPG magazine.  However, we'll see how it goes.  The changes could be for the better.  We'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## herald (May 14, 2004)

So what becomes of Living Greyhawk? Much of what I got the mags for was that content. If that goes, so do I.


----------



## omokage (May 14, 2004)

hmm. I'll miss _Polyhedron_. I hope someone picks up on that void, I'd be happy to contribute material.


----------



## The_Gneech (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Since the launch of Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition, fans of Dragon and Dungeon magazines have rolled with a lot of changes. Absorbing the rules “shock” that came with the new edition of D&D occurred simultaneously with an all-new look and format for the magazines. Add on top of that the changes that came as Paizo Publishing, LLC took over the development and sales of the magazines, and you’re talking about one wild ride!




Overall, I've been pleased with the results. 



> Over these years, we have learned a lot about our business, ourselves, and you, our customers. We’ve had successes . . . and failures—both of which you’ve been eager to let us know about.
> 
> And we’ve been listening.




I can tell!



> The results of our efforts will appear this August when we release the “new” Dragon (with issue #323) and Dungeon (with issue #114) magazines. By now, I’m sure you’ve read the cryptic hints left by the editors in response to letters, email, and forum responses.




I did notice the "Dragon Unleashed" ad in the 30-year retrospective issue; and I have to admit my first reaction was, "It ain't broke, why are you fixing it?"



> Starting with Issue #323, Dragon Magazine opens its pages to a new era of utility and power. In addition to its usual complement of material that provides D&D roleplaying gamer with the tools they need to raise the level of their play experience, DRAGON will widen its coverage to include articles and information about all aspects of the D&D brand. Whether you knock down dungeon doors in the tabletop RPG, command warbands with the D&D Miniatures game, invade the Underdark online with your closest friends, or enjoy reading about the exploits of your favorite characters, the ‘new’ Dragon magazine is THE source for information and content about your favorite aspects of Dungeons & Dragons. Starting with issue #323, Dragon will contain a bonus quarterly Catalog detailing upcoming D&D releases from Wizards of the Coast, so you’ll have the scoop on the latest products all gathered in one place.




Meaning what exactly? Just a general "coming attractions" thing, or what?



> And lest you think we’re skimping on RPG content, the ‘new’ Dragon will have something for every RPG’er, no matter what character they play. With features like the new Class Acts—which provides content for every core D&D character class EVERY issue—and Winning Races—a column  that offers a new PC race or monster class progression each issue— Dragon will continue its tradition of providing the best D&D RPG content to its readers.




Sounds cool.  How about things like magic items, funky new monsters, and the like?



> Beginning with issue #114, Dungeon magazine becomes the ultimate resource for Dungeon Masters. Each issue will contain three adventures, one each for low-, medium-, and high-level play.




That will be an interesting logistical challenge -- to you get that many decent _submissions_ every month at each level?



> In order to provide this in-depth offering, Dungeon will now focus exclusively on Dungeons & Dragons—delivering even more high-quality D&D coverage. We listened to your feedback, and it was clear that by trying to serve D&D fans, the d20 market, Star Wars fans, and the RPGA, our magazine wasn’t completely succeeding at delivering the highest quality experience for any of those groups. We know that many of you subscribed to Dungeon for the complete mini-games and articles about Star Wars d20 and D&D Modern.  Unfortunately, there weren't enough of you to offset those who left the magazine due to the decrease in the D&D content each issue.  The D&D players felt we weren't giving them enough D&D content, and the Polyhedron readers felt that we shorted the d20 stuff. For this reason, after careful thought and some soul searching, we’ve decided to end the long run of Polyhedron Magazine and focus on being the best resource for Dungeon Masters. Regular RPGA updates will transfer to Dragon magazine to reach the largest number of D&D gamers around the world, and we’ll continue to include RPGA Player Reward adventure codes for each Dungeon adventure. With Network material in both magazines, Dragon and Dungeon will support the RPGA like never before.




I knew this was going to happen sooner or later, but that doesn't mean I'm happy about it. So tell me, any suggestions on where I can go to get the stuff I liked about _Polyhedron_? As it was, I was happy to pay every issue for _Star Wars Gamer_ (remember that one?) as well as _Dungeon/Polyhedron_. I want MORE, not less!



> Finally, each issue of the magazine will feature Wil Save, a regular column of gaming observations penned by none other than Wil Wheaton of Star Trek: The Next Generation fame.




Oh, lord, spare us. :\ Seriously, no thank you.



> Being a part of the D&D 3rd Edition launch, I know firsthand the depth of passion and commitment our audience has toward both D&D and our magazines (I share that commitment, as does Lisa Stevens, our CEO and another member of the 3rd Edition team). We’ll be reading and responding to Internet discussions, and if anyone would like to discuss the relaunch further, you can reach me at Keith@paizo.com.




That's always cool. 

   -The Gneech


----------



## Pramas (May 14, 2004)

I'd like to raise a goblet and toast Erik Mona for conceiving the Poly mini games and bringing us several years worth of really interesting games that showed what you could do with the d20 System. They were my favorite part of the magazine and I'll miss them (though I understand why this change is right for Paizo). 

Thanks for the goodness, Erik!


----------



## Terry Edwards (May 14, 2004)

Dragon Subscription...canceled

Dungeon Subscription...resumed.  Wil Save?  Fantastic!  I haven't heard anything from Mr. Wheaton since he had a home visit from the Screen Savers a year or two ago.


----------



## psionotic (May 14, 2004)

These changes sound interesting.  I for one really like the clear split between a player's magazine and a DM's magazine.  I'd also like to mirror the comments of another poster when I say that while the minis game and many of the D&D computer games are cool, and I like an occasional article on both, I hope that the major focus of Dragon remains on D&D ....the RPG.


----------



## DM_Jeff (May 14, 2004)

*Poly want a (fire) cracker*

So to be honest, I have sat on my Dungeon resubscription notice for *2 weeks*, debating if it's worth it anymore (my hatred for the jumbled waste of space which was polyhedron knows no bounds). Since issue #7 when I first subscribed, renewing each year was a no-brainer. I've even known 2 friends who let their subscription slide because of poly being in there. 

Just two days back I decided I would go with my guts, that the hints to drop Poly were too strong to ignore, and I have been rewarded. Good move, folks. Great move.

As for Dragon, The changes there sound exciting too. All good here methiks.

-DM Jeff


----------



## Neo (May 14, 2004)

I cant say a focused D&D magazine for D&D is a bad thing as it isn't.. But I will mourn the loss of the occassional star wars article or the Minigames from Dungeon.

I'd also go so far as to say I was very surprised by your comments they werent wanted as much as other things, as almost any forum threadm I've seen on the subject where Dungeon and Dragon have been concerned has largely been calls for more minigames or expanding upon the ones that have already been put out there an so forth..

I dont suppose theres any chance of Paizo putting another magazine out that will be purely for the content they are dropping from Dungeon and Dragon any time soon?  See for all the D&D fans who want more D&D I imagine there are a large number of D20 modern fans say who want more Modern...  the trouble may not necessarily be balancing it for an Issue as opposed to neither having had thier own dedicated production... maybe a D20 Modern Magazine with no D&D content is warrunted also a result at some point down the line?

One thing I hope you guys do get to grips with is Overseas Subscriptions... once upon a time we could subscribe in this country at a UK address and had it distributed to us from a UK address and as a result didnt get hit with overseas shipping costs, which is a big reason why subscribing under current circumstances is not popular over here... most of us get the magazines from our local game stores, which although not bad means we miss out on the extras subscribers get.   Dont forget your overseas cousins eh


----------



## Blue_Kryptonite (May 14, 2004)

Par for the course. 

- At least one thing I can use? Since I bagan reading the magazine decades ago, only not true once. And I did laugh at a cartoon. 

- Excellent possibility of many good things? Even more than before. Sweet. 
- Wil Wheaton? Double sold. Awesome dude. 

- Mini-Games... Well, sad, but Min-Game Magazine in PDF shows promise. 

Overall... Cool. No change in my multi-year subs.


----------



## DaveMage (May 14, 2004)

Great changes to Dungeon!

I think I may subscribe now!

As for Dragon, I used to pick up the magazine years ago JUST to look at the TSR Previews section.  However, with the Web being what it is, previews of upcoming products are generally available way before the magazine prints. 

Hopefully this will be addressed.  

I like the idea of features on miniatures in the game.

So, in total, I love the changes and am looking forward to them!

Thanks, Keith!


----------



## Dr. Harry (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Though they might be a little uncomfortable with my sharing this, the editorial staff of Dragon and Dungeon go above and beyond the call of duty to provide the best RPG magazines possible—often working late nights and weekends to do so.




   In my opinion, the quality of Dragon over the last few years has been first-rate.  Makes me think of the glory days of issues 55-85, give or take.  I agree with Henry's description of the articles that give the best feel of Dragon when Dragon was best.  At the end, the only thing enticing me to buy a issue of Dungeon was the Greyhawk content.



> The “New” Dragon
> 
> Starting with Issue #323, Dragon Magazine opens its pages to a new era of utility and power. In addition to its usual complement of material that provides D&D roleplaying gamer with the tools they need to raise the level of their play experience, DRAGON will widen its coverage to include articles and information about all aspects of the D&D brand. Whether you knock down dungeon doors in the tabletop RPG, command warbands with the D&D Miniatures game, invade the Underdark online with your closest friends, or enjoy reading about the exploits of your favorite characters, ...




   Darn.  This is pretty much going to be wasted space as far as I am concerned.  Are you closing down "Undefeated"?



> the ‘new’ Dragon magazine is THE source for information and content about your favorite aspects of Dungeons & Dragons. Starting with issue #323, Dragon will contain a bonus quarterly Catalog detailing upcoming D&D releases from Wizards of the Coast, so you’ll have the scoop on the latest products all gathered in one place.




   Somewhat convenient, but why do you think I'm on ENWorld?   Here, I get Wizards information - and everybody else's.


----------



## heirodule (May 14, 2004)

*Living Greyhawk Journal?*

So where will the Living Greyhawk Journal sporadically be published? It would fit well with Dragon, because the information is of most use to PLAYERS of LG.

Info?


----------



## Arnwyn (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Beginning with issue #114, Dungeon magazine becomes the ultimate resource for Dungeon Masters. Each issue will contain three adventures, one each for low-, medium-, and high-level play.



Wicked. Wicked, wicked, wicked. This is just great, and really meets my needs. Excellent.


> In addition to the high-quality adventures you’ve come to expect from the magazine, Dungeon will expand its offerings to include articles and other content written specifically to help DMs take their game to the next level. From old favorites like the ever-popular Dungeoncraft by Monte Cook, to new features like the Campaign Workbook—a section devoted to providing tools specifically designed to enhance a DM’s ability to create lively and adventurous campaigns—the “new” Dungeon offers experienced DMs and players interested in taking up the reigns of Dungeon Mastering everything they need to be successful.



I'm curious to see what this will be like before I lay judgement. However, I'm optimistic, as the focus definitely seems right. I'm very interested!


> In order to provide this in-depth offering, Dungeon will now focus exclusively on Dungeons & Dragons—delivering even more high-quality D&D coverage. /snip/ For this reason, after careful thought and some soul searching, we’ve decided to end the long run of Polyhedron Magazine and focus on being the best resource for Dungeon Masters.



Finally! It's about time. The two _completely different_ magazines didn't help anyone. I'm very glad to see it gone.


> Unfortunately, there weren't enough of you to offset those who left the magazine due to the decrease in the D&D content each issue.



As many (here at least, certainly including myself) had surmised.


			
				kamosa said:
			
		

> {Dancing on Polyheadran's grave}



Me too!

This is very good news for Dungeon, and I'm very pleased.

As for Dragon - I'm not impressed, but I think that's because Dragon is past it's expiry date for me. I'm not interested _at all_ in new feats, prestige classes, spells, or magic items (and I steer clear of all books that are heavily weighted towards that type of content)... so I'm definitely no longer in the target demographic for Dragon.


----------



## Unseelie (May 14, 2004)

Dragon subscription - no renew after it runs out next month
Dungeon subscription - no renew (ran out this month)

Poly was the reason I was buying Dungeon, and in fact, several of the Poly articles are what got me to stop fence sitting and actually buy D&D 3.x.

Dragon already has too many articles about the miniatures. Adding yet more articles about computer games (something better served by existing computer magazines) waters down the rest of the magazine too much for my taste.

I recognize that you need to cater to what you see as being your strongest target market. I am sorry that I do not fit in that market segment.


----------



## Greatwyrm (May 14, 2004)

Well, I'm glad to hear some of it and not happy with other parts.  But hey, you'll never please everybody, right.  I'll anxiously await the new mags and hope for the best.

In any event, I commend you and the Paizo staff for making a serious effort to improve the quality of the magazines (not that I felt they were really lacking).  There are plenty of people willing to stick with the status quo as long as the money keeps rolling in.  An attempt to improve quality will almost always bear some fruit, even if it wasn't what you were expecting.


----------



## ledded (May 14, 2004)

First of all Keith let me say I for one appreciate your candor and the time you took to update those of us on this forum about your changes.  Good communication from a company many of us are customers of means a great deal.  That being said, I have a few comments I have to make.

Subscriptions issues:  I'm glad to hear that you are paying attention, but one of the main reasons I dropped my subscriptions to your magazines were because of a 'subscription issue' long ago, back when Star Wars Gamer was killed off.  So I began just perusing the various magazines at different times in my FLGS to find anything interesting.

Dragon:  Not surprising, and gives me even less reason to want to look for it on the news stand than my decreasing interest has been giving it over the last year.  This type of diversion of resources is supposedly what caused the issues with Dungeon, but I think if done correctly could be pulled off.  Hopefully this will cause the various articles on one particular aspect (D&D, the minis game, etc) to have more 'bang' as they are effectively going to be competing for a smaller space.  Good luck, I'll keep an ear on the forums to hear how they do.

Dungeon:  Not surprising either, and completely eliminates my desire to ever pick it up again.  I've never understood why so many D&D players were so opposed to sharing content with other games and so dependent on a single source for gaming ideas, but then again our group mostly does our own and doesnt use that many packaged adventures.  Biased or not, this completely bites for me.  The minigames and even short articles on d20 games that are not D&D kept me going on this magazine and almost had me re-subscribing instead of just buying so many off the rack.  Now I'll just have to thank you for the time I'll save by completely skipping Dungeon on the rack in the future.  

I'm sure these changes will appeal to a much wider customer base and hopefully generate better revenues and return customers for you, and I truly do wish you luck, but I will have to stick by my lament for the death of things that do not fit within the status quo of the average D&D fanbase or the marketing-focus-de jour of WotC.

You certainly can't make all of the people happy all of the time (many RPG companies and mags have died trying), and sometimes you can't make someone happy at all.  No hard feelings.


----------



## Hjorimir (May 14, 2004)

Well, in regards to Dragon including articles relating to online gaming I can only hope it is a good thing for the hobby. To clarify, if D&D Online takes off (it is being developed by Turbine) and that draws a large customer base where a faction of them subscribe to Dragon magazine, we could see more people come to the hobby. With those people come spending dollars and with those dollars we have a better chance at seeing good products produced (along with more junk).

In order for D&D to thrive we need to have new blood coming in. Maybe this will help facilitate this.

Anyway, I will continue with my Dragon subscription and will actually consider subscribing to Dungeon now (I wasn't a fan of the Poly material in general - though there were a few exceptions).


----------



## Rahkan (May 14, 2004)

Okay, the Polyhedron minigames were incredibly neat, especially the Spelljammer one. I guess that isn't really constructive, but I thought I'd throw that out there.


----------



## Erik Mona (May 14, 2004)

We'll continue to support the Living Greyhawk campaign in Dungeon with "Living Greyhawk Approved" articles similar to the City of Hardby we ran in #109. Dungeon #114 also has an adventure usable as an introduction to the LG campaign, set in the city of Greyhawk. Dungeons #117, 118, 119, and 120 will contain a massive four-part poster map of the World of Greyhawk similar to the FR map published in Dragon a couple years ago. Wolf Baur's got a module on tap set in the Land of Black Ice, and I've also got Sean Reynolds at work on a Greyhawk adventure. Greyhawk fans will have lots to like about the new Dungeon (as will Eberron and Forgotten Realms fans--lots of exciting stuff for those settings coming up as well).

--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dungeon Magazine


----------



## diaglo (May 14, 2004)

WoooHOOOOooooo...

i'm giddy. i'm hyped.

tHank You. thaNk yoU. thanK yOu.

i've been banging on the snail mail, email, and internet since Wolfgang and Barbara were there.

finally my wish has come true.



(ps. thanks Erik Mona too. but you know for me Poly has been dead/useless since the 80s)


----------



## Bloodstone Press (May 14, 2004)

soundd great! I look forward to august.


----------



## jaults (May 14, 2004)

Erik,
  Has the idea of releasing mini-games or mini-game supporting articles on the Paizo website or RPGNow been considered? I would gladly shell out $5 for more material for Spelljammer or $10 for a new mini-game. I really like the Dungeon articles, but I also really like the mini-games... 

 Jason


----------



## Mercule (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> And we’ve been listening.



Great!  It sounds like you guys have put a lot of thought and work into things.  I'm looking forward to seeing the new shape of things.  I'll almost certainly be picking up the new Dungeon.
Some miscellaneous comments follow.



> The “New” Dragon
> 
> Starting with Issue #323, Dragon Magazine opens its pages to a new era of utility and power.



I hope this doesn't translate to an ever-increasing power creep and munchkin's wet dream.  If it's more utility to work the game, that's awesome.



> Whether you knock down dungeon doors in the tabletop RPG, command warbands with the D&D Miniatures game, invade the Underdark online with your closest friends, or enjoy reading about the exploits of your favorite characters, the ‘new’ Dragon magazine is THE source for information and content about your favorite aspects of Dungeons & Dragons. Starting with issue #323, Dragon will contain a bonus quarterly Catalog detailing upcoming D&D releases from Wizards of the Coast, so you’ll have the scoop on the latest products all gathered in one place.



Hmm... while I like miniatures games -- full bore unit warfare, not lame skirmishes -- I happen to be the only person in my group who doesn't loathe them.  Hopefully miniatures stuff will be only an occasional thing.

I'm also hoping that this doesn't mean the continuation/rebirth of a regular fiction or "Silicon Sorcery" section.  Those are of somewhat less value to me than a rat turd.



> And lest you think we’re skimping on RPG content, the ‘new’ Dragon will have something for every RPG’er, no matter what character they play. With features like the new Class Acts—which provides content for every core D&D character class EVERY issue—and Winning Races—a column that offers a new PC race or monster class progression each issue— Dragon will continue its tradition of providing the best D&D RPG content to its readers.



I've always been a fan of the multiclass progressions and similar things from Dragon right after 3E was released -- things that showed us how to use what was there even better.  I'm hoping that "Class Acts" doesn't just turn into "PrC of the month", though.  I'm already choking on prestige classes.  I'm not too sure about trying to handle EVERY classe in EVERY issue, either.  Overall, though, I'm hopeful for this column, though.

The races column, though, I'm far from sanguine about.  The occasional new race would be nice, but I'm not sure if having one in every issue would be a good use of space.

As for the racial class progressions, it depends on what you mean.  If you're talking about the malconceived "racial classes" from "Savage Species", then I've got no use for it.  If you're talking about classes that are specific classes for monsters, like are sometimes included for dragons, etc., then I'm on board.



> The “New” Dungeon
> 
> Beginning with issue #114, Dungeon magazine becomes the ultimate resource for Dungeon Masters.



Sounds great!  I've been thinking about picking up Dungeon as a resource, and I think the added DM-related content will cinch it up.  



> Finally, each issue of the magazine will feature Wil Save, a regular column of gaming observations penned by none other than Wil Wheaton of Star Trek: The Next Generation fame.



I've got nothing against Mr. Wheaton in any way.  Didn't care one way or the other about Wesley Crusher and don't know much else about him, other than hearing he's a pretty nice guy.  So, don't take this in the wrong way.  

I'm just not sure why I should care what he thinks about D&D.  Gygax and Cook make sense -- they wrote the books.  Wheaton is just an actor and I don't listen to actors' opinions on anything else.

On the other hand, if he turns out to be a great essayist, then I'll be happy.  He's just got to start at zero on this one, IMO.  His celebrity brings no cred (positive or negative) to the table.


----------



## Thorin Stoutfoot (May 14, 2004)

*Awesome!*

This means I'll definitely be renewing my Dungeon subscription. It's still the best resource for the money, especially now that polyhedron is taken out.


----------



## eris404 (May 14, 2004)

Dr. Anomalous said:
			
		

> Mini-Games... Well, sad, but Min-Game Magazine in PDF shows promise.




I didn't actually use the minigames, but I loved reading about them - they had a lot of interesting ideas. I will be sorry to see them go. But I think you are exactly right about a minigame PDF magazine. It's a good format and I'm surprised that someone hasn't come up with one already. Going slightly off-topic here, I think that d20 Modern has been undersupported and could benefit from something like this, too. Maybe combine the two?


----------



## Remathilis (May 14, 2004)

Sigh...

Looks like I'm finally going to have to shell out for a DUNGEON subscription as well. Luckily, I'm cancelling my subscription to EGM, so it MIGHT work out...

Like the idea, killer on the pocketbook.


----------



## d20Dwarf (May 14, 2004)

I think I'll be picking up a Dungeon subscription now. I buy it every month anyway, but I really like the proposed changes to it.

The Dragon changes I'm not too thrilled with, but I'll still keep my subscription (hey, it's DRAGON after all). I don't even look at the computer game articles as it is, even though they have feats and spells and things for a regular game. I hope they get more computer gamers to buy the magazine as a result, but somehow I think the crossover angle isn't going to do much. Miniatures....bleh, they aren't a game, they're a D&D aid.


----------



## Zaukrie (May 14, 2004)

Dungeon: more likely to buy. It's a great place for busy people who want to DM to get adventures. Plus, all the interesting stuff is really for DMs (see below).

Dragon: Hard to say. Does your letter state clearly that all DM stuff moves to Dungeon and this is really only a players magazine now or are we just reading it that way? If so, I'm a lot less likely to buy Dragon (which I just re-upped for a year, d$*&). The "classic" articles that people listed on this site when Erik (I think it was Erik) asked were all DM related. I can't believe that you'd actually take all the DM stuff out, monsters, planes, running adventures in different types of environments....all the in-game stuff (I consider Dungeoncraft "meta game" as it talks about running the game as opposed to in-game stuff that is still mostly for DMs like monsters, politics, ecologies.....).

Is that really the split? If so, Dungeon better have a lot of pages dedicated to being a DM. I know there are less DMs, I know that is why we get less DM material from WoTC and others. Dragon was one of the places to still get this in digestable doses (unlike 250 page hardcovers).


----------



## jaerdaph (May 14, 2004)

Personally I'm not real happy about Polyhedron getting dropped, but I totally understand the sound reasons why you have to do it. 

Hopefully this will be an opportunity for somebody else to step up to the plate with a d20 System/d20 Modern magazine...


----------



## Tortoise (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> The “New” Dragon
> 
> Starting with Issue #323, Dragon Magazine opens its pages to a new era of utility and power. In addition to its usual complement of material that provides D&D roleplaying gamer with the tools they need to raise the level of their play experience, DRAGON will widen its coverage to include articles and information about all aspects of the D&D brand. Whether you knock down dungeon doors in the tabletop RPG, command warbands with the D&D Miniatures game, invade the Underdark online with your closest friends, or enjoy reading about the exploits of your favorite characters, the ‘new’ Dragon magazine is THE source for information and content about your favorite aspects of Dungeons & Dragons. Starting with issue #323, Dragon will contain a bonus quarterly Catalog detailing upcoming D&D releases from Wizards of the Coast, so you’ll have the scoop on the latest products all gathered in one place.
> 
> ...




Thanks for the information. The change in store for Dungeon is long overdue. MAking it the DM resource it should be is a great step in the right direction. I am 2 issues away from the end of my Dungeon subscription and would have been quite content to let it lapse if not for this news.

