Forgotten Realms magazine! [Archive] - Wizards Community

Forgotten Realms magazine! [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Ber'gan the Cloak
01-21-04, 04:15 PM Well, I think I have just give up on Dragon and Dungeon after 12 years of purchase. I'm frustrated at the lack of Realms oriented articles; the flood of dubious articles on new kits; the alternative fiction featuring Saxon characters and suchlike. Basically the content sucks BIG TIME!

Its just not a patch on what it used to be like, and that's likely to get worse with the launch of Eberoon or whatever its called.

Dungeon is worse with the backwards d20 stuff.

Could no one make even a bi or tri monthly REalms (or traditional) D&D magazine work or worthwhile financially?
Mystery Man
01-21-04, 04:23 PM That would be so awesome! Never gonna happen. But it would be so awesome!
Mirtek
01-21-04, 04:35 PM Originally posted by Ber'gan the Cloak
(or traditional) D&D magazine work or worthwhile financially?
Depends on your definition of traditional.

D&D is not about the Forgotten Realms. FR is just one setting out of many. Maybe the single setting with the most players (arguably) but there are certainly as many people who do not play FR as there are people who do play FR. And with the vast flood of D20 products and settings i would say that in these modern days there may be even more players who do not play FR than players who play FR.

Thus presenting only articles for generic settings, which can be included into any campaign world seems to be the best way to go.
Mystery Man
01-21-04, 04:39 PM And with the vast flood of D20 products and settings i would say that in these modern days there may be even more players who do not play FR than players who play FR.

They're called homebrewers. Lots and lots of them. As far as I've seen on different polls on different boards (which IMHO reflect the entire gaming community) there's the homebrewers who make up half, then Realms, then Greyhawk, then everyone else.
In that order.
Faraer
01-21-04, 04:52 PM A licensed Realms periodical, such as Brion Wischstadt's RealmSpeak was to be, is perfectly possible in principle. It would be a financial gamble, but so what?

So-called 'generic' articles are just set in a world that isn't named and which we know nothing about; the idea that they're more easily adaptable into your own campaign is a matter of perception only. It would be a great shame if Dragon had *no* 'world-specific' articles, especially given the current Realmslore bottleneck at which rate Ed's notes would take 100+ years to be published. Hearteningly, though, "Elminster's Guide to the Realms" has resumed.
Wooly Rupert
01-21-04, 07:31 PM Originally posted by Mirtek
Depends on your definition of traditional.

D&D is not about the Forgotten Realms. FR is just one setting out of many. Maybe the single setting with the most players (arguably) but there are certainly as many people who do not play FR as there are people who do play FR. And with the vast flood of D20 products and settings i would say that in these modern days there may be even more players who do not play FR than players who play FR.

Thus presenting only articles for generic settings, which can be included into any campaign world seems to be the best way to go.

Agreed. One thing I've seen the magazine higher-ups comment on in more than one issue is the fact that while some people want lots of articles pertaining to a specific world, others want articles pertaining to either a different world, or to a generic one.

I, too, would love to see more Realms stuff. But what about the people that play Dragginglance or Greyhawk? I'm sure they'd like to see their worlds receive more coverage, too. So it's a delicate balance the magazine people have to maintain...

Besides, even generic articles can have some useful material. Some of my all-time favorite articles were generic ones -- like the one that made cantrips a proficiency (this was during 2nd edition), or the one about magical item quirks... And what about the articles on making memorable NPCs? That's something that can go for any setting, and with only the smallest amount of tweaking, any genre.
Ber'gan the Cloak
01-21-04, 08:57 PM So now I'll have to buy Dragon JUST to read Elminster's column! :rolleyes:