I'm curious to see what Dragon will be like. I'm one of those who thought that the Poly content would have been best served by being in Dragon instead of Dungeon. Looking at the history of Dragon when I first began picking it up (back around issue #52) it seems that what I saw as great about it then has gradually gone away. Becoming simply a mouthpiece for Wizards of the Coast and D&D alone has allowed some of the flavor to escape. Poly had some of that flavor and I wouldn't mind seeing it mixed into Dragon occasionally without being labelled as a subsection.

I've already seen some people groaning about Wil Wheaton writing for the mags and all I can say to those folks is this ... Wil grew up and has gone on to other things. He is not Wesley Crusher (thank goodness). Give him a chance. If you want a preview of his sense of humor and his real personality then check out his website. You might be pleasantly surprised. Besides, it can't hurt the hobby to have celebrity support and participation. I'm looking forward to him coming aboard.


----------



## Joshua Randall (May 14, 2004)

*Paizo* guys - a question. Can you give us an update on the web site? I know you have made some moves into adding more content there (e.g., the Challenge of Champions V handouts). What else is planned? Thanks!


----------



## Jai Kel (May 14, 2004)

I believe I just received my last issues of both Dungeon and Dragon because I let my subscription die.  Only Dungeon had some small hope of getting renewed by me, but while an initial proponent of merging Poly and Dungeon, I have found myself thinking that more Dungeon would have been much more satisfying.

With this announcement I believe I will re-subscribe to Dungeon.  

I'll wait and see about Dragon...


----------



## BryonD (May 14, 2004)

Dragon:
Overall sounds good.  I do not have any desire for expansion into the non-tabletop-RPG stuff.  But I certainly see me maintaining a subscription here.  Computer gaming and other side topics have been in and out for a long time and have never been a BAD thing before.  I'll take them.

Dungeon:
Hurrah Hurrah Hurrah
The product I wanted returns.  And you are even giving me a Wil Wheaton page so I can put post-it notes in each issue without worrying about covering up anything important.

I expect to re-subscribe very soon.

Any chance there will be a simple way to take up new supscriptions that start promptly with the new format?

Thanks


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (May 14, 2004)

ledded said:
			
		

> Dungeon:  Not surprising either, and completely eliminates my desire to ever pick it up again.  I've never understood why so many D&D players were so opposed to sharing content with other games and so dependent on a single source for gaming ideas, but then again our group mostly does our own and doesnt use that many packaged adventures.  Biased or not, this completely bites for me.  The minigames and even short articles on d20 games that are not D&D kept me going on this magazine and almost had me re-subscribing instead of just buying so many off the rack.  Now I'll just have to thank you for the time I'll save by completely skipping Dungeon on the rack in the future.




I couldn't have said it better, so I'll just echo these sentiments. The one silver lining I can see in this decision is that if in a year or two Dungeon joins Polyhedron in the periodicals graveyard, the reason will be unambiguous.


----------



## Faraer (May 14, 2004)

I also am apparently outside the largest segments of the _Dragon_ audience (but what about your *potential* audience?) -- pandering to powergaming players even more than before repels me (and I suspect will work against WotC's drive for new players, since the rules-fetishist culture is a major barrier to many non-roleplayers). Covering all aspects of the D&D 'brand' is inevitable and I think it's churlish for RPG-only people to begrudge that as with _Star Wars Gamer_ and _Polyhedron_-in-_Dungeon_.

Erik Mona's comments give me more hope: a magazine with Realms and Greyhawk each issue (and prestige classes aren't content to me) as well as good adventures (including some named-world ones by people who understand those worlds) is one I'll buy.


----------



## diaglo (May 14, 2004)

as an aside and probably Off Topic.

who is Wil Weaton and why should i care?  

if it were Gary Gygax or Skip Williams or even Tom Wham i might be even more giddy.

but what makes Wil so special?

you've got me    on this one.


----------



## billd91 (May 14, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> We'll continue to support the Living Greyhawk campaign in Dungeon with "Living Greyhawk Approved" articles similar to the City of Hardby we ran in #109. Dungeon #114 also has an adventure usable as an introduction to the LG campaign, set in the city of Greyhawk. Dungeons #117, 118, 119, and 120 will contain a massive four-part poster map of the World of Greyhawk similar to the FR map published in Dragon a couple years ago. Wolf Baur's got a module on tap set in the Land of Black Ice, and I've also got Sean Reynolds at work on a Greyhawk adventure. Greyhawk fans will have lots to like about the new Dungeon (as will Eberron and Forgotten Realms fans--lots of exciting stuff for those settings coming up as well).
> 
> --Erik Mona
> Editor-in-Chief
> Dungeon Magazine




Well, that's good. It may keep me as a subscriber after all. I was quite happy a number of months back when Dungeon was going to cut down the number of mini-games, host Living Greyhawk material, and some Star Wars and d20 Modern. I'll be very sad to see all Star Wars support go from the magazines.

Like some other respondants on this thread, I'm surprised that so many D&D players were so vehemently opposed to sharing a magazine with any other games. I remember the days when Dragon was a general gaming magazine even if most of its content was devoted to D&D. Scenarios for Squad Leader would pop up, game reviews, articles for Traveller, stories about the background to Diving Right. I stopped subscribing to Dragon after many years because it dropped too much non-D&D content. Since then, I've only picked up select issues that grab my fancy for specific articles.
What ever happened to general game magazines. Or for that matter, if those magazines don't have enough of a consumer base, whatever happened to general gamers who played many different games?


----------



## billd91 (May 14, 2004)

diaglo said:
			
		

> as an aside and probably Off Topic.
> 
> who is Wil Weaton and why should i care?
> 
> ...




Wil Wheaton is an actor. He played Wesley Crusher on Star Trek: Next Generation. And even though  his character was extremely annoying from time to time, his blog has been very popular with the fanboy and gamer crowd.
I think it's good to get a regular column from someone outside the gaming industry. Fresh perspective and all that.


----------



## tburdett (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> For this reason, after careful thought and some soul searching, we’ve decided to end the long run of Polyhedron Magazine and focus on being the best resource for Dungeon Masters.



All I have to say regarding this change is, YES!  On the flip side, Dragon sounds like it will be much less useful to me.


----------



## diaglo (May 14, 2004)

billd91 said:
			
		

> Wil Wheaton is an actor. He played Wesley Crusher on Star Trek: Next Generation. And even though  his character was extremely annoying from time to time, his blog has been very popular with the fanboy and gamer crowd.
> I think it's good to get a regular column from someone outside the gaming industry. Fresh perspective and all that.




okay. i missed all of the Next whatever. there is only one Star Trek. And Captain James Tiberius Kirk was in charge.      altho, i liked the pilot with Capt Pike.

i did a search. he was in Stand By Me with River Phoenix, right?


----------



## buzz (May 14, 2004)

Mercule said:
			
		

> I've always been a fan of the multiclass progressions and similar things from Dragon right after 3E was released -- things that showed us how to use what was there even better.  I'm hoping that "Class Acts" doesn't just turn into "PrC of the month", though.  I'm already choking on prestige classes.



I cannot emphasize enough how much I liked those class progressions and the "Power Plays" from early 3e _Dragon_. I really don't need more PrC's and feats as much as I do information on *how to use what's in the core rules*. This is why I really love the articles Mike Mearls has been writing of late, and (tangent here) why I ordered a copy of Goodman Games' _Power gamer's 3.5 Warrior Strategy Guide_ immediately after reading the free preview, and why I love the "Rules of the Game" column on the WotC site.

New rules content isn't nearly as useful to me as content that will strengthen my D&D-fu. Show me how to better use what I already own, and I'll be willing to forgive the demise of _Polyhedron_.


----------



## Agemegos (May 14, 2004)

Henry said:
			
		

> I await the new changes with bated breath. (Since I'm not a fisherman, I can't wait with "baited breath," so that will have to do. )




Did you hear the one about the clever cat that ate some cheese and breathed down a mouse-hole with baited breath?


----------



## Sernett (May 14, 2004)

*Press release error*

Through some calamitous misfortune, an old version of the letter was put out. The Dragon section was supposed to read as follows:

Starting with Issue #323, Dragon Magazine opens its pages to a new era of utility and excitement. In addition to its usual complement of material that provides D&D players with the tools they need to raise the level of their play experience, the new Dragon provides more information about all aspects of the D&D brand. Whether you knock down dungeon doors in the tabletop RPG, command warbands with the D&D Miniatures game, invade the Underdark online with your closest friends, or enjoy reading about the exploits of your favorite characters, the new Dragon is THE source for information about and content for Dungeons & Dragons. Also, starting with issue #323, the new Dragon presents a bonus quarterly catalog giving you the scoop on upcoming D&D releases from Wizards of the Coast, all gathered in one place.

   And lest you think we’re skimping on RPG content, our plans for the new Dragon include having articles that present new spells, feats, magic items, rules advice, player tactics, a single prestige class, a new PC race, and an ecology of a monster in every issue--something for everyone, no matter what character they play! With features like the new Class Acts—which provides content for each of the eleven Player’s Handbook classes—and Coup de Grace—the last word in gaming, this column lets you hear from the people behind every aspect of D&D, from designers and developers to members of the marketing team—Dragon continues its tradition of providing the best D&D RPG content to its readers.

The will be no power creep.

Miniatures and computer games are not taking over the magazine.

In the average issue, just two articles will be devoted to miniatures and computer games. The notes about those topics above are there to show that the new Dragon is a funnel for all people interested in D&D to get into the RPG. In  fact, that is one of the main goals we have for the magazine in the marketplace--to throw a wide net and help more people see why the D&D RPG is the greatest hobby out there (and by extension, increase sales of the magazine).


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 14, 2004)

Joshua Randall said:
			
		

> *Paizo* guys - a question. Can you give us an update on the web site? I know you have made some moves into adding more content there (e.g., the Challenge of Champions V handouts). What else is planned? Thanks!




   Joshua,

   We have a complete website redesign and overhaul in progress. The future Paizo site will be much easier to navigate and have regular content.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Hjorimir (May 14, 2004)

diaglo said:
			
		

> i did a search. he was in Stand By Me with River Phoenix, right?




Yub.


----------



## Gizzard (May 14, 2004)

Another vote 100% in favor of the changes to Dungeon.


----------



## Terry Edwards (May 14, 2004)

Thanks Matthew, I'll have to alter my previous post to...

Dragon Subscription...renewed
Dungeon Subscription...started


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 14, 2004)

The_Gneech said:
			
		

> Overall, I've been pleased with the results.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Gneech,

   Thanks for your email/post. We've really worked hard to make sure the "new" magazines will hit on all cylinders. Just so you know, the 16-page bonus quarterly catalog will give detailed information on upcoming Wizards of the Coast D&D products. We'll also have a small section in Dragon that will highlight the utility of new and upcoming products specifically for players as well.

  Dragon will still have articles on new magic items, funky new items and the like--just like you've come to expect from the magazine. The open letter info was supposed to be illustrative and not exhaustive.

   Again, thanks for writing in.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 14, 2004)

ledded said:
			
		

> I'm sure these changes will appeal to a much wider customer base and hopefully generate better revenues and return customers for you, and I truly do wish you luck, but I will have to stick by my lament for the death of things that do not fit within the status quo of the average D&D fanbase or the marketing-focus-de jour of WotC.
> 
> You certainly can't make all of the people happy all of the time (many RPG companies and mags have died trying), and sometimes you can't make someone happy at all.  No hard feelings.




   Ledded,

   Thank you for your own candor. We really do believe that these decisions will help insure that Dragon and Dungeon thrive in the coming years. I hope to see you perusing the pages of our magazines in the future.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## rowport (May 14, 2004)

Hey, Paizo folks!

First off, thanks for the update posts here on ENWorld- it is great that you folks see some of your core audience (with loud praise or complaints!) and are responding in kind on-line.  I was also happy to note an ENWorld post in your recent letters column- smart.

Keeping my thoughts brief:
Dragon: I initially shared the nervousness of some of the other posters here about CRPG and mini articles, but feel lots better after Matt Sernett's clarification.  I can handle a couple of new articles, just not a fundamental shift away from the D&D RPG.  Since I think the current Dragon is darn near perfect right now- my most awaited monthy mag- I might be nervous about any change!  Regarding miniatures, the only articles that I wish would return are mini painting, which I realize runs counter to the pre-painted plastic ones...

Dungeon: Hmm.  I was a Polyhedron/Mini-Game guy, so I am really not thrilled about this.  If you were going to eliminate any section, I would have voted for RPGA, which is a waste of space IMO.  I guess I can see it for business reasons, but am disappointed.  Oh, well...

Thanks again for sharing the plans.


----------



## JeffB (May 14, 2004)

I let my Dragon sub lapse a couple of months ago (for the second time). Looks like I won't be re-subbing there. More crunch. 

However I *may* re-sub to Dungeon. It sounds like it will be more useful, and although I liked some extra D20 content, other than the pulp game, I thought the mini-games were wasted space. So thats a good think killing them AFAIC.

If the adventure quality goes up, I'll spring for the sub.

How much emphasis in Dungeon will there be on Realms, Greyhawk, and Eberron specific adventures Keith? or Matt ? or Erik?


----------



## d20Dwarf (May 14, 2004)

Twiggly the Gnome said:
			
		

> *Suspiciously active avatar*.



What the heck is your avatar doing??!?


----------



## milotha (May 14, 2004)

Cool, sounds like I'll be resubscribing to Dungeon if all this is true. :


----------



## Dark Jezter (May 14, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> The “New” Dragon
> 
> Starting with Issue #323, Dragon Magazine opens its pages to a new era of utility and excitement. In addition to its usual complement of material that provides D&D players with the tools they need to raise the level of their play experience, the new Dragon provides more information about all aspects of the D&D brand. Whether you knock down dungeon doors in the tabletop RPG, command warbands with the D&D Miniatures game, invade the Underdark online with your closest friends, or enjoy reading about the exploits of your favorite characters, the new Dragon is THE source for information about and content for Dungeons & Dragons. Also, starting with issue #323, the new Dragon presents a bonus quarterly catalog giving you the scoop on upcoming D&D releases from Wizards of the Coast, all gathered in one place.




I don't mind this at all.  It could be nice to expand Dragon's coverage to D&D products other than the P&P RPG.



> And lest you think we’re skimping on RPG content, our plans for the new dragon include having articles that present new spells, feats, magic items, rules advice, player tactics, a single prestige class, a new PC race, and an ecology of a monster in every issue--something for everyone, no matter what character they play! With features like the new Class Acts—which provides content for each of the eleven Player’s Handbook classes—and Coup de Grace—the last word in gaming, this column lets you hear from the people behind every aspect of D&D, from designers and developers to members of the marketing team—Dragon continues its tradition of providing the best D&D RPG content to its readers.




Sounds good.  More races, feats, classes, etc.  Are always good, just so long as too many of those new races aren't elf subraces.  There are enough of those as is. 




> The “New” Dungeon
> 
> Beginning with issue #114, Dungeon magazine becomes the ultimate resource for Dungeon Masters. Each issue will contain three adventures, one each for low-, medium-, and high-level play. So, no matter the experience level of your party, DUNGEON’S got you covered every single month. In addition to the high-quality adventures you’ve come to expect from the magazine, Dungeon will expand its offerings to include articles and other content written specifically to help DMs take their game to the next level. From old favorites like the ever-popular Dungeoncraft by Monte Cook, to new features like the Campaign Workbook—a section devoted to providing tools specifically designed to enhance a DM’s ability to create lively and adventurous campaigns—the “new” Dungeon offers experienced DMs and players interested in taking up the reigns of Dungeon Mastering everything they need to be successful.
> 
> In order to provide this in-depth offering, Dungeon will now focus exclusively on Dungeons & Dragons—delivering even more high-quality D&D coverage. We listened to your feedback, and it was clear that by trying to serve D&D fans, the d20 market, Star Wars fans, and the RPGA, our magazine wasn’t completely succeeding at delivering the highest quality experience for any of those groups. We know that many of you subscribed to Dungeon for the complete mini-games and articles about Star Wars d20 and D&D Modern.  Unfortunately, there weren't enough of you to offset those who left the magazine due to the decrease in the D&D content each issue.  The D&D players felt we weren't giving them enough D&D content, and the Polyhedron readers felt that we shorted the d20 stuff. For this reason, after careful thought and some soul searching, we’ve decided to end the long run of Polyhedron Magazine and focus on being the best resource for Dungeon Masters. Regular RPGA updates will transfer to Dragon magazine to reach the largest number of D&D gamers around the world, and we’ll continue to include RPGA Player Reward adventure codes for each Dungeon adventure. With Network material in both magazines, Dragon and Dungeon will support the RPGA like never before.




I agree with all the changes here.  Good job!


----------



## Cassander (May 14, 2004)

Well, I'll certainly give Dungeon a look again. On the one hand, I'd wish it would focus just on adventures like it used to. I don't mind the occasional adventure from a setting or game I don't play (one of the best was a Chris Perkins Alternity, actually, and I never have played Alternity), but the minigames weren't adventures and they took up way too much space. I never have and never will play d20 modern, so they were almost totally useless anyway. Quite happy to see the new Poly go.

But if the non adventure DM info is good (like the original Dungeoncraft, rather than Monte's version), and the adventures are interesting, plentiful, and useful, then I'll probably resubscribe. 

Btw, I don't mind adventures that tie in with new products or settings that Wizards puts out, as it sometimes gives a nice sampling of the product that lets me know whether I'll like it. Just make sure its usable without hte product 

Oh, and well-written adventures with cool twists are a plus too. Ailamere's Lair stands out cause it was so open-ended and the goal of the adventure was so completely different from any other adventure, as does the aforementioned Alternity adventure cause you could actually fail without a tpk. I'd love to see more adventures like those.

More recent favs include Natural Selection and Mysterious Ways.


----------



## Stereofm (May 14, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> We'll continue to support the Living Greyhawk campaign in Dungeon with "Living Greyhawk Approved" articles similar to the City of Hardby we ran in #109. Dungeon #114 also has an adventure usable as an introduction to the LG campaign, set in the city of Greyhawk. Dungeons #117, 118, 119, and 120 will contain a massive four-part poster map of the World of Greyhawk similar to the FR map published in Dragon a couple years ago. Wolf Baur's got a module on tap set in the Land of Black Ice, and I've also got Sean Reynolds at work on a Greyhawk adventure. Greyhawk fans will have lots to like about the new Dungeon (as will Eberron and Forgotten Realms fans--lots of exciting stuff for those settings coming up as well).
> 
> --Erik Mona
> Editor-in-Chief
> Dungeon Magazine




Oh Joy, Oh happiness ! How about a little bit of Living Arcanis on top of that to send us completely to the heavens ?


----------



## Felon (May 14, 2004)

Some random thoughts:


 *More Dungeons in Dungeon*--Fantastic! A no-brainer! One subscription renewed right here! 
 *No More Poly*--Too bad, but it was not a very elegant fusion to begin with. 
 *Mixing RPG with Minis & Console Games*--So you're streamling Dungeon just to turn around and muddle up Dragon? I think you'll find yourself in the same position too, with you losing more core readers than you gain by pandering to other facets of D&D. After all, what can you really offer computer gamers besides news and advice columns, which they already get from fan websites for free?
 *Porting Dragon Content to Dungeon*--Of course Dungeoncraft belongs in Dungeon! Good move. Another no-brainer. Y'know what? IMO the monster ecology articles belong there too.  
 *Will Wheaton Articles*--What's the big deal? Why should anyone care? I mean, we're talking about a guy who was in a sci-fi show for a few seasons, got written out, and then really hasn't done much since. That I even remember this guy's name is kinda sad. And this isn't even a sci-fi mag. Let's get some articles by Marc Singer or Shawn Wayans or the who played Ralph Malph and the voice of Eric the Cavalier on the old D&D cartoon.   
 *More Elven Subraces, Please*--I'll buy two copies of any issue that features a new elven subrace...no, three. OK, four tops.


----------



## Sernett (May 15, 2004)

JeffB said:
			
		

> I let my Dragon sub lapse a couple of months ago (for the second time). Looks like I won't be re-subbing there. More crunch.




Just to echo something Keith said in an earlier post: The letter doesn't describe all of the changes to Dragon. The regular articles that we plan to have in every issue of the new Dragon include plenty of flavor or "fluff." Each issue should have an ecology artilcle describing the culture and nature of a D&D monster, the Class Acts articles (not prestige classes) that offer roleplaying advice and new ideas for each core class, Player Tips article that help you have more fun by providing roleplaying and play advice, and the new PC race articles that will offer an in-depth veiw into a new monster for your D&D game (which just happens to be a playable PC race). Of course, we plan a more balanced flavor-crunch ratio in all articles, and the new features should include things of interest to you too.

We'd love it if you'd take a look at the first couple of issues and let us know what you think of the new format: what works and what doesn't. That goes for anyone who hasn't checked out Dragon in a while or who has been dissatisfied with what we've been doing. We made these changes to the magazines with our consumers desires in mind, and we want to hear from you about the new magazines.


----------



## shady (May 15, 2004)

Dungeon - that's it. I have £5 more per month to spend on stuff from other publishers. Poly's been on life support for a while anyhow, I guess it's good to finally have positive confirmation of death. Hmmph.

 Dragon - at risk. I collect the miniatures but use them for RPG,  I have no interest in the miniatures game(s). The computer coverage in recent Dragon issues has been weak and I don't see it adding value. And this coming attractions thing sounds like I'd be paying for the same kind of material Sword and Sorcery are willing to hand out for free. I'll carry on buying but as I say, at risk.

 Time for a revival of Fantasy Gamer, I think.


----------



## Cymex666 (May 15, 2004)

*and there was much rejoicing!*

Hurray!!!  No more Poly!  Now that Paizo is changing the format of Dungeon, I can't wait to see how the magazine will change.


----------



## atra2 (May 15, 2004)

*Add some skills crunch to Dragon!*



			
				Sernett said:
			
		

> We'd love it if you'd take a look at the first couple of issues and let us know what you think of the new format: what works and what doesn't. That goes for anyone who hasn't checked out Dragon in a while or who has been dissatisfied with what we've been doing. We made these changes to the magazines with our consumers desires in mind, and we want to hear from you about the new magazines.




I haven't subscribed to either Dragon or Dungeon in years. I still have my
collection of dragon #70-250 or so, and Dungeon #1-60 or so.

Class Acts is the most attractive thing about the new Dragon.

I do advise you though, the next time you print multiclassing progressions,
that whoever wrote up a cleric/ranger 10/10 with the cleric level first, losing
out on all the ranger skill points (even under 3.0), shouldn't be allowed to
write Class Acts.

Now, I just happened to review the new SRD posting, with many Epic Feats
all in one place and this struck me:

Complete Divine has feats requiring 4 ranks of a skill, (based on ENworld
threads, haven't seen the book) and the SRD has Epic feats requiring 24,
27, 30, whatever ranks of a skill.

How about some cool feats requiring 10 or 15 ranks of a skill? Yeah, there
are tons of Prestige Classes that do that, but not feats!

If I stuff 15 wasted points into Jump (wasted, because by that time I have a
Flying magic item or mount) then I want a feat that requires 15 ranks of
Jump and gives me something cool!

Right now, D&D skills have the following breakpoints:

1 rank: some trained only stuff
5 ranks: synergies
max ranks: concentration and tumble and other stuff you can't live without

and misc ranks: prestige classes.

Let's give reasons to have 10, 15, 13, whatever ranks of a skill besides
prestige classes and (occasionally) the skill DC chart for that skill.

I want to see new crunch tasks I can accomplish, or feats I can gain without
going in to a prestige class, for all skills at all ranks.

You can start with 3-5 feats an issue and work from there. I know it's a
big task 

Given that some Dragon rules ended up in Complete Divine (Radiant Servant
of Pelor anyone?) how about giving us some early previews of skill-based
feats, whatever, that will make it into Complete Expert or whatever the
3.5 Complete "Rogues and other skill users" book is?


----------



## Sernett (May 15, 2004)

shady said:
			
		

> Dragon - . . . And this coming attractions thing sounds like I'd be paying for the same kind of material Sword and Sorcery are willing to hand out for free. I'll carry on buying but as I say, at risk.




The quarterly catalog of Wizards products is just that, once every three issues. Also, it's going to be printed on extra pages added to the magazine. Essentially, it's a freebie. Issue #323, our September issue and the first of the new Dragon issues, will have the first quarterly catalog, so you can check out that issue to see if it's something that bothers you or that you find useful.


----------



## shady (May 15, 2004)

Sernett said:
			
		

> The quarterly catalog of Wizards products is just that, once every three issues. Also, it's going to be printed on extra pages added to the magazine. Essentially, it's a freebie. Issue #323, our September issue and the first of the new Dragon issues, will have the first quarterly catalog, so you can check out that issue to see if it's something that bothers you or that you find useful.



 Actually, Matthew, I hadn't read your correction before I posted. I quite like Dragon right now and it doesn't look like a drastic set of changes, given the context. So maybe (a fair bit) less risk than I thought. 

 But no more fiction please.

 And why can't Dragon provide running news updates for WotC campaign settings, like the Traveller News Service that GDW used to run for Traveller? That's a suggestion, not a complaint.


----------



## SmokeDoctorlove (May 15, 2004)

How about reposting all the material Wotc had on the old Dragon Site (Like Dungeon craft because my harddrive crashed and I lost my copy) Sure I have most of the Issues with it but it was far nicer to have it all in one place.

You can't tell me you are doing better if I get less content that I can use (Almost all of the last Dragon was useless to me; Darksun be damned!), and you manage to support the product less on your website then they did.

I like the idea of splitting up DM and Players stuff between the two, but be very careful, Dungeon has been the best it has ever been. I have bought every one that came out from just before the 3E release to now.


----------



## Erik Mona (May 15, 2004)

JeffB said:
			
		

> How much emphasis in Dungeon will there be on Realms, Greyhawk, and Eberron specific adventures Keith? or Matt ? or Erik?




Well, insofar as I'm concerned, "Greyhawk" and "core D&D" are pretty much the same thing. If there's no reason _not_ to set an adventure in the core world, I'll put it there. We've got three Eberron adventures in the next five issues, and something really big planned for Eberron next year. There's a Realms adventure in #113 (which we're working on now), and I think it's a really good one. Ed Greenwood was good enough to supply some additional details on the city of Marsember, for which we're grateful. I've got it in mind to do a really special Forgotten Realms "event" next year, but I'm weighing a couple options for what that should be.

For the most part, generic D&D and Greyhawk adventures will be the same thing. This is fundamentally no different from how the magazine's been run since the advent of 3rd Edition, but since I'm blessed (cursed?) with an obsession with the campaign setting, I suspect the adventures will "fit" in a little better without becoming so "Greyhawky" that they'll be unusable by the average "home campaign setting" DM (which makes up, I believe, the bulk of our readers).

Since people have to convert the proper nouns in a "generic" adventure anyway, we might as well make those proper nouns usable to a large number of our readers.

Does that answer the question?

--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dungeon Magazine


----------



## Bendris Noulg (May 15, 2004)

My primary reason for letting my subscriptions drop (shortly before the BoVD issues, although I picked up the BoVD issues at the game shop) is due to the lack of participation in Open Gaming.  I still look through them (heavily looked over the Dark Sun issues, for instance), but over all, the lack of OGC makes both magazines basically useless to me (and thus I don't buy them).

Any odds of that changing in the future, or will Drag/Dung continue to be mostly exclusive closed-content?


----------



## Numion (May 15, 2004)

Excellent news for Dungeon. Great to have the magazine "back in shape". It's been a while since I've bought it, but now it seems I'll start again!


----------



## Erik Mona (May 15, 2004)

Bendris Noulg said:
			
		

> Any odds of that changing in the future, or will Drag/Dung continue to be mostly exclusive closed-content?




I don't intend to run a lot (or any) open content in Dungeon. The requests for more open content seem to me to be useful only to publishers and freelancers, who make up a tiny portion of our audience.

Out of curiosity, why does the absence of open game content make the magazine "useless" to you, Bendris? Do you not play D&D?

--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dungeon Magazine


----------



## Vocenoctum (May 15, 2004)

First off, I'm subscribed right now, no plans on canceling. I'll give the new format's a chance, like I do anyway.

that said, it's very disappointing that the vocal opposition to Polyhedron drummed out quality material. The quirky mini-games and assorted other material was a fine addition, and adding one more adventure like I already have doesn't automatically make it better. It's a shame that only one side (the poly supporters) could be happy with their share, whereas Dungeon-only types couldn't have anything less than No Poly.

As long as the CRPG stuff is limited to D&D, and doesn't take up too much room, it'll be nice. The Mini stuff has been present for a while, so I'm not worried about it being regular.

I don't care for Monte Cooke's Dungeon Craft, but I've been ignoring it in Dragon, I can ignore it in Dungeon now too 

I'm not sure why the Wil column is important. Why not get Wil Upchurch instead? 

Oh, and Kill Downer if you're hurting for room. It's too many pages, and I don't like it. I like the other comics, but Downer is just bleh!

Thanks.


----------



## Buttercup (May 15, 2004)

This sounds like excellent news to me.  I love CRPGs but not too many other types of computer games, so having them covered in the same magazine as D&D is an exciting and interesting development.

And the changes to Dungeon?  Woohoo!  The Polyhedron content never interested me, so I won't miss it.  And since dropping stuff I was never going to use is getting me *three* adventures each month, well, I couldn't be happier.


----------



## BSF (May 15, 2004)

Thanks for the update, it gives me a lot to think about.  

I do hope that you are working on your subscription fulfillment.  I regularly received my copy of Dragon after the local stores.  I never received the November 2003 issue.  But, that is not my point, so I won't rant on it.  

I am not excited about the changes listed for Dragon.  As it is, I don't get much use out of Dragon any longer.  But, if you can make it more useful/appealing to (relatively) new gamers, than more power to you.  I would love to see more articles that give players new ideas on approaching problems and characterization.  

The changes for Dungeon intrigue me.  I might have to give it a look.  

Overall, I am really going to withhold judgement until I can see the changes.  To do otherwise isn't quite fair to what you are trying to achieve.  But, I will be honest in saying that my gut reaction is that I might be moving out of the target demographic for Dragon and Dungeon.  That may, or may not be a bad thing.  If the changes help bring in new players and help strengthen the brand, these are all good things.


----------



## isidorus (May 15, 2004)

Sigh, first Darksun craziness/mess; just was not Darksun to me and now this. The computer games and minatures in Dragon do not interest me, but I am probably not the target group. Just when I was to subscribe to Dungeon, just for poly. I am going to miss it.

Good Luck with the changes.


----------



## BSF (May 15, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> I don't intend to run a lot (or any) open content in Dungeon. The requests for more open content seem to me to be useful only to publishers and freelancers, who make up a tiny portion of our audience.
> 
> Out of curiosity, why does the absence of open game content make the magazine "useless" to you, Bendris? Do you not play D&D?
> 
> ...





I'll pipe up!  From what I know of Bendris, it would be a stretch to say that his game is true D&D any longer.  If I like to tinker, he likes to rebuild.  One day, I might be as ambitious as he is.  

Open Content is useful for the tinkerers because it allows us to tinker with our gameworlds and provide the information to our players in a consolidated, legal, format.  You can put together a PDF, or even book, for your game world and not break any laws.  Your players will have a single reference rather than picking through a half dozen books and two dozen magazines to see all the content.  

To us tinkerers, this is a golden benefit of the OGL.  But, from the standpoint of a publisher, it is not as appealing.  While publishers might be excited to hear that another company is using their material in a new product, it might not be as exciting to hear that somebody like Bendris finally completed his world guide that includes content from the same publishers.


----------



## Bendris Noulg (May 15, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, why does the absence of open game content make the magazine "useless" to you, Bendris? Do you not play D&D?



That would depend on who you ask.

Seriously, I include my material on my website; this includes redistribution of OGC that I use from various sources. After a certain amount of time, I ended up with a bunch of magazines with content that I couldn't use in that capacity, and as they started stacking up, I began to regard the magazines as an unneccessary expense (particularly compared to the amount of re-usable material that was available then and continues to become available now).

Granted, there is a difference between what _can_ be re-used and what _will_ be re-used, but a source of material that I _can't_ re-use at all isn't going to rate high on my must-buy list. No offense, mind you; just a simple matter of personal priorities.

Edit:
As an example, I never bought _Deities & Demigods_ for the same reason. As of this morning, I have a copy on-order because the of the SRD update.


----------



## Bendris Noulg (May 15, 2004)

BardStephenFox said:
			
		

> I'll pipe up! From what I know of Bendris, it would be a stretch to say that his game is true D&D any longer. If I like to tinker, he likes to rebuild. One day, I might be as ambitious as he is.



Yikes! I've been getting compliments all day. My stars must be in a good alignment or something...

Oh, and thanks!



> To us tinkerers, this is a golden benefit of the OGL. But, from the standpoint of a publisher, it is not as appealing. While publishers might be excited to hear that another company is using their material in a new product, it might not be as exciting to hear that somebody like Bendris finally completed his world guide that includes content from the same publishers.



This is true, but to a degree, it isn't. For instance, let's look at Insanity (_Unearthed Arcana_). While I am using this rule, I've rewritten some of the components to more suit the specific world. In addition, the rules are cut-up and distributed throughout: The base rules in the Heroes' Lorebook, with Sanity Damage from spells included in the Spell Descriptions; Insanity, curing insanity and other odds and ends are included in the Veiled Lorebook (next release, not current); and the monsters that cause Sanity Damage have such information included in the Aedon Bestiary (again, the next release). So, to use Sanity from _my_ rules, you'd have several things to contend with:

1. Drawing all of the information from the various locations scattered throughout the books.
2. The changes I made to the system.
3. The additions I made using other sources, such as Netherland/Bloodstone's _Book of Broken Dreams_.

So, while _some_ publishers may not be too thrilled with it (and, to be honest, there are only a few products that are getting major re-use, most everything else is a Feat from here and a Spell from there...), it's a far cry from a clean copy extraction.

Other than that, BSF's got it down: Compiling everything into one source that can be used by my players and shared with my friends (and anyone else curious enough to look it over) is my primary motivation.


----------



## thundershot (May 15, 2004)

I kinda expected this to happen at some point.

My major disappointment is putting miniatures and computer games in my Dragon. I buy Dragon for my D&D pen and paper game, not a computer game. I hope it doesn't take up any more space than it does now...

Dungeon.... I REALLY enjoyed the minigames. Fortunately, Fantasy Flight Games Horizon series gives me the fix for that. 3 adventures per issue now, and they pretty much have the whole book to do them? I hope that the adventures are shorter than they've been lately. I really wish they could squeeze in a d20 Modern adventure or two in there somewhere. Ah well, at least they appear online.


Chris


----------



## Samothdm (May 15, 2004)

_*Dragon:*_ I've really liked the magazine recently.  I don't use, or read, everything in there, but there's always at least one or two things that interest me.  Unfortunately, I think that most of those things are being moved to _Dungeon_  As far as the changes, I think I'll just have to wait and see.  It would be a shame to let a nearly 20 year subscription end.

_*Dungeon:*_ I haven't really used it because I find that's really too much work to rework the adventures for my homebrew world.  I don't use most of the standard races, and many of the "monsters" I use as PC races.  I've also got funky things like monotheistic religions and such.  So, I tend to do things like take Monte's _Banewarrens_ and make all of the conversions at once and then just use that for multiple sessions.  It's less overall work for me.  Once in a while I introduce a sidetrek, but those usually come from _Book of Challenges_ or from the Free Adventures on the WotC site.

I've also got piles and piles of old Basic, Expert, and 1E adventures I can go to.  So, in short, I don't need that many new adventures.  

Given that it seems all of the cool DM'ing content is now going to be in _Dungeon_, I guess I'll need to reconsider.  My wife will be so pleased to have even more bookshelf space going toward shelving these things.  

What about articles like "Campaign Components" that included both Player and DM content?  Where would those articles go?  What about the series you were doing on various cities like Paris, Baghdad, and others?  I really liked those, although to be honest they could have been fleshed out a little more.  But, where would those go?  Or are you giving up unique content like that for just more feats, elf subraces, and the like?  

*Wil Wheaton:* I'm sorry to see some of the negative comments about Wil here, but I expected it.  Here's the thing: Wil is a cool guy.  He is *not* Wesley Crusher.  That was a character, people.

Wil is an actor and published writer who games.  He knows a *ton* about gaming.  More than you'd think.  I remember coming back from Vegas and mentioning that I had just bought some little cardboard figures to use in my games.  He asked me which ones, and I said, "Oh, they're just something I saw at the game store from Steve Jackson games..." and without prompting he shouted, "I LOVE Cardboard Heroes!".

The bonus about having him write in the magazine is that he's a professional writer with a great sense of humor.  No, he's not a professional game designer, but he does have a lot of experience in the industry and has contact to people like Monte Cook and the guys from Wizards and Paizo (obviously).  He is starting to DM a campaign for his kids.

I look forward to the articles.  I'm pretty sure they're not going to be "back when I was on Star Trek...".


----------



## Kenson (May 15, 2004)

Pramas said:
			
		

> I'd like to raise a goblet and toast Erik Mona for conceiving the Poly mini games and bringing us several years worth of really interesting games that showed what you could do with the d20 System. They were my favorite part of the magazine and I'll miss them (though I understand why this change is right for Paizo). Thanks for the goodness, Erik!



Hear, hear!


----------



## Chroma (May 15, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> I don't intend to run a lot (or any) open content in Dungeon. The requests for more open content seem to me to be useful only to publishers and freelancers, who make up a tiny portion of our audience.




The question I'd pose to that is what *harm* would arise from including or designating things Open Content?  Considering the short shelf-life of magazines I can't see it reducing sales, but only increasing them and adding more ideas and information to the great OGC pot.  Is there concern that authors don't want to release their ideas as OGC?  I'm not well versed on the structure of the writer's agreement for Dungeon (or Dragon), but what rights are retained by the author after submission?  If an author wanted their ideas released as OGC would you refuse them?  I'm just curious as to why you wouldn't want to include OGC.

As an aside:  The mini-games as OGC would've been great, as now they are dead/dormant with no real chance to become anything more, and there were some fantastic ideas in there!


----------



## scourger (May 15, 2004)

*changes to Dungeon*

Good luck with the changes to Dungeon, folks!  You can't miss by focusing on publishing core modules, so I look forward to that.  I'll keep subscribing.  I will miss the mini-games, but the peak of that feature was Omega World for me.  So, I don't feel like I'll be missing too much.  3 adventures per issue and a 4-part poster map of Greyhawk sounds great.


----------



## Son_of_Thunder (May 15, 2004)

*This is Good News!*

Keith and Erik,

Thanks for coming here an telling us whats coming.

When my wife saw my Dungeon re-subscription letter a few months back she asked if I was going to renew. I told her no, Dungeon just wasn't any use to me anymore. Maybe one adventure I could use and never played any of the mini-games. When the group gets together we have time for one game, the best.

Now however, I am re-subscribing to Dungeon and renewing my Dragon when it comes up.

Thanks Paizo.

Son of Thunder


----------



## EricNoah (May 15, 2004)

Hey Keith, good to see you around!

There have apparently been some changes to the leadership of the mags and at Paizo over the past several months.  Guess I haven't been paying enough attention!  Could one of you just run down who does what, and maybe who to contact with what kind of issue/problem?


----------



## SJ (May 15, 2004)

*bring on the changes*

These mags have both changed *ALOT* since my subscriptions started way back in the day. They are infinitely better. There have been a few issues of each title I thought weren't so great, but I've never regretted subbing to both of them, even during the lean years when I didn't play a game of anything, much less D&D.

If you are a gaming fan, any genre, but particulary D&D, you gotta be pretty hardcore with some unique requirements not to read the flagship magazine of your industry. But hey, to each his indomitable own.

As to the changes, I love 'em. BRING IT ON. New crunch. New fluff. Articles by the gaming geek-savant. Ecology articles (one of my all-time faves), player and rule advice. Good stuff.

Frankly, I'll miss the mini-games. I only ever used one of them, but it was always interesting reading to see other designers' work in a genre. And I'll miss Poly, I play several RPGA games. But more adventures is fine by me.

I would say that over the years I have much preferred the fact the D/D TRIED to change, improve, and progress than if they just stayed with the exact same stuff they had back in issue #48 (or whatever). And even back then people wrote, "why change? I don't like the changes to your magazine!"

Keep rollin' Keith, Matt, Erik, and all the Paizo crew.


----------



## Ranger REG (May 15, 2004)

Well, at least I can finally save $7 a month for something more practical, now that Paizo have finally made their decision about _Dungeon._

No _Poly,_ no money.


----------



## JoeBlank (May 15, 2004)

Sounds like you were right about losing some subscribers by dropping _Poly_, but gaining more than enough to make up for it.

What is selling me is the open, honest attitude I see from the people who make the magazines. That, and the rebirth of _Amazing _tells me Paizo is a company headed in the right direction.

_Dragon_ - will renew (there was never any doubt)
_Dungeon_ - will subscribe (never have before)
_Amazing Stories_ - will give it a look, and consider a subscription

Any consideration to discounts for subscriptions to two or more magazines? While I am happy to spend my hard-earned money, I am seeing some of the features I like from Dragon shifted over to Dungeon. Some kind of package deal would help with that.


----------



## gunter uxbridge (May 15, 2004)

hmmmm....

*scratches head*

I check for traps.


----------



## Ranger REG (May 15, 2004)

gunter uxbridge said:
			
		

> hmmmm....
> 
> *scratches head*
> 
> I check for traps.



Hehehe.  

If only I could leave such a parting gift for _Dungeon_ readers...


----------



## Henry (May 15, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, why does the absence of open game content make the magazine "useless" to you, Bendris? Do you not play D&D?




I'll add my voice as another who feels that Open content is the only way to share or get any content available electronically, because then 3rd parties can work to release for free or for charge electronic versions of said information for instance lookup and reference. I've never published any gaming material before, and the SRD's and the open content releases in PCGen are ENORMOUSLY invaluable to my game preparation efforts.


----------



## Ulrick (May 15, 2004)

I have an idea.

The should COMBINE the two magazines into one uber-magazine called 

Dungeons & Dragons--The Magazine!


Of course, then people would be upset because theres too much Dungeon and not enough Dragon and vice-versa.


----------



## Nighthawk (May 15, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> We'll continue to support the Living Greyhawk campaign in Dungeon with "Living Greyhawk Approved" articles similar to the City of Hardby we ran in #109. Dungeon #114 also has an adventure usable as an introduction to the LG campaign, set in the city of Greyhawk. Dungeons #117, 118, 119, and 120 will contain a massive four-part poster map of the World of Greyhawk similar to the FR map published in Dragon a couple years ago. Wolf Baur's got a module on tap set in the Land of Black Ice, and I've also got Sean Reynolds at work on a Greyhawk adventure. Greyhawk fans will have lots to like about the new Dungeon (as will Eberron and Forgotten Realms fans--lots of exciting stuff for those settings coming up as well).
> 
> --Erik Mona
> Editor-in-Chief
> Dungeon Magazine




This is great news to me! Very cool. I am really looking forward to seeing these issues (I do have a subscription). I am one of those people who are content to see Dungeon in any format. With regards to Dragon, I will take a wait and see attitude. I like the concept, so that's a good thing. The most significant subscription issue that I have is having all the issues reach my home (and in good condition). Overall, the content of both magazines is satisfactory.


----------



## borc killer (May 15, 2004)

If any of you have not meet Keith at the cons I can assure you that he means everything he says.  If he says it is going to be the best at something it will be.  And boy do I feel sorry for who ever is to blame for the subscription problems hehe!

Borc Killer


----------



## d20Dwarf (May 15, 2004)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> I'm not sure why the Wil column is important. Why not get Wil Upchurch instead?



Best. Idea. Ever.


----------



## Vigilance (May 15, 2004)

Once again every genre that isn't fantasy gets the shaft. I subscribed strictly for the mini-games and won't be getting the magazine anymore. 

I love how they want to focus solely on D&D to the point of killing the mini-games, but they have space for miniature articles, computer game articles, and a Wil Wheaton column. 

In other words, they have plenty of space for things that aren't D&D, just not Polyhedron. 

The people dancing on Poly's grave are probably the same folks who whined about the 10 page Ares Section in the old Dragon till they killed that. 

Chuck


----------



## Psion (May 15, 2004)

> I do advise you though, the next time you print multiclassing progressions,
> that whoever wrote up a cleric/ranger 10/10 with the cleric level first, losing
> out on all the ranger skill points (even under 3.0), shouldn't be allowed to
> write Class Acts.




I thought multiclass progressions were neat at first, but I've come to beleive their value is pretty vacuous. I mean, do we really need an article to tell us what level to take next, and what benefits you get at those levels? I think that's fairly trivial.


----------



## d20Dwarf (May 15, 2004)

Psion said:
			
		

> I thought multiclass progressions were neat at first, but I've come to beleive their value is pretty vacuous. I mean, do we really need an article to tell us what level to take next, and what benefits you get at those levels? I think that's fairly trivial.



that's what I was thinking. It's sorta like "gee, thanks for telling me I get a bonus feat at 2nd level fighter!"


----------



## Agamon (May 15, 2004)

Very cool.  Thanks for the info, guys.  I was just about to let my subscription run out...I've changed my mind.


----------



## Agamon (May 15, 2004)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> The people dancing on Poly's grave are probably the same folks who whined about the 10 page Ares Section in the old Dragon till they killed that.




I actually didn't mind Ares.  And I would have been happy to see Poly in Dragon.  But not Dungeon.


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> Once again every genre that isn't fantasy gets the shaft. I subscribed strictly for the mini-games and won't be getting the magazine anymore.
> 
> I love how they want to focus solely on D&D to the point of killing the mini-games, but they have space for miniature articles, computer game articles, and a Wil Wheaton column.
> 
> ...




   Chuck,

   I understand your frustration about losing Polyhedron. It was a difficult choice for us to make, but it was clear that we needed to make it. Sales data, discussions on forums, snail mail, and personal email were sending us a message we couldn't ignore.

   Non-fantasy genres don't "get the shaft" because _we_ don't like anything outside of fantasy. Many people at Paizo are passionate about other genres in roleplaying (and I think the quality of the d20 mini games are proof of that). The reality is that the collective readership of the magazines and the RPG marketplace in general prefer fantasy content. We don't necessarily create the market force in question here, but our livelihood (and the future of the magazines) depends on our ability to listen to it and respond with what the market wants.

   I know that as a multi-genre fan that's got to suck to hear--and I wish that we could make everyone happy _and_ make our magazines successful. The truth was that Dungeon under its current format wasn't truly accomplishing either of those goals.

   As far as what is going in those magazines in the future, I wanted to (hopefully) clear something up. The miniature and computer game content is going to appear in Dragon and not Dungeon. It will be D&D focused and will generally take up about as much space in the "new" Dragon as it does currently.

   I hope that there is a time when the magazines will once again prove useful to your gaming needs. I want to thank you for your post, and your patronage of Dragon and Dungeon in the past.

   I hope we see you again.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## jokamachi (May 15, 2004)

The changes sound great to me; I never got any use out of Polyhedron, anyway. More adventures for the rest of us D&D fanatics.

Looking forward to that Greyhawk map, too.


----------



## mythusmage (May 15, 2004)

*Just as I Was Getting Back in the Hobby*

Zines: Hope it works out. 

OGC: So come up with your own version of the dang mechanic and make that OGC. Shesh, think you were helpless or something.

Wil Wheaton: He's had some small parts, appeared most recently on TechTV ere ComCast pulled off their version of *Night of the Long Knives*, and the most recent news is that Wil and family are participating in a walk against leukemia this June. You can find his blog at WWdN. Which is also where you can find links to his books at Amazon and to his photoblog.

Warning: He takes the weekends off from blogging. Saturday and Sunday are for his wife, his two (step) sons, and a daughter on the way.


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

Zaukrie said:
			
		

> Dragon: Hard to say. Does your letter state clearly that all DM stuff moves to Dungeon and this is really only a players magazine now or are we just reading it that way? If so, I'm a lot less likely to buy Dragon (which I just re-upped for a year, d$*&). The "classic" articles that people listed on this site when Erik (I think it was Erik) asked were all DM related. I can't believe that you'd actually take all the DM stuff out, monsters, planes, running adventures in different types of environments....all the in-game stuff (I consider Dungeoncraft "meta game" as it talks about running the game as opposed to in-game stuff that is still mostly for DMs like monsters, politics, ecologies.....).
> 
> Is that really the split? If so, Dungeon better have a lot of pages dedicated to being a DM. I know there are less DMs, I know that is why we get less DM material from WoTC and others. Dragon was one of the places to still get this in digestable doses (unlike 250 page hardcovers).




   Dragon will still have material that will be useful to DMs, but Dungeon will become even more focused on providing DMs the tools (advice, crunchy bits, and, of course, the adventures) they need to provide an awesome experience for everyone involved in their game.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

BardStephenFox said:
			
		

> Thanks for the update, it gives me a lot to think about.
> 
> I do hope that you are working on your subscription fulfillment.  I regularly received my copy of Dragon after the local stores.  I never received the November 2003 issue.  But, that is not my point, so I won't rant on it.




   Hey,

   Just email me your full name and address, and I'll make sure that we send you the November 2003 issue (if we have it in our backstock).

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

JoeBlank said:
			
		

> Any consideration to discounts for subscriptions to two or more magazines? While I am happy to spend my hard-earned money, I am seeing some of the features I like from Dragon shifted over to Dungeon. Some kind of package deal would help with that.




   It's something that we are working on now. I'm not sure when we'll have it all ready to go, but it's a great idea that we want to implement!

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

borc killer said:
			
		

> If any of you have not meet Keith at the cons I can assure you that he means everything he says.  If he says it is going to be the best at something it will be.  And boy do I feel sorry for who ever is to blame for the subscription problems hehe!
> 
> Borc Killer




   Aww, shucks! 

   Seriously, I am working on the subscription fulfillment issue. It may take some time, but we *are* going to get it right. 

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## frankthedm (May 15, 2004)

Glad to hear the poly matterial is out of the dungeon. To me it fealt like a marketing ploy to get players buying Dungeon magazine to increase readership. I still prefer adventures only for dungeon [4 to 5 an issue, 6 issues a year], but the DM material is MUCH better that the poly crud.

Without poly, will the dungeon's price drop to equal dragon's, or will dungeon's smaller amount of sales require the  higher price?


----------



## jaults (May 15, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Non-fantasy genres don't "get the shaft" because _we_ don't like anything outside of fantasy. Many people at Paizo are passionate about other genres in roleplaying (and I think the quality of the d20 mini games are proof of that). The reality is that the collective readership of the magazines and the RPG marketplace in general prefer fantasy content. We don't necessarily create the market force in question here, but our livelihood (and the future of the magazines) depends on our ability to listen to it and respond with what the market wants.
> 
> I know that as a multi-genre fan that's got to suck to hear--and I wish that we could make everyone happy _and_ make our magazines successful. The truth was that Dungeon under its current format wasn't truly accomplishing either of those goals.



So, Keith, I'll ask again... Has there been any consideration given to test marketing a mini-game or a mini-game expansion in the electronic market, whether from the Paizo website or RPGNow? I don't know how the PDF Bundle sold that was advertised in Polyhedron a number of months ago, but it seems like you have built-in advertising/marketing, and a semi-captive (and I assume receptive) audience with your subscribers and buyers.

Thanks,
 Jason


----------



## frankthedm (May 15, 2004)

Mini games would be fine in Dragon's space


----------



## TimSmith (May 15, 2004)

Nice one, Paizo guys. 

You listened to the feedback and it all sounds great. My subscription is definitely assured again (it was slightly in doubt after the "curate's egg" of the recent times with Dungeon).

By the way, those guys (Neo earlier in these posts, I think) who think they can't get a subscription in the UK and Europe, check out "The place for games" website. (.co.uk, if i remember). I have been subscribing through them quite happily for nearly a year.


----------



## wingsandsword (May 15, 2004)

*sigh*

Dungeon, well, there's $7 a month I can save.  I only bought it for the d20 Modern/d20 Star Wars/Mini-Games.  I subscribed to Star Wars Gamer, it bit the dust, I was about to finally get off my duff and subscribe to Polyhedron, scratch that.

Adventures?  I really don't need any more.  I don't run D&D often (d20 Modern is my game of choice, followed by Star Wars, then Forgotten Realms, so I run D&D, but it's down the list), and between the issues of Dungeon I already have (everything since they were Dungeon/Polyhedron), and all the adventures that have been up for free download on the WotC site (both 3e adventures, and old 1e/2e adventures put up for free download), I could probably run an entire campaign out of the box.  

The changes to Dragon make me very wary.  I've bought Dragon every months since 3e came out, and admittedly I probably still will, but I'm afraid the game-useful material will be choked out by flashy, vapid coverage of computer games I don't care about (there is a reason I don't subscribe to any video game mags).

Dragon used to have really cool articles, like the Planar Factions article in issue #287 for one.  Lately though, it's been a lot of PrC's that fill character concepts that are already filled by other PrC's or feat trees or something else, Feats that are so specialized that they would never come into play in most games, lots of flashy pictures pushing new products (and not a lot of useful stuff about those products), and it seems like re-hashes of old concepts.  Maybe it's just a rut of having been around for 300+ issues over almost three decades, but I just feel like I'm seeing the same thing over and over most of the time.

What about new clerical domains (occasional, but not often done)?  New planar cosmologies?  New base classes for unusual campaign styles (something it seems like is rarely done, Sage, Physician, Engineer, Sailor, European-style Monk are examples).  More stuff on quasi-historical gaming?  Ideas for very-low magic, low-magic or very-high-magic games.  Maybe dust off a few old settings and see how they shape up in 3e (I loved that old "Campaign Classics" issue last year).   The Shannara issue was cool, how hard would it be to do one-shots of other fantasy novels (I know there are licensing deals to make, but it could be a great thing).  What about issues with themes of campaigning in a quasi-Greek, or pseudo-Egyptian setting?  

I don't mean to be to harsh about Dragon, but a few years ago (early in 3e), they were rich with "crunch", very legible and easy to read (while all the color recently sure is flashy, it seems to distract from the actual text much of the time), and it really felt like it was adding a lot with every purchase.  Now it seems more like a habit, and one article might be useful or funny.


----------



## Sigurd (May 15, 2004)

*Dungeon Should be for Dungeons*

The more Dungeons you can get into Dungeon the better.

Ditch Polyhedron & Lower your prices

or 

Ditch Polyhedron & Give us 5 dungeons an issue. No dungeon smaller than 3 pages.

If you can't pay for more than 3 professional High layout dungeons gather the best of the web for 2 small dungeons an issue.

I know its not as simple as counting the dungeon's in an issue, artwork, layout detail, etc... all are essential, but it seems like now you produce roughly 3 dungeons an issue plus polyhedron. How much will things really change?

My 02

Sigurd

ps. just my opinion, 'Challenges' are beneath you guys. I'd rather pull a portion out of a real dungeon with possible leads to more material than be given an isolated encounter.
     If you want to do 'Challenges' set yourself a goal for a calendar year and detail the workings of a goblin\orc army such that all the challenges work together. The more context you provide the less work I have to do as a DM and the happier I am as a customer. If I go ahead and do too much work and rewrite everything you give me, thats my choice, but I still want to absorb the atmosphere and context of individual dungeons.


----------



## TeaBee (May 15, 2004)

I just resubcribed to Dungeon for 3 years, a month ago or so. I did it for (98% for) the Polyhedron content.

To say I'm dissapointed is an understatement. I feel cheated.

For any other companies out there reading this, I'm willing to pay for a nice mag full of Star Wars/d20 Modern/mini-games/etc.

I don't think I would have resubscribed at all if I knew at the time...


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

jaults said:
			
		

> So, Keith, I'll ask again... Has there been any consideration given to test marketing a mini-game or a mini-game expansion in the electronic market, whether from the Paizo website or RPGNow? I don't know how the PDF Bundle sold that was advertised in Polyhedron a number of months ago, but it seems like you have built-in advertising/marketing, and a semi-captive (and I assume receptive) audience with your subscribers and buyers.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jason




   Jason,

   Sorry, I think I missed your originnal question. We've definitely thought about it. However, Paizo is a relatively small company, and our resources (from editing right down to marketing) are stretched thin at the moment. Once we move past the relaunch of Dragon and Dungeon, launch Amazing, and overhaul our website, we'll give this possibility another look.

   But, mini-games do take a lot of effort on the art directors and editors. We'd only do it if we felt we wwouldn't be jeopardizing the quality of our magazines.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## MacMathan (May 15, 2004)

The changes sound good to me. 

As for Wil Wheaton, give the guy a chance. 

I like him on Tech TV, he writes well in his books and blogs. 

As if that were not enough he had a nice piece in KoDT this month also. 

He represents the 30ish, gamer w/ a life that I see as many of the people here on EN World. 

I remember seeing him at game cons 15 years ago and that is when "Kill Wesley" pins were the rage and being sold at the same Con. So he has done more than dabble in our hobby.


----------



## beta-ray (May 15, 2004)

I understand the economic realities of the situation but I am still saddend by the decision to stop the D20 stuff in Dungeon. But if the audience of this board is any indication (kind of a sad one at that), it is the right thing to do.

I haven't been that much of a pure D&Der for a while, looking for more of a variety of things. I wonder about the support that D20 Modern, Future and Star Wars will have. Oh well, good luck to you. I probably won't be buying Dungeon much except possibly for special occassions.

Good job on the minigames by the way. Much of them were inspired and creative.


----------



## RodneyThompson (May 15, 2004)

Well, it's a little disheartening to see _Polyhedron_ go away (since most of my articles have been in Poly). Still, you can't fault the guys for trying to cater to gamers, eh? Never let it be said that the company is run by those blind to the needs of roleplayers.


----------



## Bagpuss (May 15, 2004)

Moridin said:
			
		

> Never let it be said that the company is run by those blind to the needs of roleplayers.




Don't you mean mini-gamers and computer gamers?   

Having read that letter I've decided I'll be saving some money each month as well. First of they are removing all the Polyhedron content (to be fair this has often been so Fantasy orientate in recent issue as to be near useless), and yet not significantly increasing the number of Dungeon adventures, so you pay the same for less. Then they are adding computer and wargame articles to Dragon, and so must remove RPG content to find the space, again pay the same for less.

We the good news is I won't have trouble with subscriptions anymore since I don't intend to have one.


----------



## Balrog (May 15, 2004)

I must say that for myself I am pleased with the sound of these changes.  I never liked the addition of Polyhedron to Dungeon.  I have used Dungeon adventures since the SINGLE DIGIT issues to supplement my DnD gaming material, not provide me with useless d20 games.  give me Dungeon by itself and let the customers decide with their dollars. 

I do like the overall concept of having Polyhedron content moved to Dragon, as I have felt for quite some time that Dragon was more of a players mag anyway.

Dungeon magazine should be a source of DM material for their DnD games, not a source of monthly tangent d20 material that appeals to about 20% of the audience.


----------



## Alzrius (May 15, 2004)

I'm sorry to see _Polyhedron_ go. Not so much because I had any special attachment to it, but because its a rather iconic staple as far as long-term D&D magazines go, and seeing it bite the dust is hard.

That said, I'm also slightly worried over the almost-total lack of support for _d20 Modern_ this will generate. I don't own _d20 Modern_, but I want to, and articles like FEAR, and Dark*Matter: Shades of Grey were just incredible. Now, the only resource for Modern d20 is its website on WotC's page.

I'm also slightly worried about the new features that _Dungeon_ will include. While I certainly understand the mindset behind putting DM-focused articles into _Dungeon_, this worries me somewhat...what the majority of people seem to want out of _Dungeon_ is a greater number of published adventures. Replacing the lost Poly content with DM-content may be a step in the right direction, but at the end of the day, it's still pages in the magazine that aren't being used for adventures.

For _Dragon_, there isn't much I can say, because honestly, to me, it sounds almost exactly the same as the _Dragon_ I'm seeing now. We already have content about miniatures and computer games...I just hope we keep the current trend with having those articles provide something (new spells, new monsters, etc.) in the mechanics of the tabletop D&D game itself. I do want to add that I find the new races section to sound cool. That will be exciting.

I've been subscribing to _Dragon_ for almost a hundred issues now, and to _Dungeon_ for almost thirty (and buying it off the newsstands for a while before that). I can honestly say that I will never let my subscriptions to either one lapse. While some of these changes may not be exactly what I was wishing for, there isn't a doubt in my mind that I'm going to enjoy the end results. Keep up the great work Paizo!


----------



## Mr Vergee (May 15, 2004)

The long time Dungeon reader sihgs with relief.

Great. I embrace the change.
I'm really looking forward to getting that first new Dungeon magazine.


----------



## Dismas (May 15, 2004)

Like a few other people I am happy that the changes mean that I will have more money spare to spend on other things. Dragon I was only buying for the Eberron previews, Dungeon for the Polyhedron content (last published aventure I ever ran was 20 odd years ago), so it looks like I'll won't be buying anymore past the 30th Aniversary. The biggest let down for me is that it means there will be no follow up articles for Dark*Matter: Shades of Grey and that, for me, will take a long time to forgive 

I do understand that they are doing what they believe is best for the company and do honestly wish them all the best. I meet Keith many years ago at Gen Con UK, he is a great guy. I have many fond memories of drinking Cider and Black with him and a bunch of other WoTC staff into the early hours, less fond memories of the hangover the next day


----------



## Greybar (May 15, 2004)

Right now I only subscribe to Dragon - I don't want pre-written modules.  But Dungeoncraft and such articles are one of my primary draws to Dragon, and those are moving to Dungeon - which still looks to be 75% stuff I don't want.  Dragon adding nonRPG stuff will largely be a dilution of stuff that I want to see - more pages to skip.

So my draw to buy Dragon is lowered, and my draw to buy Dungeon is still very weak.

Well, I guess I'll reassess when the subscription expires, but I'm not optimistic at this time.

john


----------



## tassander (May 15, 2004)

WOW!!!

That's just great news!

AWESOME!

Thumbs up to Paizo, Erik and Keith! These are going to be great improvements! That's exactly how I envisioned the magazines: Dragon as the crunch magazine, Dungeon as the fluff magazine!

You guys made my day! I dearly hope these changes will work for you! I'll keep buying your magazines, anyway! And I'll recommend them to my players, Dragon is the perfect player's magazine, now!

WOW!!!!


----------



## JeffB (May 15, 2004)

Sernett said:
			
		

> We'd love it if you'd take a look at the first couple of issues and let us know what you think of the new format: what works and what doesn't. That goes for anyone who hasn't checked out Dragon in a while or who has been dissatisfied with what we've been doing. We made these changes to the magazines with our consumers desires in mind, and we want to hear from you about the new magazines.




Absolutely. I'll check out the new Dragon on the newstands and go from there. I WILL re-sub if the mag starts getting back to it's roots as a gaming magazine, and not just a monthly players rules supplement.

thanks for the comments


----------



## JeffB (May 15, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Well, insofar as I'm concerned, "Greyhawk" and "core D&D" are pretty much the same thing.




As another Greyhawk fan from "back in the day"    I'd have to disagree to a certain extent; the rules & "tone"  changes brought about by 3E have changed the "flavor" of the setting IME. But that is an entirely different argument   




> Does that answer the question?




Sure does Erik. Thanks.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (May 15, 2004)

Wow -- these changes sound great to me!  I've always detested Poly, since I'm essentially a D&D-only player/DM.  Paizo seems to be giving me exactly what I've wanted in Dungeon.  Giving Dragon an entirely player-focus seems right, too (though I will worry that Dungeon can survive on just DMs).

Thanks, Paizo!


----------



## Connorsrpg (May 15, 2004)

A very big thankyou to Matt, Keith and Erik here!!!  

I am one who has let my subscriptions to both slip over a year ago.  I personally thought that some of the first 3e versions were some of the best I have seen.  It was the inclusion of these 'other add ons/projects" that made me decide to let my subscriptions slide.

whilst I found many of the mini-games interesting to read, they provided no use at all to my dnd game (the reason i was buying Dragon & Dungeon mags).  I, like many do not have the time to try all of these alternative games out - as good as some of them were.  I too would like to see a space where they could live on (all those suggesting this - start something) but I was certainly not happy shelling out $16 dollars (In Australia here) for 1 adventure in the last Dungeon mag I bought.

Don't jump to too many conclusions; press releases are just that.  They certainly cannot state EVERYTHING that each mag will have, but I agree with the change of focus.  As far as all of the individual articles go - well let's face it, we have always had those we love and those we are not so fond of.  There will be articles of advice and not just crunch...

Once again thanks guys, now I will need to try and sort out another subscription over here in Oz....

I too am keen on more info being on the website: especially unlabelled versions of player's maps or pics.  Furthermore I too would like to put out a call for an appearance of the old Dungeoncraft articles so that we can access them easily.  As a long time developer of MOCS Ray Winninger's articles were some of the best I have read in the pages of Dragon mag.

Keep up the good work guys...I must point out that each of these guys are a great help to anyone wishing to appear in these mags if you email them and I too appreciate your time here on these boards.

Connors


----------



## cybermonkey (May 15, 2004)

While I'm not too thrilled about the added computer game material (I just don't have the time to play computer or console games), I can fully respect and understand why Dragon may want to take this rout. There are 180 million people that play computer games and it's a $10 billion industry. I don't think table-top games are even close to those numbers.

I think that Paizo just wants to tap into that market. Heck, who's to blame them. If a video gamer picks up Dragon to get some information and is drawn into playing table-top RPGs, then article has done its job.

However... If anyone has read Dragon for more than 10 years, we all know the magazine continues to change its format. (I still miss the Ares section.) This shouldn't be surprising, and it's just another indicator of how a specialty magazine can survive being around for a few decades.

The article where I got those numbers:
http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,63449,00.html


----------



## Sketchpad (May 15, 2004)

I'm glad I saw this before I re-upped my Dungeon sub.  The only reason I got the mag was for Poly and now, seeing it go the way of Star Wars Gamer, I'll focus my interest in other directions.  
If I could offer a suggestion to the crew at Paizo?  Remeber when Dragon had a section called Ares?  It focused on the non-D&D material back in the day.  How about a new magazine called Ares?  As we've seen by pop media, everything old is new again, so why not Ares?  You could have it focus on d20/OGL games like Star Wars, d20 Modern, Mutants & Masterminds, Forbidden Kingdoms, various Mini-Game Support, as well as support for FFG's Horizon line and other various products.  I believe that it could support its own weight if it has monthly columns rooted in the popular games ... after all, isn't that what makes Dragon so popular?


----------



## Celtavian (May 15, 2004)

*re*

Nice change to _Dungeon_. Definitely makes it a more attractive purchase now. I don't have time for mini-games, and more dungeons means more options for adventure.


----------



## thundershot (May 15, 2004)

Why not let Polyhedron continue as a web-zine? Maybe as a bonus to subscribers or soemthing, with the occaisional mini-game, and still have some content for d20 modern and Star Wars? It'll save on printing costs, and only subscribers to either magazine could have access to it.

Or how about a new magazine! Call it "Young & d20 Modern"  *runs before he can get pelted with tomatoes*



Chris


----------



## Imhotepthewise (May 15, 2004)

I will truly miss Poly, especially the minigames (snif!).  I think the caretakers of the publications, have, over the years, always tried to bend with the changes in the industry and please their customer base by changing the product. I think for the most part, they have done a great job.  Remember that most of them are gamers themselves, and this is a labor of love as well as a job.  Keep it up, gang!


----------



## Sholari (May 15, 2004)

Big thanks to the Paizo crew!  That really made my day.  I will definitely be resubscribing to the new Dungeon magazine.  Heck, double or triple the price on me and I'd still buy the revised version.  As quality sources of adventures have dwindled over the years, this is the resource I've been waiting for.

As far as Polyhedron I hope it lives on in some fan-based e-zine format, so that all the Polyhedron guys have something to meet their needs as well.  Perhaps there is some enterprising individual that could license out that brand and focus Polyhedron on what it does best.


----------



## beverson (May 15, 2004)

_originally posted by ledded_


> I'm sure these changes will appeal to a much wider customer base and hopefully generate better revenues and return customers for you, and I truly do wish you luck, but I will have to stick by my lament for the death of things that do not fit within the status quo of the average D&D fanbase or the marketing-focus-de jour of WotC.
> 
> You certainly can't make all of the people happy all of the time (many RPG companies and mags have died trying), and sometimes you can't make someone happy at all. No hard feelings.




I have to disagree with ledded and say that I DO have hard feelings.  What about all of those comments regarding Dungeon and Poly not being able to stand on their own?

I hope someone out there is ready to take up the cause of the non D&D d20 gamer and put together a new Poly, including mini-games.  I for one will send them my money.  Meanwhile, I now must contemplate cancelling my current sub to Dungeon.


----------



## MrCharm (May 15, 2004)

*changes*

I like the changes to Dungeon.  The minigames were kind of cool, but my group would never play them.  I think some d20 modern adventures would have gone a long way toward getting me to play that game.

Dragon--Well, I don't currently subscribe, and don't plan to do so.  Prestige class every issue?  There are already 10000 of them, so who needs more?  Same with feats, and character classes, etc.  I would be more likely to pick up Dragon if it had more player advice, and sections on the different games (d20 Modern, d20 Future, etc).
IMO, I would like to see all "crunch" game content in Dragon/Dungeon be OGL.  Why would you not do this, since the magazine shelf life is so short?


----------



## beverson (May 15, 2004)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> Once again every genre that isn't fantasy gets the shaft. I subscribed strictly for the mini-games and won't be getting the magazine anymore.
> 
> I love how they want to focus solely on D&D to the point of killing the mini-games, but they have space for miniature articles, computer game articles, and a Wil Wheaton column.
> 
> ...




Here, here!!  What Chuck said!


----------



## Razuur (May 15, 2004)

This is the complete wrong direction for me.  I understand that Paizo has a business to run, and is catering to their larger audience.  I respect this, and wish them well.  Unfortunately, the Poly and D20 content were the reason i bought the mags.

I wish you folks well.  i will miss the monthly mags.

Razuur


----------



## Drengy (May 15, 2004)

*Excellent changes*

I like all the changes listed. 

Dragon as the players mag and Dungeon as the DM mag is perfect!

Also, I LOVE the idea of Dragon being about all aspects of D&D - RPG, minis, and CRPGs. I think there is a ton of crossover between the camps, and this might also convince those who only play D&D computer/console games to try out the pen-and-paper version. To those naysayers I say: It's 2004, the D&D audience is getting older because kids are more accustomed to computer and console games. ANYTHING that will expose them to the tabletop version is fine by me. We need some new blood or we will slowly die. As a kid I LOVED tabletop wargames (SPI, Avalon Hill, etc.). But computer games came along and crushed them, and the old grognards refused to recognise this until it was too late. I miss SPI…

As far as Dungeon goes, the three-tier adventure thing is perfect. That means useful stuff no matter what campaign I'm currently running.

As far as the lack of non-D&D material, I think this is a great opportunity for Paizo or some other publisher to step-in and create another magazine. Either print or online. I would subscribe to a PDF, downloadable magazine if one were available. 

Finally, to those who would cancel or not subscribe - an entire year subscription to each of these mags is $45. Not much more than a one hardcover gaming book, and there's lots more useful info in a year of magazines than even the best hardcover book (except for the 3 core books of course). Put another way $45 / 12 months = $3.75 per month. Less than a single lunch, half a movie, or one large specialty coffee drink from Starbucks. If you are truly a fan of the hobby how can you justify *not* having subscriptions?


----------



## Ranes (May 15, 2004)

'Eyup Keith, Erik & Co,

Thank you for sharing your plans with us here. I found them very interesting and look forward to seeing the new format of both magazines.

Computer games related articles in Dragon are something I've never liked but I'm not against them in principle. I don't believe we need - except perhaps very occasionally - conversions of items or creatures from CRPGs to pen and paper. But if the next NWN expansion features, say, a colourful guild of extraplanar search and rescue specialists, then I'm happy to see them written up for the rest of us.

I always thought Poly content would have found a better home in Dragon but that's academic now. Why don't you consider donating the title to ENWorld? I read a post from Morrus recently, in which he indicated he was looking for a new name for the EN World Players' Journal. I appreciate that he's bound to have settled on a new name now but I just think 'Polyhedron' would be the perfect name for a magazine published by a d20 fan site.

On the whole, I like the sound of the changes to Dungeon. However, I'm hoping for a very high standard of creative DMing material. By all means, write some DMing articles for beginners (we need new DMs) but I challenge you to furnish any such articles with ideas that will surprise, please and provide utility to veterans and newcomers alike.

As for having a Wil Wheaton column, why not? I've never read anything by him. I look forward to finding what he writes - and the way he writes it - entertaining.

While I'm here, can I just add my voice to the chorus (tell me there's a chorus) begging you not to push the cover art and headline style any further comic book-wards? Thanks for listening.

And, of course, I won't hold it against you should fiction find its way out of Dragon and into Amazing.

Good luck, to all of you, with all your endeavours.


----------



## JoeBlank (May 15, 2004)

Regarding package deals, or discounts for multiple subscriptions:



			
				Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> It's something that we are working on now. I'm not sure when we'll have it all ready to go, but it's a great idea that we want to implement!
> 
> Keith Strohm
> Vice President
> Paizo Publishing, LLC



Great! Thanks! My _Dragon_ subscription runs for a few more months, and I will just continue to pick up _Dungeon_ from my FLGS, and then decide whether to do a combo subscription.


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> Don't you mean mini-gamers and computer gamers?
> 
> Having read that letter I've decided I'll be saving some money each month as well. First of they are removing all the Polyhedron content (to be fair this has often been so Fantasy orientate in recent issue as to be near useless), and yet not significantly increasing the number of Dungeon adventures, so you pay the same for less. Then they are adding computer and wargame articles to Dragon, and so must remove RPG content to find the space, again pay the same for less.
> 
> We the good news is I won't have trouble with subscriptions anymore since I don't intend to have one.




   Bagpuss,

   As mentioned earlier in the thread, the "new" Dragon should continue to have generally the same amount of content devoted to D&D computer games, D&D miniatures, and other D&D-related games as it currently does. You won't be missing out on any of your RPG content.

   I also believe that you'll find the RPG articles even more useful than you might now. To say that Dragon is the source of information and content related to Dungeons & Dragons is decidedly not to say that it's RPG content will be weaker or less apparent. 

   Check out Issue #324 and give us your feedback.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

cybermonkey said:
			
		

> While I'm not too thrilled about the added computer game material (I just don't have the time to play computer or console games), I can fully respect and understand why Dragon may want to take this rout. There are 180 million people that play computer games and it's a $10 billion industry. I don't think table-top games are even close to those numbers.
> 
> I think that Paizo just wants to tap into that market. Heck, who's to blame them. If a video gamer picks up Dragon to get some information and is drawn into playing table-top RPGs, then article has done its job.
> 
> ...




   Also, keep in mind that the computer game content in Dragon, which will stay about where it is now in terms of number of pages, will focus on D&D comouter games or games with some serious relevance to the D&D brand and RPG players.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Piratecat (May 15, 2004)

This communication is very valuable, Keith; thank for letting us know ahead of time what your plan is.


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

MrCharm said:
			
		

> I like the changes to Dungeon.  The minigames were kind of cool, but my group would never play them.  I think some d20 modern adventures would have gone a long way toward getting me to play that game.
> 
> Dragon--Well, I don't currently subscribe, and don't plan to do so.  Prestige class every issue?  There are already 10000 of them, so who needs more?  Same with feats, and character classes, etc.  I would be more likely to pick up Dragon if it had more player advice, and sections on the different games (d20 Modern, d20 Future, etc).
> IMO, I would like to see all "crunch" game content in Dragon/Dungeon be OGL.  Why would you not do this, since the magazine shelf life is so short?




   MrCharm,

   The list of Dragon content in the open letter is illustrative and not exhaustive. Dragon will also have player advice content ad a balance between pure crunch and pure fluff.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (May 15, 2004)

Great news for the D&D player in me...but horrible news for the Star Wars player. We lost Gamer(which was great) and now we've lost Poly...*sigh* Ah well.


----------



## Piratecat (May 15, 2004)

Keith, can you explain the rationale for not including more OGL material in Dragon? I suspect that doing so would boost sales and good will, but there might be economics or politics that I'm missing.


----------



## Painfully (May 15, 2004)

After reading the initial post, I'm excited to hear that many of the problems I've had with Dungeon/Poly be addressed.  In fact, my initial reaction was to jump with joy and yell like a foreign football (aka soccer) announcer screaming, "SCOOOO...(keep going for about 30 seconds here)...OOOOOOOOOOOOORE!"      

Now, after carefully reading ALL 8 PAGES of posts, I'd like to list my one, perhaps premature, complaint about Dungeon.

Adding articles in Dungeon is bad.

That's like putting a D&D adventure in Dragon every month which, while not bad, befits the purpose of Dungeon Magazine!  Why does everything have to be a half-this or half-that these days?!  This isn't a new half-race! 

The thought of articles in Dungeon makes me reconsider the initial good news I had about the removal of Poly.  I rely on Dungeon for the adventure material, not articles!  The one and only series of articles I thought might be appropriate was the original Dungeoncraft, and still I prefered it in the pages of Dragon.

Dragon Magazine provides articles of interest related to the D&D game!  Dungeon Magazine provides quality adventures for the D&D game!  There's a very elegant simplicity involved here that doesn't need to be "redifined" every time a person at Paizo gets an itch.  *sigh*  

Unfortunately, this means I must reserve my jubilation over Dungeon Magazine.    

The three adventures a month is definitely a plus.  But if they are more like two adventures, and a critical threat, or some other "encounter" instead of an adventure, then I'll be reserving my subscription.

Is it really that difficult to understand what the fans of Dungeon want most?

Articles in Dungeon, bad.  Adventures in Dungeon, good.


----------



## Ycore Rixle (May 15, 2004)

*Thumbs Up*

Keith, that is all great news, and I am impressed by the open communication. Thanks for all the hard work from you, Lisa, the editors and everyone else at Paizo.


----------



## shadowlight (May 15, 2004)

Well, I'm definitely dropping my subscription to Dungeon.  oh well. The end of an era I guess.


----------



## Painfully (May 15, 2004)

I do think that three quality adventures each month are enough to attract my subscription.  But I don't go to Dungeon for the articles any more than I go to Dragon for the fiction.  So, in the end it is something I can live with, even if I despise it.


----------



## Sernett (May 15, 2004)

[Edit]
Nevermind. Keith already answered that concern.


----------



## Vigilance (May 15, 2004)

Another point from my perspective:

As someone who works for a company (RPGObjects) that has advertised in Dungeon in the past, I was wondering how much sense that made going forward. The magazine has just openly stated they don't want non-fantasy gamers in their sandbox anymore.

The decision isn't mine to be sure, but I certainly wouldn't advocate it at this point except for a fantasy product, which is a small minority of the RPGObjects product line.

Sunny point #2 in this same vein is that I no longer believe there *is* a place to advertise and reliably reach our core market.

Except the net.

Chuck


----------



## Nilhgualcm Leahcim (May 15, 2004)

WOW! I am so glad that the guys (and gals) at Paizo are making this change! It sounds wonderful that _Dungeon_ is going to be the place for GM's that I think it logically should be. The idea that _Dungeon_ is going to have all of the DM related stuff and that _Dragon_ is going to have a lot more player content is terrific! Seeing _Poly_ go is probably sad for many readers, but I enjoy this news. Perhaps, after Paizo launches _Amazing Stories_, finishes these new style changes for _Dungeon_ and _Dragon_, and revamp their website, they could look into the possibility of doing _another_ magazine, one devoted to OGL content, _Poly'_ articles, and other genres of roleplaying. I know that this would make my wife angry, but I would then be a subscriber to five Paizo magazines and be very happy!


----------



## Greyson (May 15, 2004)

*Good Job, Keith*

I am excited about and support the pending cahnges at _Dungeon_ and _Dragon_ magazines this summer. I think the staff at Paizo have done a great job at keeping the magazines afloat and I appreciate their effort in doing so. I have liked all of the recent changes, tweaks and improvements of the last two years. While it is too bad about the end of _Polyhedron_, I trust that Paizo is keeping the interests of the magazines and the D&D community at heart. So, great job, Paizo. And, thanks.

Here's to many more years of _Dungeon_ and _Dragon_ magazines.


----------



## C. Baize (May 15, 2004)

*An open letter to Paizo.*

Well, guys.
Thanks for several issues of Dungeon that were once again useful to me after a considerable amount of time that they were no longer useful.
An all too brief moment in which Dungeon/Polyhedron expanded its horizons into mini-games, and other D20 Modern material. 
That having been said, I no longer see a reason to continue purchasing Dungeon Magazine. Without Polyhedron attached to it... well... it's just not worth the money to me.
Should Paizo decide at some future time to publish another magazine with Modern material, or to revive Polyhedron, I will once again become a patron. 

I suppose with the money I save on the first magazine I don't purchase, I can grab a few beers, and my group can raise a glass to the demise of a valued friend ... Goodbye Polyhedron.


----------



## El_Gringo (May 15, 2004)

So Dragon is going to have the same format Star Wars Gamer had?


----------



## Mixmaster (May 15, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Also, keep in mind that the computer game content in Dragon, which will stay about where it is now in terms of number of pages, will focus on D&D comouter games or games with some serious relevance to the D&D brand and RPG players.
> 
> Keith Strohm
> Vice President
> Paizo Publishing, LLC




Keith,

I want to thank Paizo first for announcing the changes and you personally for answering questions and giving the heads up on the future. I am a subscriber to both (Dragon since #45, Dungeon since the beginning).

But two(+) questions on Dungeon are being conspicuously not answered and I have to "hold your feet to the fire" until I get answers.

1. The original reason for merging Polyhedron & Dungeon was because "neither magazine can survive on it's own." By removing Polyhedron, now Dungeon can survive? By what means?? What has changed???

2. You're removing the Polyhedron pages from Dungeon. What happens to the price point? You are quick to mention numerous times that the content in Dragon will not change. But it has been asked repeatedly about Dungeon - no answer. Am I paying the same price for less content?? I'm getting 3 adventures now, 3 after the change. But I've lost the Polyhedron pages!!

+. What is your support going to be on Star Wars? d20 Modern? d20 Future?? Those. are. settings. too.

I'm not worring about Dragon #324. It is what it always is since the beginning. Feats, Prc's, Monsters, Magic Items, Characters, Races, Settings, Min-Maxinging, (crunchy bits).......

The jury is out on Dungeon #114. And your answers.


----------



## Sholari (May 15, 2004)

Mixmaster said:
			
		

> Keith,
> 
> 1. The original reason for merging Polyhedron & Dungeon was because "neither magazine can survive on it's own." By removing Polyhedron, now Dungeon can survive? By what means?? What has changed???




Yeah, I am kind of curious about this myself.  Originally, the assertion was made it was Polyhedron that was propping up the sales for Dungeon.  Then back in July 2003 an informal poll was conducted that demonstrated much stronger support for Dungeon than Polyhedron.  Was this original assumption based on skewed data?


----------



## Lizard (May 15, 2004)

Well...

I never bought a single Dungeon magazine when it was just adventures.

I've bought every issue since it added Polyhedron content.

I'm going back, it seems, to not buying it. I do not like adventures, Sam-I-Am. I can't fit them into my worlds and they do not suit my style of GMing.

I appreciate this is a minority opinion -- obviously, if more people felt this way, the minigames and other Polyhedron content would not have been cut back and then culled. I don't have a "right" to have Paizo lose money to make me happy, and I have not been "betrayed" or "ripped off". By the same token, though, I'm not going to spend my money on something I'm not going to use, read, or enjoy. I will continue to buy Dragon, as I have regularly since issue 36. (Which I still own.)

So it goes.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (May 15, 2004)

Lizard said:
			
		

> I appreciate this is a minority opinion -- obviously, if more people felt this way, the minigames and other Polyhedron content would not have been cut back and then culled. I don't have a "right" to have Paizo lose money to make me happy, and I have not been "betrayed" or "ripped off".




Oh, you're no fun.

It's the hip thing. Shred your clothes as you wail at how you have been wronged. You are not demonstrating the appropriate level of obnoxious narcissism and lack of perspective so characteristic of too many posts in this thread.


BTW, Lizard, your mini-game in Polyhedron was one of those that really made it a worthwhile venture while it lasted. IMO.


Regards,
Eric Anondson


----------



## Corinth (May 15, 2004)

Dragon = The PHB magazine

Dungeon = The DMG magazine

This is how it ought to be, and I'm glad to see that it shall be that way.  Good going.


----------



## Treebore (May 15, 2004)

All right, I'll re-subscribe to both. But I reserve the right to cancel for a full refund on my remaining issues at any time!

I also want to add that at no time that I thought the quality of the Paizo Dungeon/Dragon mags was bad. In fact I thought it was very good/outstanding. It was the content that made me leave. So, with the improvement in content I am returning. Yaaayy!


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 15, 2004)

Mixmaster said:
			
		

> Keith,
> 
> I want to thank Paizo first for announcing the changes and you personally for answering questions and giving the heads up on the future. I am a subscriber to both (Dragon since #45, Dungeon since the beginning).




   Mixmaster,

   First off, thanks for being such a long-time supporter of Dragon and Dungeon. I certainly wasn't trying to conspicuously duck questions. I've been sifting through this thread (often when I should be sleeping <grin>) answering the questions that I catch. I'll do my best to give you honest, truthful answers to your questions.



> But two(+) questions on Dungeon are being conspicuously not answered and I have to "hold your feet to the fire" until I get answers.




   Consider them held.   




> 1. The original reason for merging Polyhedron & Dungeon was because "neither magazine can survive on it's own." By removing Polyhedron, now Dungeon can survive? By what means?? What has changed???




   Well, that decision and explanation was made by a different manager at a different company, as far as I recall. I was not privy to the sales data of Dungeon (as I was in charge of Pokemon at the time), but one major factor that has changed is the size of the company publishing the title. Large corporations like Wizards carry much larger overhead costs, and each business unit must share the load. What would be unprofitable (or profitable to such a small degree that it is not worth the effort) at WOTC, can actually do quite well for a company the size of Paizo. We also believe that the changes we're making to Dungeon will actually bring a much larger portion of the D&D market to the magazine--bringing it even greater success.



> 2. You're removing the Polyhedron pages from Dungeon. What happens to the price point? You are quick to mention numerous times that the content in Dragon will not change. But it has been asked repeatedly about Dungeon - no answer. Am I paying the same price for less content?? I'm getting 3 adventures now, 3 after the change. But I've lost the Polyhedron pages!!




   Dungeon magazine will remain at $6.99. I'm not actually ducking the rest of this question, but I do want to have Erik fill in the details of what you'll be getting for that same price, as he can be more specific in his response.



> +. What is your support going to be on Star Wars? d20 Modern? d20 Future?? Those. are. settings. too.




   I agree. Those are settings, too--and ones with passionate followings. However, in order to build for the highest growth and long-term health of our business, we need to deliver quality magazines that meet the needs of the largest segment of our audience. In short, we need to deliver what the majority of the market wants. We currently do not have any plans to suppor Star Wars, d20 Modern, or d20 Future. It's not a satisfying answer, I know. But it's the honest one.



> I'm not worring about Dragon #324. It is what it always is since the beginning. Feats, Prc's, Monsters, Magic Items, Characters, Races, Settings, Min-Maxinging, (crunchy bits).......
> 
> The jury is out on Dungeon #114. And your answers.




   Well, I do hope that you enjoy what Erik Mona, James Jacobs, and Sean Glenn have put together for the "new" Dungeon. They are each tremendously talented and passionate about Dungeon, and D&D specifically. What they have built is truly an exceptional periodical. I look forward to your feedback once you've had a chance to see 114.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## Karl Green (May 15, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> Keith Strohm
> Vice President
> Paizo Publishing, LLC




Well, I guess I am one of the silent you LOVE the Dung/Poly but oh well, people bitch and complained and that is who you have to listen to 

I will give it a try but I am not sure I will continue picking it up. Not that big a deal I am sure, and I don't want to bitch, just my thoughts.


----------



## BSF (May 15, 2004)

Drengy said:
			
		

> Finally, to those who would cancel or not subscribe - an entire year subscription to each of these mags is $45. Not much more than a one hardcover gaming book, and there's lots more useful info in a year of magazines than even the best hardcover book (except for the 3 core books of course). Put another way $45 / 12 months = $3.75 per month. Less than a single lunch, half a movie, or one large specialty coffee drink from Starbucks. If you are truly a fan of the hobby how can you justify *not* having subscriptions?





Maybe because I don't remember actually using one single thing from the last 8-9 issues of Dragon that I have?   I expect that sometime in the next 6 months, I will actually be bored enough to try to read most of the last 3 issues.  But, I'm not in a hurry.  

By contrast, I am still getting use out of Portals and Planes, Manual of the Planes, and a host of other books.  I am excited by my recent purchase of the Psychic's Handbook and have been integrating it into my game.  I like a Magical Society:  Ecology and Culture.  I am eagerly awaiting both the Immortal's Handbook and Steam and Steel on the PDF front.  

It's not that Dragon, or Dungeon, is a bad magazine.  But, I find myself referring to Dragon magazines that 2-23 years old more than I have for issues that are less than 2 years old.  For the older articles, part of the appeal has a lot to do with memories and nostalgia.  Well, that and those gems from the past that I remember reading and having a gestalt moment.  Sometimes, I want to brush up on the moment of insight on how I can make my game better.  I'm not that interested in new PrC's.  I create my own.  I'm not that interested in alternate builds to core classes.  (Urban Druid?  It's not to my taste.)  

I want to see more content for D20 games.  I used to love Ares, even when it published Marvel Superhero characters.  I want Open Game content, and articles that sometimes deal with other games.  I want wacky cross-genre ideas and scenarios.  Maybe I won't use it, but then again, maybe I will.  In short, I'm looking for more diversity when they are pulling in to focus.  It sounds like Paizo needs to do that, and that's great that they are able to recognize it.  I hope it helps strengthen the industry.  Down the road, things may swing outward again and they will need to shift toward more diversity.  I will still be here.  I've been here for 24 years, and I hope to be here for another 24.  Heck, I will only be 58 in another 24 years.  But, if I know that very little of the content is going to appeal to me, how can I justify a subscription?  I will still see it on the shelves.  I will still read about articles on the messageboards.  When they have something that piques my interest, I can buy it then.  But otherwise, I will spend my money on other gaming resources.  Mostly sourcebooks.


----------



## Alzrius (May 15, 2004)

BardStephenFox said:
			
		

> But, I find myself referring to Dragon magazines that 2-23 years old more than I have for issues that are less than 2 years old.  For the older articles, part of the appeal has a lot to do with memories and nostalgia.




Subscribe to the magazines now so you can read them again twenty years later and keep getting that nostalgic high!


----------



## BSF (May 15, 2004)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> Subscribe to the magazines now so you can read them again twenty years later and keep getting that nostalgic high!




I've thought about that!  But, in the end, I look at it like this.  For all those nostalgic highs, I have still opened my 1st ed Monster Manual II and my 1st ed Fiend Folio more than any issue of Dragon in the last couple of years.  Heck, I've opened up my old HERO/Champions books more than old issues of Dragon.  In the last 5 years, I have probably pulled out Paranoia and Car Wars about as often as I have old issues of Dragon.  I would rather pick up a new game, or sourcebook than to hope I will find a gem in an old issue of Dragon 20 years from now.


----------



## Arani Korden (May 15, 2004)

Eric Anondson said:
			
		

> It's the hip thing. Shred your clothes as you wail at how you have been wronged. You are not demonstrating the appropriate level of obnoxious narcissism and lack of perspective so characteristic of too many posts in this thread.




Have I missed something?  I think the Poly crowd in this thread have been pretty restrained, especially in the face of all the "I dance on Polyhedron's grave" posts.


----------



## Vexed (May 15, 2004)

Corinth said:
			
		

> Dragon = The PHB magazine
> 
> Dungeon = The DMG magazine
> 
> This is how it ought to be, and I'm glad to see that it shall be that way.  Good going.



-----------------
I agree completely! The content of the magazine should focus on DnD.  That is what it says on the front cover of the mag.  

My condolences to the Poly fans.  But, its a long time coming.


----------



## WayneLigon (May 15, 2004)

I'm very pleased with what I've heard so far; I bought a 3-years sub to both magazines when 3E first came out, and I've renewed for another three. I really will miss some of the Polyhedron content and the mini-game content but I certainly understand the reasoning behind it. I'd also like to thank Keith for posting this announcement, then answering queries as well. It really shows what a great forum we have here


----------



## Laslo Tremaine (May 15, 2004)

Arani Korden said:
			
		

> Have I missed something?  I think the Poly crowd in this thread have been pretty restrained, especially in the face of all the "I dance on Polyhedron's grave" posts.




Maybe it just shows how mature and restrained the Poly fans are. Or maybe it just shows that we knew it was coming eventually.

I for one think that it makes lots of sense to make Dragon the player's magazine and Dungeon the DM's magazine.  I'll be interested to see how things work out and will be looking forward to the remainder of my subscription to Dungeon (assuming I actually get any issues, since I re-subscribed, I think I got the first one, but not the last two  ).

That being said; Polyhedron (and its mini-games) were _by far_ my favorite things about Dungeon and the reason why I subscribed.  I was greatly dissapointed when Dungeon went monthly and reduced the Poly content.  Now that they are cutting Poly all together, I will let the reamainder of my subscription run, and will be suprised if I renew it again...

  :\


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (May 15, 2004)

Arani Korden said:
			
		

> Have I missed something?




Yeah, I wasn't directing at any category of subscriber or allegedly potential subscriber, other than exactly what I said.  I have no stand in the discussion, other than to make fun of everyone with over-heated rhetoric towards Paizo over this. 


Regards,
Eric Anondson


----------



## Acid_crash (May 15, 2004)

Ya guys at Paizo know what, you guys bite.  First you all take away Star Wars Gamer and PROMISE that you'll have great coverage of that game in Polyhedron.  Broken.  You guys PROMISED more Polyhedron coverage with all of your announces over the last year.  Broken.  Now, you guys wont' cover any of that at all.  You are not getting my money for Dungeon.  Polyhedron was THE reason why I bought those magazines, and after three years of having all those cool bits, it's all back to boring old fantasy.  God, this sucks.

AS for Dragon, I like those changes, so I'll keep buying that one.


----------



## Zaukrie (May 15, 2004)

Keith and Erik, thanks for taking the time to discuss this with us. Since I just re-upped for Dragon, I'll certainly give it a 12 month test run  

As for Dungeon, I currently don't have an active game, but when I do, I'm much more likely to buy this magazine.  If the articles are good enough, I may even buy it without an active game.


----------



## NewLifeForm (May 15, 2004)

*Long One...A Bit Ranty...But Not Much*

I will begin by agreeing with the majority of the people who have posted so far. I say good luck to Paizo with this new direction. Logically, it sounds like the best approach for them at this time.

That said...

With the 30th Anniversery of D&D and the 28th Anniversery of Dragon this year, I find myself thinking nostalgically about both, and coming to the conclusion that I shall not see Draon's heyday again for some time...  

In the dim and distant past, Dragon Magazine had articles about...<gasp>...other games!    You could find ideas for Traveller and Champions within those mighty pages. The Polyhedron section of Dungeon still connected me to that time. With the Poly section of Dungeon departing, I certainly have little reason to purchase it in the future. No Star Wars, No Mini-Games, No thank you.

Dragon just has not interested me very much in the last year or so. After gaming for as long as I have, I look at most articles and simply think "this subject again?" The latest issue of Dragon covered 30 years of D&D history - very cool -, but then had an article on Dragon PCs (Between Dragon Magazine and house rules I've been seeing that since the early to mid eighties-and do we really need to push this into a game that has enough trouble with power gamers and balance as it is).

I'm going to give each mag's new format a few issues. It would be unfair not to. They will have to really wow me though. These days, with the internet and all the ideas and supplement material I can get for free, I may start to cut out a resource that, as much as it dismays me to say so, I really just don't use.

AD


----------



## C. Baize (May 15, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> I agree. Those are settings, too--and ones with passionate followings. However, in order to build for the highest growth and long-term health of our business, we need to deliver quality magazines that meet the needs of the largest segment of our audience. In short, we need to deliver what the majority of the market wants. We currently do not have any plans to suppor Star Wars, d20 Modern, or d20 Future. It's not a satisfying answer, I know. But it's the honest one.
> 
> Keith Strohm
> Vice President
> Paizo Publishing, LLC




Well. The candor is appreciated... but to give a little analogy... a stoked fire burns better, longer, and more satisfyingly in the long run. 

That being said, I know that in the 21st century it's all about *right now!* We can't realistically expect a company to look to the long term, rather to snatch what they can, and eventually dump the product when they feel they've squeezed as much profit as they can out of it.
And, no. I'm not hacking on a corporation for wanting to make money. It's what they're there for. I know this. I simply lament the days that a company would look past the profits at the end of TODAY, and instead look at how to increase those profits TOMORROW by supporting a dynamic and exciting new product...
Ah well.
Polyhedron will be missed.


----------



## Dragonblade (May 15, 2004)

I certainly understand the reasons, but I'm sad to see Polyhedron go. I may not renew my Dungeon subscription.

That said, I have an idea to save Polyhedron. Why don't you get rid of the fiction in Dragon and replace those pages with Polyhedron info?

Does anyone actually read the fiction in Dragon? I never read it. Its a waste of space. I would much rather have Polyhedron take up those pages.


----------



## tetsujin28 (May 15, 2004)

I haven't bought an issue of Dragon in more than 20 years, and unfortunately, I don't see anything to make me change my mind. Too bad.


----------



## Ranger REG (May 15, 2004)

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> That said, I have an idea to save Polyhedron. Why don't you get rid of the fiction in Dragon and replace those pages with Polyhedron info?



Because then those avid _Dragon_ readers of today -- unlike yesteryears -- will be offended and will flood Paizo with the same abusive emails that _Dungeon_ readers have done.

It's been a very long time since the *ARES* section (whose format is to support non-_D&D_ games like _Marvel Super-Heroes_ and _Traveller_) used to grace the pages of _Dragon_ in its early days (the 80's). But _Dragon_ readers wants _D&D_ material, even though the debate rages on to the magazine's "official" status.


----------



## tetsujin28 (May 15, 2004)

Dragonblade said:
			
		

> That said, I have an idea to save Polyhedron. Why don't you get rid of the fiction in Dragon and replace those pages with Polyhedron info?
> 
> Does anyone actually read the fiction in Dragon? I never read it. Its a waste of space. I would much rather have Polyhedron take up those pages.



Bad fiction is a Dragon tradition. It would be like, I dunno, covering other games or something to get rid of it.

Yep, I'm a grumpy old man *grumble grumble*


----------



## EB3 (May 16, 2004)

Too bad.

Dragon - not subscribing.  Won't start.

Dungeon - Currently subscribing, and have been disappointed by poor recent  Poly "content", general poor quality/non-useful dungeons, incedibly late shipping (i.e. its in stores LONG before I get the mailed version).  I get the feeling that Paizo was intentionally hosing the Poly content (no facts, just a feeling).  Considering the scope of D20, it is unbelievable that Polyhedron couldn't continue to find an audience - even if it just did adventures for existing WOTC D20 products (CoC, Wheel of Time, D20 Modern, etc).  

Will cease subscribing.  Why?  The quality of dungeons are too variable.  By my count, in the last year less than half the issues aren't worth buying for the adventure content alone.  More pointedly, issues are in the stores before I get it (and I do NOT live on the Moon) - a REAL problem for a "publishing company."


----------



## jwdh71 (May 16, 2004)

*Oh Well.... :-(*

Well, there goes Dungeon for me, as the ONLY reason I picked it up at all was for Polyhedron. I haven't used a published adventure for D&D in 20 years, as most did not adapt well to my DM style, the world I run, or the style that my players prefer. The Polyhedron Mini-games gave me inspiration for side adventures to run, when we reached break points in our continuing campaign, and these little side adventures were always a lot of fun. I tend now to play more D20 than D&D, so the loss of D20 coverage is a double whammy. If in the future Paizo adds D20 coverage to one of its magazines, or adds a new one to cover the D20 world more completely, I will pick it up, but with this news I fear that both Paizo and my local game store (where I used to buy both Dragon and Dungeon/Polyhedron) are not going to be seeing my money for the near future.


----------



## Mouseferatu (May 16, 2004)

Well, I had just decided to let my Dungeon subscription lapse before this announcement. But I have officially resubscribed.

I didn't have any problem with the notion of Polyhedron; it just very rarely appealed to me personally. I do play almost exclusively D&D (or at least fantasy D20), so very few of the mini-games provided me with much. The notion of replacing that space with DM-oriented articles appeals to me.

I do feel sorry for the Poly fans, and I was certainly not one of those calling for its removal. That said, I know that I'm happier (at least hypothetically) with the announced new format than the old.

On a related topc...

Since Paizo is launching a new run of Amazing Stories, surely the fiction in Dragon can go away? After all, AS is devoted largely to fiction. That would permit space in Dragon for either more D&D stuff or a single Ares-style article per issue covering something else in the D20 universe. I know that I, despite my fantasy-centric focus, wouldn't mind either.

I'd also like to second (third? fourth?) the call for more Open Content in Dragon and Dungeon. I'm not suggesting that Paizo release anything that's WotC's property, but surely it would do nobody any harm to allow the new feats/PrCs/monsters/races/core classes/spells/items into the stream of Open Game material? Given how long a specific issue is on the shelves, I can't imagine that doing so could possibly hurt sales. Sure, it won't boost sales much either, but it might boost them a _little_--and it would _certainly_ provide for more goodwill in the industry, and when that can be done without harming the bottom line, it's never a bad thing.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (May 16, 2004)

Arani Korden said:
			
		

> Have I missed something?  I think the Poly crowd in this thread have been pretty restrained, especially in the face of all the "I dance on Polyhedron's grave" posts.



 I noticed this, too. I LOVED Star Wars Gamer. Great magazine that we lost...it was sad, but we got some content in Poly. Now we lose Poly...*sigh*

Part of my problem is people here seem to have screamed and raged so much from the Anti-Poly side that those of us on the other(who have been a bit quieter) just don't get any credit. I wonder how people would feel if this went the other way, and Dungeon was cancelled to let Poly live on its own...


----------



## d20Dwarf (May 16, 2004)

tetsujin28 said:
			
		

> I haven't bought an issue of Dragon in more than 20 years, and unfortunately, I don't see anything to make me change my mind. Too bad.



You say this as if it matters. 

My point is that someone who hasn't bought an issue in 20 years (essentially has never bought an issue) isn't likely to start anytime soon anyway, unless something changes on *their* end, not with the magazine.


----------



## Vigilance (May 16, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Since Paizo is launching a new run of Amazing Stories, surely the fiction in Dragon can go away? After all, AS is devoted largely to fiction. That would permit space in Dragon for either more D&D stuff or a single Ares-style article per issue covering something else in the D20 universe. I know that I, despite my fantasy-centric focus, wouldn't mind either.




Noooooooo surely that would elicit another round of whining, letter-writing, and all around gnashing of teeth. A *non fantasy article*?

Gasp.

Obvious those of us who appreciate different genres should respond like this crowd. I should have canceled my subscription and started posting daily, along with emails, the FIRST time Poly page count dropped.


----------



## JeffB (May 16, 2004)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I wonder how people would feel if this went the other way, and Dungeon was cancelled to let Poly live on its own...




Well, I cancelled my sub when it went to "more poly" so AFAIC Dungeon was cancelled when the dungeons got leaner and fewer per issue.

That said I didn't mind the D20 content (other than the majority of the mini-games), but when it started to interfere with Dungeon content, it was time to vote w/ my $.

While I sympathize with the poly fans (or especially the SW Gamer fans, lovedthat mag), it seems Paizo is simply returning to the original focus of the what the magazine always has been about until a couple of years ago...D&D adventures. For that I'm thankful.

I don't think the anti-poly people are whiners, it's simply the fact that Dungeon went off on a tangent w/ Poly when the format had not changed  since 1986 or whatever. You really cannot expect people to just say "OK...I'll take this other stuff I'll never use in exchange for material I will use in some capacity". And of course I suspect most of the big Poly fans were not fans of Dungeon previously. When the magazine shifted in thier (poly fans) favor, they were happy, but in the end Paizo only peed off the majority of fans the magazine had garnered for 15 years plus. 

If I bought Field & Stream for however many years, and all of sudden half the page count each month was dedicated to mountain biking, I'd be a little peeved. 

Not arguing mind you..just thinking out loud


----------



## BryonD (May 16, 2004)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I noticed this, too. I LOVED Star Wars Gamer. Great magazine that we lost...it was sad, but we got some content in Poly. Now we lose Poly...*sigh*
> 
> Part of my problem is people here seem to have screamed and raged so much from the Anti-Poly side that those of us on the other(who have been a bit quieter) just don't get any credit. I wonder how people would feel if this went the other way, and Dungeon was cancelled to let Poly live on its own...



Now that several people have claimed this, I'll just chime in that it must be completely in the eye of the beholder.

Back when the pro-poly change was first annouced I said the same type things: "good luck to you all, but this isn't what I want so I will not buy."
The ranting and childish garbage spewed from the pro-poly side was plentiful.

I've never been anti-poly any more than I have been anti-good housekeeping.  I just don't want to buy either.  So I am not dancing on anyone's grave.  I AM dancing in the recovery room because Dungeon just came out of a two year coma.  

Lastly, the implication that this change is a result of louder voices is questionable.  The reasoning clearly stated that the magazine LOST READERSHIP.  If they were bringing in more money, they would keep doing it, regardless of who was screaming or how loud.

Poly may get to live on its own in the new version of ENWorld magazine.  Best of luck to the effort.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (May 16, 2004)

Just a note, I don't mind the change on one end. I play D&D and make use of Dungeon and Dragon all the time. This just means more use for them in my D&D games.

Just dissapointed about losing Star Wars content...again.


----------



## DaveMage (May 16, 2004)

I know it has been said before in the thread, but I *really* want to thank the Paizo folks for not only contributing to the thread, but for their responses to those that disagree with the changes.

It's quite bold of you to do that, and I think you are handling it in a very professional manner.

Kudos to all.


----------



## MrCharm (May 16, 2004)

*Thanks!*

Paizo Guys,

Thanks for the information, and your dedication in making sure we all understand the situation.  

I think one thing remains unanswered:  Why can't most, if not all game mechanic content in Dragon/Dungeon be OGL?


Thanks, in advance for the answer.


----------



## Vocenoctum (May 16, 2004)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Lastly, the implication that this change is a result of louder voices is questionable.  The reasoning clearly stated that the magazine LOST READERSHIP.  If they were bringing in more money, they would keep doing it, regardless of who was screaming or how loud.
> 
> Poly may get to live on its own in the new version of ENWorld magazine.  Best of luck to the effort.



My opinion, but it was something like this:
Dungeon got Poly added/ Poly got Dungeon added.
Neither side was happy, but Poly folks sighed and continued enjoying their excellent content and putting up with Dungeon.
Dungeon guys canceled subscriptions because they weren't getting enough Dungeon.

Now, Poly folks will leave the magazine en masse, and we'll see if the dungeon fella's return in sufficient numbers to balance that out. I think you might also see some fence sitters like myself that liked BOTH, some of them will also leave as the content they've come to love is gone.

So, in short, Poly readers put up with the split issues, but Dungeon readers didn't. Dungeon readers were more vocal because of that, while most "pro-poly" folks simply said "we like it as is" and the vast majority probably never sent in info. You'll see more complainer's than content customers in any situation.

As I said, I'll buy the magazine based on what I see in the magazine. I don't buy it for "D&D content" or "Poly content" but for content I can use and enjoy.


----------



## Vocenoctum (May 16, 2004)

MrCharm said:
			
		

> Why can't most, if not all game mechanic content in Dragon/Dungeon be OGL?




It was mentioned that they didn't see a need for it, but in addition, I'd say because some day Wizards may use some of the material. They've done it before, and will most likely make some stuff OGL, but it's usually for a specific reason.

Heck, are any of the licensed products (Kalamar, Ravenloft, Gamma World) OGL?


----------



## BryonD (May 16, 2004)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> My opinion, but it was something like this:
> Dungeon got Poly added/ Poly got Dungeon added.




Fair enough.

Was POLY ever a "real" magazine in the same manner as Dungeon?  I thought it was a RGPA benefit before joining Dungeon.

What subscriptions did Poly people have to cancel?


----------



## Keith F Strohm (May 16, 2004)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> I know it has been said before in the thread, but I *really* want to thank the Paizo folks for not only contributing to the thread, but for their responses to those that disagree with the changes.
> 
> It's quite bold of you to do that, and I think you are handling it in a very professional manner.
> 
> Kudos to all.




   DaveMage,

   Thanks for your kind words. Being as open and honest as I can be is something I did when we announced the launch D&D 3rd Edition and it's sort of stuck with me throughout my career.

    Lisa Stevens feels the same way, and Erik and Matt have always been willing to "peel back the layers" and give you guys the truth.

   It is nice to get positive responses because of it. That's really not why we do it, but it's nice nonetheless.

Keith Strohm
Vice President
Paizo Publishing, LLC


----------



## EricNoah (May 16, 2004)

This is a tough situation for everyone.  There's no solution that can please everyone, unfortunately.  

My own experience has been that Dragon has been used less by me in recent years; we've gone so far in the "toolbox" direction over the past few years that it often seems like a magazine full of gadgets with little connect between them.  Sometimes I do get some interesting material (new critters are better than new classes).  

Dungeon has always been entertaining -- I love seeing the pieces put together, and I love maps and illustrations.  Poly was interesting even though I never used any of it -- it was a valiant effort.  I will be interested to see how Dungeon develops as the DM's magazine because usually that's the sort of material I find interesting.


----------



## jaerdaph (May 16, 2004)

Content removed after a good night's sleep.


----------



## Vocenoctum (May 16, 2004)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Fair enough.
> 
> Was POLY ever a "real" magazine in the same manner as Dungeon?  I thought it was a RGPA benefit before joining Dungeon.
> 
> What subscriptions did Poly people have to cancel?




I believe it was the Official RGPA magazine, yeah.
For myself, I never subbed to either magazine individually, I bought them as a combo. The variety meant there was usually something (on one or both sides) that I liked.


----------



## Samothdm (May 16, 2004)

Keith, I asked a question on Page 5 but it seemed to have gotten buried in my "pro-Wil Wheaton" post.  

Anyway, since Dragon is now just player material and Dungeon is just for DMs, but about articles like "Campaign Components" (such as Knights, Swashbucklers, Spies) that had content for both players and DMs?  How will these articles be handled in the future?  They are one of my favorites and I always read them when they're in the magazine.  

I'll also add that I'd like to see more OGC in Dragon.  I've never really understood why Wizards started the license and then almost never contributes to it (with the exception of Unearthed Arcana and of course the SRD).

Thanks for answering all of the posts and criticisms.  I'm not happy with a lot of the changes you've mentioned, but given how often Dragon has changed over the years since I've been reading (around issue #72), I expect that it will change again in the next few years anyway.  

On another note, someone up above needs to switch to decaf.


----------



## jokamachi (May 16, 2004)

Keith,

I have a question regarding Living Greyhawk. Will the absence of Polyhedron in Dungeon allow for more frequent installments of Greyhawk material such as the LGJ?

Thanks,

jokamachi


----------



## storyguide3 (May 16, 2004)

Samothdm said:
			
		

> Anyway, since Dragon is now just player material and Dungeon is just for DMs, but about articles like "Campaign Components" (such as Knights, Swashbucklers, Spies) that had content for both players and DMs?  How will these articles be handled in the future?  They are one of my favorites and I always read them when they're in the magazine.




From what Keith said a few pages ago, the Player/DM split is not absolute. To quote from his earlier post


> Dragon will still have material that will be useful to DMs, but Dungeon will become even more focused on providing DMs the tools (advice, crunchy bits, and, of course, the adventures) they need to provide an awesome experience for everyone involved in their game.


----------



## tarchon (May 16, 2004)

Aren't... aren't those pretty much the same things that have always been in Dragon?


----------



## Teflon Billy (May 16, 2004)

I've not bought *Dungeon* in awhile, but the inclusion of _Wil Save_ will get me to buy it regularly.

Now, I hated the character of Wesley Crusher as much as anyone, but judging by his Blog, his interviews and the reports of people I know who know him, Wil Wheaton is a super-cool guy.

No, he's better than Super-Cool, he's super-cool and he is _one of us_.

Check out HIS BLOGand see if you don't agree with me.

Good job Paizo


----------



## Henry (May 16, 2004)

C. Baize said:
			
		

> ...I simply lament the days that a company would look past the profits at the end of TODAY, and instead look at how to increase those profits TOMORROW by supporting a dynamic and exciting new product...
> Ah well.
> Polyhedron will be missed.




Actually, they profit-hunted back then, too - but given the turn-around demanded in business cycles now versus 20 years ago, businesses don't have time to invest in growing a product. Heck, look at the turnaround time for Network Television in the 2000's - if it's not a hit within 4 shows, it gets pulled! 

I do wait with interest to see the changes. One thing that has hallmarked my Dungeon and Dragon mag purchases of late was picking them up, leafing through them, and putting them back down. The amount of interesting topic in them was choked off by YET MORE prestige classes, YET MORE feats, YET MORE adventures where the plot was almost transparent in a desire to appeal as generically as possible. For instance, after the third or fourth "Cauldron" adventure path module, that series became like so many other small-press and 1990's series modules with forced paths and simplified endings that I found very little of use to me. Great start, but it couldn't hold my interest further in.

More feats, classes, and weapons are not useful to me. Articles like "Campaign Components" with the Swashbucklers, and Chivalric organizations, etc. were useful to me. SO I'll still be evaluating case by case - I'm just hoping I'll see more than I've been seeing this month.


----------



## Leopold (May 16, 2004)

Poly was useles..thank god for it's depature. Been asking for that since day 1 since it merged. Make it web content for crying out loud! Put it in the magazine where people who subscribe can go there. 

low medium high? Now that is something useful. I can use that. I can do stuff with that. One mag to take my players from level 1-15. Now if they could tie them all together somehow! Heck that would be spectacular!


----------



## Graf (May 16, 2004)

I just wanted to chime in indicating my support.
(A meaningless gesture I suppose but given that the page count is 11 I'm not so worried about the noise ratio).

The poly mini-games were, at times, shockingly brilliant. Both the most recent ones that I recall (trapped in a video game and Hi-jinks) were never going to see the light of day with my group; but they were very stimulating from a system perspective.

I'm also cautious about the changes to dragon. More crunch sounds like a wretched thing. But I have to admit that as a DM I find myself refering more and recent dragons. The last 5 issues see more combined use than the prior 10 and a lot of articles that seemed banal when I first looked at them (cassed were-creatures and the scrying magic items) have turned out to be extremely useful in my last game. 

So you still have my subscription. Good luck.


----------



## Welverin (May 16, 2004)

I hate the loss of Poly, the rest of it I'll have to see first.



			
				Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Since people have to convert the proper nouns in a "generic" adventure anyway, we might as well make those proper nouns usable to a large number of our readers.




It also helps everyone who's converting them, it'll be easier to convert a consistent set of names than a new set for every adventure.


----------



## Graf (May 16, 2004)

I just wanted to chime in indicating my support.
(A meaningless gesture I suppose but given that the page count is 11 I'm not so worried about the noise ratio).

The poly mini-games were, at times, shockingly brilliant. Both the most recent ones that I recall (trapped in a video game and Hi-jinks) were never going to see the light of day with my group; but they were very stimulating from a system perspective.

I'm also cautious about the changes to dragon. More crunch sounds like a wretched thing. But I have to admit that as a DM I find myself refering more and recent dragons. The last 5 issues see more combined use than the prior 10 and a lot of articles that seemed banal when I first looked at them (cassed were-creatures and the scrying magic items) have turned out to be extremely useful in my last game. 

So you still have my subscription. Good luck.


----------



## Emirikol (May 16, 2004)

Paizo people:

Dragon: Thanks
Dungeon:  Thanks even more

Another touch of feedback:  Please get 'your-subscription-expires-on-issue X' on the mailing label

Thank you, thank you, thank you and great job.

Jay Hafner
Denver, CO USA


----------



## Ranger REG (May 16, 2004)

*Erik Mona:* For Your Eyes Only.

In the midst of this highly emotional discussion, I have forgotten to thank you. _Poly_ was the reason I started buying _Dungeon_ since 2002 because I wanted to be more than just a mere _D&D_ gamers. I want to see and believe that the very fundamental rules engine for _D&D Third Edition_ can be used in other genres besides fantasy. Because of your effort as an editor of the mini-games, I have never had such enjoyment as playing PULP HEROES, V IS FOR VICTORY, and MECHA CRUSADE. I have enjoyed the re-imagination of GAMMA WORLD (you dubbed it OMEGA WORLD) and SPELLJAMMER (without the complex information of phlogiston and crystal shells). Without your effort, _GeneTech_ (the fourth _d20 Modern_ campaign model) would not have been made public.

And through it all, you have endured an inconceivable amount of hate mails and abusive threats. Sometimes I feel like I should take your place in all of the abuses. But you have managed through it all.

For that, I thank you for believing in leaping forward and promoting _d20_ and _d20 Modern._ You have embraced the always-evolving change that is the _d20 System._ I'm sure that the minority of Wizards of the Coast RPG fanbase -- the ones that do believe in change -- feel the same way as I do.

Thanks for making that leap of faith.

Mahalo,
Ranger REG


----------



## mythusmage (May 16, 2004)

*Suggestion*

Make _Ares_ a weekly webzine, in the style of _Pyramid_ (Steve Jackson Games). Fresh content, a comic or two, plus news of the d20 industry. Be sure to include a subscriber only discussion forum. Keep it barebones graphics wise and focus on content. And since I'm talking about a d20 _Pyramid_ D), make playtest files available to subscribers and hold discussions thereon.

Where _Dragon_ and _Dungeon_ are concerned, more on setting and how character and setting interact would be nice. An Ultimate Accountant PR-C is nice, but would be much better if we knew what role the UAPR-C filled in a setting.


----------



## morbiczer (May 16, 2004)

*When will the change happen?*

Quick question. When (which month) will these new style Dragon and Dungeon Magazines come out?


----------



## Painfully (May 16, 2004)

Let us remember that they promised Dragon would be a D&D ONLY magazine.  The only drawback is that now it includes a minis game that holds almost no interest from most RP gamers because they could always get that level of combat in a D&D game without new rules, and it will still include the luke warm fiction that nobody I know would want to read.  Adding Poly to Dragon will only serve to upset even more readers/subscribers than in Dungeon.  

Paizo has lost touch with with the attractiveness behind the original release of Dungeon.  Adventures.  That's it.  Plain and simple, and every DM's necessity.  The addition of Will Wheaton in Dungeon makes no sense to me at all.  He could be the funniest guy on the planet, but he still doesn't belong in Dungeon.  Adventures belong in Dungeon.

If anybody can draw a line of reasoning that explains Will Wheaton's inclusion in Dungeon, feel free to enlighten me.  Really!  I want to hear any reasonable explanation outside of the fact he was an actor, or went to trekkie cons (those are hardly reasons to include him in Dungeon!).

Articles in Dungoen might sound cool, but articles are what I look for in Dragon.  I don't flip through my archive of Dungeons to find an article, and I don't want to start.  I suppose that makes me a Dungeon purist, but that is the magazine that I fell in love with since issue #1, and that's the Dungeon I want to subscribe to again if Paizo let's me.

What I think they should do, is bring back the special issues.  No, not the annuals--those were nothing but billboards.  I'm talking about the, "Best of" issues.  Every two-three years they should collect the best articles and reprint them in a special issue.  A, "Best of Polyhedron" would no doubt include the best minigames and satisfy many of their fans at least a little bit.  A new "Best of Dragon" could collect the best articles of 3rd edition up to the release of Eberron, and a "Best of Dungeon" could collect the adventure path in a single special issue.

I don't want any of the Poly fans to think the rest of us are rejoicing over their pain.  If Paizo only replaced Poly with articles and Will Wheaton, then I'm pretty sure I'm still not going to be happy about it, and still might hold back my subscription.  I want more adventures, or else I'll keep my wallet closed.

I would love to see a new messageboard (modeled after EN World?) that supports everything Poly would/should/could have done.  In fact, if Poly became a serious web-project, I know that Paizo could find MANY MANY volunteers here on EN World and from other messageboards.


----------



## tmaaas (May 16, 2004)

A big "thumb's up" on the proposed changes to Dungeon (all theoretical at this point, of course   ).

I personally like the idea of it becoming more than just adventures (even though this will be its core) and more of a DM's magazine. Dungeoncraft-style articles will suit me just fine.

I started subscribing to Dungeon with the Shackled City adventure path and have been very pleased. At this rate, I plan to get getting the magazine for quite some time to come.

Thanks!


----------



## tetsujin28 (May 16, 2004)

*shrug* They've just changed it to Dragon: The PH magazine and Dungeon: The DMG magazine. Kinda lame.


----------



## thundershot (May 16, 2004)

That's fine with me. I'm just glad they don't have a Monster Manual Magazine yet, or a d20 modern one, because I would buy them in a second. I was going to say it'd be nice to have the monster annuals back, but with the MM3 coming out in sept, we kinda already DO have an annual monster manual.


Chris (who feels better about the changes since the EN WORLD magazine should take care of what used to be in Poly)


----------



## Emirikol (May 16, 2004)

Painfully said:
			
		

> Paizo has lost touch with with the attractiveness behind the original release of Dungeon.  Adventures.
> ..
> Articles in Dungoen might sound cool, but articles are what I look for in Dragon.  I don't flip through my archive of Dungeons to find an article, and I don't want to start.
> ..
> What I think they should do, is bring back the special issues.  No, not the annuals--those were nothing but billboards.  I'm talking about the, "Best of" issues.




The original release of each of the magazines was not in touch with the future of RPGamers' tastes (how could it be?).  If you've been reading DUNGEON's forum since it's conception you'll see regular mail about people wanting it to be a DM's magazine.  They've also not lost touch with 'attractiveness' if it's been made  clear to them by the vast majority of gamers that they only want to pay for what they want, and not what they don't want.    I think that's the point of this whole deal isn't it?

You make a good point about 'articles' in DUngeon.  Perhaps they should focus on more 'chart&quick-flip' sorts of articles instead of a bunch of filler.  It's been clear forever that DM's don't like to have to sort through 'filler' to run a scenario, the same is probably true of any type of 'DM-Aide' articles.  It will be interesting to see how this whole deal turns out.  Will the articles be useful like DMG-style 'helper-applications' or will they be 10 page articles on the ecology of the Flumph (sorry Roger Moore) which are like trying to convert "DUNE" to a role-playing game 

"The Best of" concept is a bad one.  If you really want people paying for more of something they already have, have them pay for the SAME ADVENTURES a second time.  I'd rather just have them put a 'list' on their website allowing people to VOTE on what adventures were the best (graded according to several criteria and then averaged of course...).  Hey, these 5 adventures were the best according to 89 people that say so.  Here are the issues, here is the 'back issue order form if you don't already have them...  Grading the adventures is something that I did on my Complete Dungeon Index according to what the "Readers" wrote in the Forum/Jail-Mail sections.  They had talked about it before, but were expecting people to just write-in.  Well, simple 'polls' with 5 or so criteria and an average will be the best way.

Game on!

jh







..


----------



## Wormwood (May 16, 2004)

tetsujin28 said:
			
		

> *shrug* They've just changed it to Dragon: The PH magazine and Dungeon: The DMG magazine. Kinda lame.



Not to Wormwood: the Happy Subscriber.

The proposed changes sound fine, and I eagerly await them.


----------



## dpmcalister (May 16, 2004)

RIP Polyhedron. It was good while it lasted.

Sorry, but I haven't bought Dragon since before Paizo took over and I won't start now. Dungeon is useless to me (as I only bought it for the Poly bits), so that's some more lost sales.

In fact, at my local club, only 1 of us (and there's 17) buy either of the magazines on an even semi-regular basis. Might say something there...


----------



## Vocenoctum (May 16, 2004)

mythusmage said:
			
		

> Make _Ares_ a weekly webzine, in the style of _Pyramid_ (Steve Jackson Games). Fresh content, a comic or two, plus news of the d20 industry. Be sure to include a subscriber only discussion forum. Keep it barebones graphics wise and focus on content. And since I'm talking about a d20 _Pyramid_ D), make playtest files available to subscribers and hold discussions thereon.




There was a d20 Pyramid... it died.

I would rather they either do a new magazine (unlikely) or even print some stuff like FFG is doing with their line. (unlikely as well) A book dedicated to the minigame's is a good idea, though I haven't had a chance to play with any of the FFG stuff yet.

Oh, and the preview section sounds like a great idea. It'll be good for all those folks that aren't on ENWorld waiting for some retailer to post a copy of the quarterly catalog.


----------



## Richards (May 16, 2004)

Originally posted by Emirikol:







> Will the articles be useful like DMG-style 'helper-applications' or will they be 10 page articles on the ecology of the Flumph (sorry Roger Moore)



Quick hijack:  Roger Moore had nothing to do with "The Ecology of the Flumph."  If you're looking to blame someone for that, you need to look to Dave Gross, the _Dragon_ editor at the time, and more importantly, to me, for having written it.   

Point taken, though:  You're not looking for articles like "The Ecology of the Flumph" in _Dungeon_; perfectly understandable. 

End hijack.    

Johnathan


----------



## The_Universe (May 16, 2004)

I, as are several of the people here, am particularly disappointed that Poly is disappearing.  That was the entire reason I began subscribing to Dungeon, but ever since I began my subscription, Polyhedron content has been steadily decreasing.  Since I don't really run pre-written adventures, a magazine with no other content has reasonably less utility than Poly's minigames and D20 updates.  

I won't demand that I get my money back, or anything asinine like that...I'll just be a little disappointed.  Unless I am thrilled with the new Dungeon, I'll probably just let it lapse at the end of my subscription.  

The changes to Dragon are all right, but you seem to stealing a lot of Undefeated's thunder.  *shrugs*  In general, I think I'll like the changes to Dragon, but Dungeon is more than likely going to be a loss.


----------



## Emirikol (May 16, 2004)

I think the loss of Poly will encourage other companies to step up.  If there's a demand for it (as people demonstrate here), a 3rd party company should have no trouble getting a new magazine started and keeping it going.

Who knows, it might be great for the industry.  The existence of Poly may have been too hard to compete with.  Also, once d20 Future comes out, there will be a lot more non-fantasy stuff to work with too.

jh


----------



## BSF (May 16, 2004)

Emirikol said:
			
		

> You make a good point about 'articles' in DUngeon.  Perhaps they should focus on more 'chart&quick-flip' sorts of articles instead of a bunch of filler.  It's been clear forever that DM's don't like to have to sort through 'filler' to run a scenario, the same is probably true of any type of 'DM-Aide' articles.  It will be interesting to see how this whole deal turns out.  Will the articles be useful like DMG-style 'helper-applications' or will they be 10 page articles on the ecology of the Flumph (sorry Roger Moore) which are like trying to convert "DUNE" to a role-playing game




Material that would help put together quick adventures would be great to see.  Articles have to be brilliant, or focused, to appeal to me any longer.  I mean, if I am looking for DM advice, I can just as easily turn here and have a Q/A session.  Anything that can be quickly and easily "unbolted" and re-used in a game is good.  Yes, almost anything can be "unbolted" from an existing adventure.  However, ease of use is the key.  Sometimes it can simply be an issue of page formatting, which might not be easy to implement.   

On a side note, I liked some of the Ecology articles.  Not all of them, but some of them.  I also like articles that mix storytelling with game info.  I still have my cardboard cutout of a Deck of Many Things from Dragon (what was it, issue 148 or so?).  The accompanying article was fun to read.   (I also have my issue of Dungeon that came out at the same time with a Deck of Many Things.  but, when choosing between color or B/W, I wanted to use color.)  On the other hand, some of the Ecology articles were, well, unnecessary.



			
				Emirikol said:
			
		

> "The Best of" concept is a bad one.  If you really want people paying for more of something they already have, have them pay for the SAME ADVENTURES a second time.  I'd rather just have them put a 'list' on their website allowing people to VOTE on what adventures were the best (graded according to several criteria and then averaged of course...).  Hey, these 5 adventures were the best according to 89 people that say so.  Here are the issues, here is the 'back issue order form if you don't already have them...  Grading the adventures is something that I did on my Complete Dungeon Index according to what the "Readers" wrote in the Forum/Jail-Mail sections.  They had talked about it before, but were expecting people to just write-in.  Well, simple 'polls' with 5 or so criteria and an average will be the best way.
> 
> Game on!
> 
> jh




The "Best of" are not geared to appeal to the long-time subscribers.  Not unless those articles are so useful that you need them in a quick reference.  The "Best of" issues were geared toward the people that are recent additions to the hobby/magazine.  

Therein lies the problem.  It is an even smaller market than the existing subscriber base.  I suspect it is difficult to justify the "Best of" anthology when you know that even fewer people will pick it up than for a regular issue.  But, years ago, it was one way that Dragon might have won new subscribers.  Nowadays, putting some of the "Best of" content on the website might be much more effective at bringing in new subscribers.

As for a listing of articles point to issues, it is a good idea, to a point.  The issues with the best articles are probably the ones with the least backstock as it is.  So, it might be a good way for Paizo to eliminate some of the backstock (which is what a company needs to do), but once you have done that the polls now point at articles that you can't buy issues for.  You can't very well pull the poll and still keep it as "Best Articles", and you risk creating a level of frustration that might not be helpful.  

It would be far better to have a listing of the articles with a brief description for each magazine.  Heck, contact one of the people that has compiled these things here on the web/EN World and ask them to use their existing compilation.  Heck, offer them a subscription to keep it updated.  Post it on the Paizo site and make that the definitive reference for information about the magazine.  

One of the problems, as I see it, is that many of us would love to see more trickle out content in the same way that we see small updates to the WotC site.  But, Paizo is a smaller company and I suspect they run much tighter and leaner, with a monthly publication schedule.  While people that loved Polyhedron would love to see a semi-monthly publication of a minigame, can Paizo realistically put one out?  For Free?  And would you be willing to fork over money for a mini-game, sight unseen, if they put it as a purchasable option on the site?  

Paizo is trying to keep the company healthy.  Right now, they are approaching that in the best way they can.  Hopefully, these changes will help bring in more customers.  As I have said earlier in the thread, I am probably not the core demographic for them right now.  It would be great if they could appeal to me and cater to market demands, but that doesn't look to be the case.  I don't begrudge that to them because I recognize that my tastes might not reflect what a majority of customers want.  My tastes will change, market demands will change, the magazines will change.


----------



## Grazzt (May 16, 2004)

morbiczer said:
			
		

> Quick question. When (which month) will these new style Dragon and Dungeon Magazines come out?




Per Paizo's website:

"Look for the new Dragon and Dungeon to be unveiled August 2004 (issue #323 for Dragon and issue #114 for Dungeon), and both magazines will now have a cover price of $6.99."

http://www.paizo.com/news/pressreleases/20040514_dnd_unleashed.shtml


----------



## morbiczer (May 16, 2004)

Grazzt said:
			
		

> Per Paizo's website:
> 
> "Look for the new Dragon and Dungeon to be unveiled August 2004 (issue #323 for Dragon and issue #114 for Dungeon), and both magazines will now have a cover price of $6.99."
> 
> http://www.paizo.com/news/pressreleases/20040514_dnd_unleashed.shtml




Thanks. Sad to hear that the price for Dragon will increase.


----------



## dreaded_beast (May 16, 2004)

I know it's been said before, but they deserve to hear it.

Thanks Paizo and crew for your honesty and willing to communicate your intentions to the public as well as taking the time to answer questions and respond to concerns.

Although I will be missing Polyhedron, I look forward to most of the upcoming changes in Dungeon and Dragon. I wish there could be a bit more adventures in Dragon though.

Good Luck.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (May 16, 2004)

Emirikol said:
			
		

> I think the loss of Poly will encourage other companies to step up.  If there's a demand for it (as people demonstrate here), a 3rd party company should have no trouble getting a new magazine started and keeping it going.
> 
> Who knows, it might be great for the industry.  The existence of Poly may have been too hard to compete with.  Also, once d20 Future comes out, there will be a lot more non-fantasy stuff to work with too.
> 
> jh



 But that doesn't do a single thing for Star Wars d20 since it isn't OGC.


----------



## Sernett (May 16, 2004)

MrCharm said:
			
		

> I think one thing remains unanswered:  Why can't most, if not all game mechanic content in Dragon/Dungeon be OGL?




We understand that printing OGL content would be helpful for d20 authors and players who like to post campaign info online, but making the content of the magazines open creates more risk than benefits for the magazines. The magazines don't need to print OGL content like a second party d20 producer because we have a special license from Wizards of the Coast. Thus, our decision about OGL content is based on what it might do for the magazines and what Wizards of the Coast wants. 

The benefit to the magazines of having open content is that we might pick up a small number of subscriptions or newsstand sales from the folks who refuse to buy the magazine because they like to collect d20 content and post it online for their player's use or because they want to use it in their d20 freelance writing. The risk to the magazine is that someone regularly posts the magaine's contents online shortly after the magazine's release, potentially hurting newstand and subscription sales, and that back issue sales would drop because folks can find the material posted on the web. So we're weighing the potential gain of a few sales against the potential loss of many sales. Good arguments have been made on both sides of the issue, but the end result is that the benefit to the magazines doesn't seem great enough to outweigh our concerns.

Also, Wizards of the Coast owns all the content produced in the magazines (with some exceptions made for certain fiction authors), and Wizards of the Coast often takes game elements from the magazines and puts them in its products. I can't speak to why Wizards of the Coast doesn't produce more open content. I suspect they've analyzed the market and make decisions based on that research. But in any event, they see the magazines as resources, a fact that would be diminished if the content has been posted online or picked up in d20 products. Being a valued and respected resource for Wizards of the Coast is important for the magazines' continued success.


----------



## Staffan (May 16, 2004)

Sernett said:
			
		

> The risk to the magazine is that someone regularly posts the magaine's contents online shortly after the magazine's release, potentially hurting newstand and subscription sales, and that back issue sales would drop because folks can find the material posted on the web.



You could always talk to WOTC and find out if they think making Unearthed Arcana almost completely open hurt those sales. That could be an indicator of how it would work for Paizo as well.


----------



## Sernett (May 16, 2004)

*Too much crunch in Dragon?*

A few people have mentioned their dissatisfaction with Dragon because of its "tool kit" approach and for having too much "crunch" versus "flavor" or "fluff." Also, a couple posts from readers of old issues mention that they find articles from those issues more useful, or that they refer to those articles a lot.

Please check out issue #323 and see if it suits you. The new Dragon stirkes a better balance between new rules and inspirational material.

Also, let us know the kinds of articles you want to see in Dragon and the ones that have been useful to you over the years by sending an email to scalemail.com. That goes for everyone reading this thread. We love to hear what readers want; we make business decisions based on that feedback. We can't make good decisions without your help.

If you liked issues from 20 years ago better than what you see now, email us and tell us which articles were most useful to you and why. If you found articles in the last 5 issues more helpful than those in the 10 before, let us know what worked and why it worked for you. But please send an email to scalemail@paizo.com rather than posting to this thread. I don't want to hijack it with comments about Dragon articles.

Thanks!


----------



## rowport (May 16, 2004)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I noticed this, too. I LOVED Star Wars Gamer. Great magazine that we lost...it was sad, but we got some content in Poly. Now we lose Poly...*sigh*
> 
> Part of my problem is people here seem to have screamed and raged so much from the Anti-Poly side that those of us on the other(who have been a bit quieter) just don't get any credit. I wonder how people would feel if this went the other way, and Dungeon was cancelled to let Poly live on its own...




Allow my "me too" on this one.  Honestly, while I hope that I am wrong, I am really wondering whether in fact the All D&D, All the Time crowd is genuinely bigger than the Poly content crowd, or just louder about its preferences.  Hmm.

Well, in either case, I will at least give the new Dungeon a chance before deciding.  As I posted before, however, I am disappointed.  And moving the useless RPGA articles into Dragon (which I enjoy perfectly as it is currently) is a huge step in the wrong direction.  If any content should head to the scrap-heap, that is it.   :\


----------



## Vocenoctum (May 16, 2004)

Staffan said:
			
		

> You could always talk to WOTC and find out if they think making Unearthed Arcana almost completely open hurt those sales. That could be an indicator of how it would work for Paizo as well.




One thing to keep in mind is that UA was out to everyone at once, whereas (well, usually  Dragon/ Dungeon is available to subscribers first.
It's entirely possible that OGL content could be posted before the issue hits stands. That doesn't mean SOME stuff couldn't be OGL, but as I said, I don't think Ravenloft or the other licensed stuff is OGL and never heard a complaint there.

The flipside being of course that most people that WOULD put the material online so soon would probably do it regardless of whether it was OGL or not.


----------



## RodneyThompson (May 16, 2004)

rowport said:
			
		

> Allow my "me too" on this one.  Honestly, while I hope that I am wrong, I am really wondering whether in fact the All D&D, All the Time crowd is genuinely bigger than the Poly content crowd, or just louder about its preferences.  Hmm.




Well, you've heard the old saying about "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" haven't you?

No, the D&D buyers are really the bulk of the subscriber base of Dungeon. They just have the bigger numbers, and unfortunately it doesn't look like the Poly fans have the numbers to compete.


----------



## Faraer (May 16, 2004)

Re: Too much crunch in Dragon?

Matthew, I'll certainly give it a look. But I suggest that as someone with authority, you're ill-advised to perpetuate that godawful, undescriptive, author-demeaning term 'fluff' (for source material, lore, background, world or story content, etc.), even in quotes or in jest. Words matter.


----------



## Monte At Home (May 16, 2004)

thundershot said:
			
		

> I'm just glad they don't have a Monster Manual Magazine yet




They could call it "&" !


----------



## Erik Mona (May 17, 2004)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Thanks for making that leap of faith.




No problem. I'd do it again in an instant.

That said, I'm very excited about the new direction of the magazine. I'm looking forward to being able to do one thing really well rather than seven things as well as I can, if you know what I mean.

There's lots to be happy about in the d20 industry. When I started Polyhedron on its ill-fated but noble commercial venture, the companies publishing material other than standard fantasy were few and far between. And, really, unless you wanted to play "Afghanistan d20" (anyone remember that gem?), you didn't have a lot of options.

If Polyhedron achieved anything in its post-RPGA incarnation, I hope it was to show publishers, and fans, that the d20 System was more than up to the challenge of emulating all sorts of interesting genres. We leave the d20 publishing field a much, much richer place than it was when we started publishing Polyhedron.

If Poly had any role in that evolution, I'd call our effort a success.

Thanks for all your support.

--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dungeon Magazine


----------



## Erik Mona (May 17, 2004)

Painfully said:
			
		

> If anybody can draw a line of reasoning that explains Will Wheaton's inclusion in Dungeon, feel free to enlighten me.




He's a good writer, a funny guy, and a gamer. And his column is going to take up one page.

Oh, and he was on Star Trek. 

--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dungeon Magazine


----------



## d20Dwarf (May 17, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> If Polyhedron achieved anything in its post-RPGA incarnation, I hope it was to show publishers, and fans, that the d20 System was more than up to the challenge of emulating all sorts of interesting genres.



Don't forget ", but not up to the challenge of making it profitable to do so."


----------



## Jorath Calar (May 17, 2004)

The changes sound nice to me and as long as they bring back Phil and Dixie I'll be happy


----------



## tarchon (May 17, 2004)

Monte At Home said:
			
		

> They could call it "&" !




Leaving 's' for the various splatbooks.


----------



## Emirikol (May 17, 2004)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> But that doesn't do a single thing for Star Wars d20 since it isn't OGC.




Star wars has it's own magazines.  Any one of those can pick up the slack.  Doesn't Paizo put out a Star Wars magazine too?

jh


----------



## MrZoink (May 17, 2004)

Ugh.

I'm glad my subscription to Dragon is ending in July.

I know that changes always make people nervous, but seriously, these guys are "drinking the koolaid" about the minis line stuff.

If it turns out that it's a small (or hopefully non-existant) part of the mag, and as long as the crpg stuff doesn't get out of hand (2-4 pages tops per issue sounds reasonable), I'll re-up.

If they are somehow given equal coverage, I won't see enough value in it.

Then again, we'll probably just have to wait a year or so for another editor to blow into the mag with a new plan and it'll all change again.

I see it already: The _New_ New Dragon - focusing on what you're really buying this mag for.

Dungeon: Hey, that's where the content displaced by all the mini and crpg stuff ended up.

Seems what they are really doing is splitting the 1 magazine I want to read into 2 mags.

Wil Wheaton: Cool. (Don't let him single-handedly save the issue every month. Wait, yeah, do let him do that. Somebody's gonna need to do it.) Just kidding, I like Wil.


----------



## Welverin (May 17, 2004)

MrZoink said:
			
		

> If it turns out that it's a small (or hopefully non-existant) part of the mag, and as long as the crpg stuff doesn't get out of hand (2-4 pages tops per issue sounds reasonable), I'll re-up.




Keith already said that those two sections will be getting the same number of pages they already do, so you already know what to expect there.


----------



## Ranger REG (May 17, 2004)

Emirikol said:
			
		

> Star wars has its own magazines.  Any one of those can pick up the slack.  Doesn't Paizo put out a Star Wars magazine too?



Wizards' Periodical put out _Star Wars Gamer_ magazine that focuses mainly on RPG but also computer games by LucasArts (_Star Wars_ or not). When WotC put out their _Star Wars TCG,_ the magazine devoted space for that one. It didn't do well due to low sale (the resentment against _Star Wars d20_ was high), limited distribution (US and Canada, but not worldwide), and complaints that it should be 100% RPG support.

_Star Wars Insider_ is a "fan club" magazine that focus on anything related to _Star Wars_ but not gaming. Paizo is no longer responsible for the circulation. It was licensed to another publisher. I don't know if that publisher is obligated to support _Star Wars RPG._


----------



## Acid_crash (May 17, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> He's a good writer, a funny guy, and a gamer. And his column is going to take up one page.
> 
> Oh, and he was on Star Trek.
> 
> ...




Uh, yeah, right...and that's supposed to be a good reason.  Saying he was in Toy Soldiers, that's a cool reason, but Star Trek...he was just a lucky kid who got a lucky break, that's all.  At least in Toy Soldiers he did something that we could appreciate him for.  He died.  

I will congratulate on at least keeping Polyhedron around for three years.  That was longer than WotC kept Alternity around for.  

It's all about the greed, nothing more and nothing else.


----------



## Ketjak (May 17, 2004)

*Thumbs... neutral*

On Dragon 

Pfft. Who cares?

I stopped subscribing to Dragon Magazine more than a year ago. The new classes (several per issue), feats, races, and so on ad nauseum - along with stupid Forgotten Realms junk (junk that's not only useless, it's _stupid_), predictable stories, and six-month-long countdowns to the next big Wizards product - were more than I could tolerate. Sayonara, Dragon, and these changes just underscore my decision.


On Dungeon

I have been happy with Dungeon as it is. Then again, I liked Polyhedron...


On Polyhedron

I only resubscribed to Dungeon this year after a wonderful customer service experience and because Polyhedron was included. I never use the adventures, rarely read more than the summary, and have not used a Critical Threat. Polyhedron, on the other hand, is read from cover to cover, every word. It's _interesting._

Dungeon sans Polyhedron will have _one_ issue to impress me. Even then, the moment I detect more suck than good I'm out. Perhaps Wil Wheaton will keep me on board, and the Dungeoncraft articles shifting here might lend a hand in terms of retention. But they better be freakin' gold to the experienced DM, or I go with Polyhedron.


On Wil Wheaton

The guy was jacked by unfriendly script writers and directors. He's a good man, the best man I've ever gotten to "know" by his web log. It's not the whining self-aggrandizement you find from most other blogs, including/especially those written by people in the game industry. Wil, I hope they publish your best the first time out... otherwise I'll find another way to read your columns without wasting my money on Dungeon.

- Ketjak,
Breaking his vow never to post again to protest this change to Dungeon.


----------



## Connorsrpg (May 17, 2004)

Thanks again Matt, Erik and Keith,

Unfortunatley this thread has bogged down in complaints.  Some being false statements such as no more fluff and the take over of computer gaming.  Read back carefully over the statements by the above guys before writing your doom.

The direction of each mag sounds great.  Poly was a good read most of the time, but Dungeon was initially for adventures and with few exceptions fantasy ones at that.  So it is returning, with even more info for the DM...how cool is that for dnd DMs who don't have the time to produce adventures and don't have the money to buy something that is only half this.

It justs sounds odd that most posters here prefer/use one or the other (Poly or adventures in Dungeon).  So the changes should be good for all.  No longer do people have to shell out for adventures they are never going to read/use or "don't like" and no longer do those of us who want adventures have to shell out for interesting ideas that will never be used.

Rather than blame the editors/the magazine/Paizo etc start something from this.  There is obviously enough support for Poly - now you can do it without paying for the parts you don't like.  Start your own 'Poly'.  I see that Morrus already has a post on the mini-games.  That could steamroll from there into something this thread helped to create.

I just can't see the bad in splitting two (often unrelated) things.  Sure Paizo will no longer do mini-games (in Dungeon) but now there is a chance for it to live elsewhere...and for those of us to buy adventures and material for the game that began it all and has brought you DUNGEONS & DRAGONS for all of those years (without minigames).  

None of us will now have to pay for the parts we don't like...

Connors


----------



## MrFilthyIke (May 17, 2004)

You'd think this thread was about sex or religion, sheesh! 

I feel truly sad for the folks at Paizo.  Like WotC, anything they do is put under a microscope, torn to shreds, and belittled...even before it is seen.
It could end up sucking, but at least judge it after you've read it.  We know everyone hear has an opinion, I just wish for once these opinions had some merit and worth.

Here's to hoping the "new direction" works out, I'll be picking it up, and judging for myself.


----------



## Belen (May 17, 2004)

Ok, Erik, I promised you that it I liked what I heard, then I would subscribe again.  I will go ahead and resubscribe to both magazines by the end of the day.  

Dave


----------



## martynq (May 17, 2004)

I'm afraid I haven't waded through the previous 14 pages of posts, so I hope that I'm not about to ask a question that is covered already.

Where will Forgotten Realms articles like Ed Greenwood's "Guide to the Realms" be located now?

I generally don't bother buying Dungeon at the moment, since apart from FR adventures, I feel I can come up with something more suited to my requirements myself.  As a DM, am I now going to be forced to get hold of Dungeon so that I can read the things aimed at me that were previously in Dragon?   

Martyn


----------



## Bagpuss (May 17, 2004)

Leopold said:
			
		

> Poly was useles..thank god for it's depature. Been asking for that since day 1 since it merged. Make it web content for crying out loud! Put it in the magazine where people who subscribe can go there.




People who subscribe to what exactly? If you mainly bought it for the Poly content you arn't likely to subscribe to a zero-poly content Dungeon magazine just to get access to some half-ass Poly web content.


----------



## Ranger REG (May 17, 2004)

Connorsrpg said:
			
		

> Rather than blame the editors/the magazine/Paizo etc start something from this.  There is obviously enough support for Poly - now you can do it without paying for the parts you don't like.  Start your own 'Poly'.  I see that Morrus already has a post on the mini-games.  That could steamroll from there into something this thread helped to create.



Well, I don't have the capital to start up my own magazine, and my credit rating is very questionable (hence the "no plastic" answer to the online ordering question) if I decided to get a business loan.

Which is why I'll be supporting *Morrus*'s magazine with the new format 100%.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (May 17, 2004)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Well, I don't have the capital to start up my own magazine, and my credit rating is very questionable (hence the "no plastic" answer to the online ordering question) if I decided to get a business loan.
> 
> Which is why I'll be supporting *Morrus*'s magazine with the new format 100%.



 I can't wait for the new ENWorld magazine...sadly, though, there won't be any Star Wars content, which is what I REALLY want.


----------



## JennyBendel (May 18, 2004)

*Paizo contact info*



			
				EricNoah said:
			
		

> Hey Keith, good to see you around!
> 
> There have apparently been some changes to the leadership of the mags and at Paizo over the past several months.  Guess I haven't been paying enough attention!  Could one of you just run down who does what, and maybe who to contact with what kind of issue/problem?




Hi Eric et al...

There's a complete company contact list on www.paizo.com, but here's a quick rundown of potentially appropriate managers:

Lisa Stevens, CEO
Keith Strohm, Vice President
Vic Wertz, Techinical Director
Rob Stewart, Advertising Sales Director
Jeff Alvarez, Ops/Customer Service Manager

Matthew Sernett, Editor-In-Chief/Dragon
Erik Mona, Editor-In-Chief/Dungeon
Michael Mikaelian, Editor-In-Chief/Undefeated
Dave Gross, Editor-In-Chief/Amazing Stories

Oh yeah, and me, Director of Marketing & PR.    

-Jenny Bendel


----------



## Acid_crash (May 18, 2004)

Connorsrpg said:
			
		

> Thanks again Matt, Erik and Keith,
> 
> Unfortunatley this thread has bogged down in complaints.  Some being false statements such as no more fluff and the take over of computer gaming.  Read back carefully over the statements by the above guys before writing your doom.
> 
> ...




Yeah, but it really sucks double-like for those few who did like BOTH.


----------



## The_Gneech (May 18, 2004)

Emirikol said:
			
		

> Star wars has it's own magazines.  Any one of those can pick up the slack.  Doesn't Paizo put out a Star Wars magazine too?




Paizo puts out _Star Wars Insider_; I don't know if there's any RPG content in there, but my first guess would be a big ol' "NO."

_Star Wars_ and _Call of Cthulhu_ are the things-no-longer-to-be-supported that bug me the most. Those are *licenses*, not OGC, which means that there won't be any more content for those in any magazine -- and there's precious little on the bookshelf as it is!

   -The Gneech


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (May 18, 2004)

The_Gneech said:
			
		

> Paizo puts out _Star Wars Insider_; I don't know if there's any RPG content in there, but my first guess would be a big ol' "NO."
> 
> _Star Wars_ and _Call of Cthulhu_ are the things-no-longer-to-be-supported that bug me the most. Those are *licenses*, not OGC, which means that there won't be any more content for those in any magazine -- and there's precious little on the bookshelf as it is!
> 
> -The Gneech



 I've gotten Insider since before the Special Editions were released. The ONLY RPG content in Insider is a preview of a book here and there...which hasn't happened for a while.

Star Wars Gamer made that pointless, but now without Gamer and without ANY kind of Star Wars content other than in the books(which isn't bad, of course) then we're kind of left with nothing at all. But ah well...I still think Star Wars Gamer(or a similar magazine) could do fine considering the audience, but that may be why I'm not in charge of things like that.


----------



## Olive (May 18, 2004)

The_Gneech said:
			
		

> Paizo puts out _Star Wars Insider_; I don't know if there's any RPG content in there, but my first guess would be a big ol' "NO."
> 
> _Star Wars_ and _Call of Cthulhu_ are the things-no-longer-to-be-supported that bug me the most. Those are *licenses*, not OGC, which means that there won't be any more content for those in any magazine -- and there's precious little on the bookshelf as it is!




2 things;
1) Paizo have lost the license for SWI. 
2) the CoC thing isn't quite true. First up, I think WotC no longer have a licence for CoC d20 (which is why it ain't on their website any more). Second, Chaosium often include d20 support in their CoC books, so stuff will continue to emerge.


----------



## Achan hiArusa (May 18, 2004)

*Well I've been trying to save money anyway*

I don't have the time to read the entire thread so if someone else has said as much my apologies.  Now I can save an extra $7 to $8 a month by not buying Dungeon.  But I guess its just as well with the Polyhedron content shrinking (since 111 had about 20 pages of Poly content) and when it wasn't shrunk it was filled with useless articles (like the "Buy .pdfs" article which was the biggest waste of paper I had ever seen).  I might of held on longer for the wonderful minigames (the vehicle system in Thunderball Rally was better than the one in Modern d20; Deathnet, Genetech, and Mecha Crusade will see play when I get my next modern game rolling; I got loads of laughs from Hijinx; the military feats and other stuff from V is for Victory has had some utility in the Modern games I have played in; I have actually ran a Pulp Heroes game which was a hit with my players and incorporated the Modern d20 version to upgrade the classes; and I used PX Poker Night in my CoCd20 game [they never complained about the occasional Sanity check ever again]), but generally I won't miss the off month magazines, each of which was a struggle to spend money on, with a few exceptions.

I too have never ceased to be amazed at the lack of interest in anything besides the stereotypical fantasy game in D&D players.  I know there are exceptions out there, but it seems there aren't enough.  Now you know why Gurps, White Wolf, and other nonD&D gamers make so much fun of D&Ders.  Just make a shallow story with pointy eared elves and you sell x10 as much stuff as if you decided to make something original and interesting.

I had originally thought to modify the Adventure Path to my Mindshadows game.  The basic ideals are fine, but I have to so break the adventures so much that its almost worth my time to write something from scratch.  It seems to be the case for every Dungeon adventure I have ever read.  I'll still get Dragon, but my Dungeon buying ends with #113.


----------



## Agamon (May 18, 2004)

Why the need for such generalizations?  I've played more Mutants & Masterminds, Exalted, and Stargate than D&D the past couple years, but that doesn't mean I want a bunch of stuff in my D&D adventure mag that doesn't really belong there.


----------



## Olive (May 18, 2004)

Achan hiArusa said:
			
		

> Now you know why Gurps, White Wolf, and other nonD&D gamers make so much fun of D&Ders.  Just make a shallow story with pointy eared elves and you sell x10 as much stuff as if you decided to make something original and interesting.




Sometimes I _really_ miss that roll eyes smiley. Every game has it's stereotypes, even GURPS, and none of need them. So lay off.


----------



## Mouseferatu (May 18, 2004)

> It's all about the greed, nothing more and nothing else.




There's a difference between "greed" and "trying to make a business work." If keeping Polyhedron was harming sales, it is in the company's, and the employees', best interests to drop it. That may not make people happy, and I understand the disappointment--I've had lines that I like canceled on me--but it's not a call for personal attacks.

The RPG industry is an extremely low-profit industry. People would be shocked to learn just how little money a given RPG project makes. Frankly, people who are greedy don't stay in this industry very long, because the industry doesn't support greed.

There's nothing wrong with you expressing your disappointment about Poly, and I do feel for you. But there's no reason to make this personal.


----------



## Faraer (May 19, 2004)

Following up martynq's query, I certainly hope Ed's column can be stably published again. And maybe his remaining P-Q Border Kingdoms articles will find a place in the new _Dungeon_; we've been waiting 2½ years so far...


----------



## Arawyn (May 19, 2004)

Keith F Strohm said:
			
		

> We have a complete website redesign and overhaul in progress. The future Paizo site will be much easier to navigate and have regular content.



Keith is there any intent for anything interactive on the site (eg. message forums).
It could be an excellent way to get collaborative feedback on which issues/articles people enjoyed.

I recall that one of the problems in the past with the "Ecology" articles is getting them written. Has that problem gone away or are they going to be written by a select number of writers?

I look forward to the changes, but I will say that unless the subscription issue in Australia is sorted out I plan to cease subscription.

I am seeing issues arriving from what I can only assume are coming from Hasbro/WotC Australia, two months after Hasbro/WotC Au have sent those same issues to the shops.

Annoying since my subscription problems has finally been fixed after nine fustrating months.
It might sound harsh but I feel like I am being treated like a 2nd class customer. 


Thanks again for the chance of open discussion. It is much appreciated.

regards,
Arawyn


----------



## Alzrius (May 19, 2004)

Arawyn said:
			
		

> Keith is there any intent for anything interactive on the site (eg. message forums).
> It could be an excellent way to get collaborative feedback on which issues/articles people enjoyed.




Check out Keith's other thread here, where this question is addressed: 
http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=88327


----------



## osprey126 (May 21, 2004)

While I understand the business reasons for dropping Polyhedron I will miss it.  I have had a long and enjoyable history with the magazine going back to issue number 4.  I raise a flagon in remeberance to a fine magazine and the staff that tried to keep it going


----------



## dargoth3 (May 21, 2004)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Well, insofar as I'm concerned, "Greyhawk" and "core D&D" are pretty much the same thing. If there's no reason _not_ to set an adventure in the core world, I'll put it there. We've got three Eberron adventures in the next five issues, and something really big planned for Eberron next year. There's a Realms adventure in #113 (which we're working on now), and I think it's a really good one. Ed Greenwood was good enough to supply some additional details on the city of Marsember, for which we're grateful. I've got it in mind to do a really special Forgotten Realms "event" next year, but I'm weighing a couple options for what that should be.
> 
> --Erik Mona
> Editor-in-Chief
> Dungeon Magazine




Ok well its good to see that we will be getting another FR module in 113 however the last one Forest of Blood was in Dungeon 103 which will be Ten issue or a 10+ Month gap between modules..

So my question is will the new Dungeon feature more frequent and regular FR modules? (Im not asking for an FR module in every issue but I would like to see one every 2-3 issues)


----------



## Bill Scott (May 24, 2004)

I have'nt read the entire thread yet so pardon me if this was already asked. What will happen to Christopher West's Global Positioning maps? The maps and the minigames were my favorite part of Poly. A few months ago, maybe longer, Eric Mona said in another thread that they had enough of his Modern maps for roughly another year and a half. Hopefully, they can be put on WOTC's website as a 'Map of the Week' feature


----------



## Vindicator (May 24, 2004)

Bill Scott said:
			
		

> I have'nt read the entire thread yet so pardon me if this was already asked. What will happen to Christopher West's Global Positioning maps? The maps and the minigames were my favorite part of Poly. A few months ago, maybe longer, Eric Mona said in another thread that they had enough of his Modern maps for roughly another year and a half. Hopefully, they can be put on WOTC's website as a 'Map of the Week' feature





To be honest, I've never understood why Modern players felt those maps were really needed.  If you want maps of schools, or shopping malls, or fire stations, or warehouses, there are hundreds of sources outside of Polyhedron.  

HOWEVER, even though I don't play Modern, I always thought the Global Positioning maps were cool.  My favorite was always the Arctic Research Base from the Dark*Matter issue of Dungeon.


----------



## Ranger REG (May 25, 2004)

Vindicator said:
			
		

> To be honest, I've never understood why Modern players felt those maps were really needed.  If you want maps of schools, or shopping malls, or fire stations, or warehouses, there are hundreds of sources outside of Polyhedron.



Because they already have grids. Plus we don't have "Map-A-Week" feature on the _d20 Modern_ web site, unlike the _D&D_ web site, which BTW, also offers free Original Adventures. Of course, if you think that WotC is wasting bandwidth and server putting up Original Adventures, I'd petition that they shut it down, making _Dungeon_ the sole provider of adventures


----------



## Bill Scott (May 25, 2004)

TeaBee said:
			
		

> For any other companies out there reading this, I'm willing to pay for a nice mag full of Star Wars/d20 Modern/mini-games/etc.




I agree with TeaBee. What I would like to see is several companies (Green Ronin, AEG, Mongoose, RPG Objects, WOTC plus others) get together to publish a consolidated magazine. If it big and has enough articles focusing on Modern and SciFi rpg, please no more fantasy unless it has something special going for it, I would pay up to $10, maybe more for it


----------



## Ranger REG (May 26, 2004)

It'll be awhile. In the meantime, I'm going to support _EN World Gamer_ for my _d20_ fix. "No _D&D_ Allowed" would be a nice catchphrase for this magazine.


----------



## kolvar (May 26, 2004)

Well, after about 250 issues of Dragon cramming my boards at home, this seems to be the point where I can stop buying the mag. In the last two years it was only every third issue that had interesting material for me and if it had not been for the "official" (and the gatherer inside of me) I would have probably stopped earlier. 
The catalogue-thingy seems rather redundant to me, when I can get these informations from the internet easyly. More PrCs, Spells, Magic Items etc? I think with the products I already own and the stuff I intend to buy in the future, I do have more of these than I (or any of my players, my children's players or my grand-children's players) could ever wish to play with. It is interesting to read, but only as an aside to the comics, sage advice and the other stuff found in there, to round up the mix, so to speak. Well. I will miss my nodwick ... Oh, I will read them probably on nodwick.com in the end anyway.

Dungeon, on the other side, is becoming interesting, with the dming stuff. Will Weaton? I was cheering as everyone else in the room when he finally got of the show. But I have the greatest respect for what he made of it now and think that it was quite hard for him. 

Polyhedron! That is sad!


----------



## Vocenoctum (May 26, 2004)

kolvar said:
			
		

> The catalogue-thingy seems rather redundant to me, when I can get these informations from the internet easyly.




I'm assuming it'll be like the quarterly catalog, with more information about the products. It's nice that retailers post the info from the quarterly's on the site, but I'd like to not have to depend on it, and have to wait.

Besides, it's extra pages anyway. Hopefully Wizards is offsetting the cost of the additional pages so it doesn't cost Paizo for them.


----------



## Bill Scott (Jun 20, 2004)

Although I'm upset at the demise of Poly, I can understand why Paizo had to cancel the content. They had to keep their primary customers, the D&D players, happy. Easy come, easy go



			
				Bill Scott said:
			
		

> I have'nt read the entire thread yet so pardon me if this was already asked. What will happen to Christopher West's Global Positioning maps? The maps and the minigames were my favorite part of Poly. A few months ago, maybe longer, Eric Mona said in another thread that they had enough of his Modern maps for roughly another year and a half. Hopefully, they can be put on WOTC's website as a 'Map of the Week' feature




I asked this question nearly a month ago and Was'nt given the courtesy of a official answer. I ask again, what will be done with Christopher West's maps? Does he, or Paizo, have the copyright on them


----------



## Ourph (Jun 20, 2004)

I have only praise for Paizo publishing.  When I emailed them to cancel my subscription and ask for a refund on the remaining part they sent me a check for the full amount and it arrived within 2 weeks.  I call that being a very good sport and excellent customer service into the bargain.


----------



## megamania (Jun 20, 2004)

Ourph said:
			
		

> I have only praise for Paizo publishing.  When I emailed them to cancel my subscription and ask for a refund on the remaining part they sent me a check for the full amount and it arrived within 2 weeks.  I call that being a very good sport and excellent customer service into the bargain.




wow-  name a publisher that would do that........I can't think of any


----------



## Stormfalcon (Jun 20, 2004)

First off, thanks to the Paizo guys for being upfront and honest about things regarding the changes in their upcoming magazines and the reasons for them.  Most magazines I've run across would just implement the changes without much by way of warning, and this goes above and beyond that.  My honest thanks.

Dragon: I'll take a wait-and-see on it.  If the new material doesn't mess up what I already buy Dragon for, I'll continue buying it and maybe even subscribe.  If the new material does present a problem, well, it's been nice reading in the past...

Dungeon:  No two ways about it: No Poly in Dungeon = No Dungeon in my purchases.  If EN World Magazine picks up the slack, my Dungeon dollars will go there instead.  Sorry, but that's the way things are.


----------



## AFGNCAAP (Jun 20, 2004)

I'd really like to see the Maps of Mystery/Global Positioning stuff continue, because it definitely makes my life easier when designing dungeons/locales on the fly.

I really liked the d20 Modern stuff because it allowed me to establish a new/unique location, and it limited player knowledge on the locale, as opposed to using/recycling an actual real-world place for an event ("Which mall are we at?  Oh yeah, I know another way in, it's always been there.").  Besides, I often used the d20 Modern maps for my Marvel game more often than for a d20 Modern game.


----------



## Emirikol (Jun 23, 2004)

AFGNCAAP said:
			
		

> I'd really like to see the Maps of Mystery/Global Positioning stuff continue, because it definitely makes my life easier when designing dungeons/locales on the fly..





When I put campaigns together, I make a list of a couple adventures that will be run, as well as the issues of Maps of Mystery that I can quickly reference.  The latter are placed on the list under "Emergency Maps!"

The latest MOM's have been awesome!

On another line, I'm getting excited to see this new stuff.  If it's really as useful as it looks like it will be, maybe I'll require that my players purchase a subscription of Dragon magazine for the group reference library instead of me just buying it for myself.  What is it?  $45?  That's about  $6.40 for each player.  Heh.

jh


----------



## MarkAHart (Jun 23, 2004)

*Kudos to Paizo Publishing*

I have had nothing but positive experiences in all my interactions with Paizo Publishing -- specifically, DRAGON and DUNGEON magazine.  I had a question regarding my DRAGON subscription, and Paizo's subscription fulfillment service contacted me back with the info only an hour later.

I also have nothing but high praise for the editors and staff at DRAGON and DUNGEON.  E-mail queries are answered in a stunningly brief time -- sometimes in the same hour they were sent.  Specifically, kudos especially to editor-in-chief Matthew Sernett, and assistant editor, Mike McArtor.  These guys are doing a fantastic job.

Given the usualy tremendous, overwhelming workload of most magazines, the fact that the editors and staff respond so quickly is a very good sign.  Judging from the time stamp of some of their messages, they put in some pretty lengthy hours in the office.

I believe the new direction of these two magazines will be worthwhile and hold great promise.


----------



## johnnype (Jun 23, 2004)

I'm happy to say that I just resubscribed to both magazines for another year. I really don't understand some of the bellyaching on this thread. Does anyone really expect to find every single article in either magazine useful all of the time? That's unrealistic and simpleminded. 

I see Dragon and Dungeon as a series of informative articles about my favorite hobby. Some of the articles I'll use right away. Others articles, later, when they become useful. A number of them I'll never use but I still enjoy. At least most of them. Silicon Sorcery, (I think that's what it's called) the articles that adapt computer RPG's for use in pen and paper D&D, is the only set of articles that I find a waste of ink. But I understand that others like the monthly feature and can see why they want to keep it. It's not for me but that doesn't invalidate the entire magazine. 

I think readers need to realize that the magazines can not service each of our needs perfectly. Paizo needs to go with what makes the most people happy. They need to go with what sells. That might mean that ocasional issues are not specifically taylored to your interests. That hardly makes the magazine useless or otherwise not worth buying. I buy Dragon and Dungeon because I enjoy them. I also buy them to support the hobby.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jun 24, 2004)

Most of us realized that already. I wish Paizo good luck in their endeavor. For now, the only useful thing I find worth purchasing from them is _Dragon._ Nothing more.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jun 24, 2004)

johnnype said:
			
		

> Does anyone really expect to find every single article in either magazine useful all of the time? That's unrealistic and simpleminded.



A neither deep nor insightful comment. I didn't see anyone say (nor even imply) that throughout this entire thread - even from those who are "bellyaching".

I'm not entirely sure what your point is.


----------



## Welverin (Jun 25, 2004)

Bill Scott said:
			
		

> I asked this question nearly a month ago and Was'nt given the courtesy of a official answer. I ask again, what will be done with Christopher West's maps? Does he, or Paizo, have the copyright on them




You might want to start a new thread, just make sure to use the Dungeon tag and maybe toss Erik's name in there.

This thread has gotten rather long, which may have something to do with the non-answer.


----------



## Mapmaker (Jun 25, 2004)

Just stumbled across this old thread and thought I should chime in, however belatedly:



			
				Bill Scott said:
			
		

> I have'nt read the entire thread yet so pardon me if this was already asked. What will happen to Christopher West's Global Positioning maps? The maps and the minigames were my favorite part of Poly. A few months ago, maybe longer, Eric Mona said in another thread that they had enough of his Modern maps for roughly another year and a half. Hopefully, they can be put on WOTC's website as a 'Map of the Week' feature



We never had a huge backlog of Global Positioning maps, but we did (and still do) have a list of map IDEAS so long that it could have kept the feature running for several years without recycling a location. It's actually longer now than it was when we started; new ideas for map locations would spring to mind or be suggested by fans faster than I could crank out the maps themselves.

All is not necessarily lost for this map series. Global Positioning may be in stasis for the time being, but I think it's safe to say that I haven't made my last modern map. I'll post news on my website if and when there is ever a continuation or collection of the series.

In the meantime, I'm quite pleased to be doing more fantasy work for Dungeon, and Wizards of the Coast has been keeping me knee-deep in Star Wars materials for the upcoming miniatures game.

I'm really honored that you folks think so highly of my work, and I hope that you'll continue to check out Dungeon and see what we've been up to.

I'm going to miss Polyhedron greatly, but I recognize the necessity of these changes and respect Paizo's decision. They have a lot of cool features in store for Dungeon, and I can't wait to start exploring the new content.


----------

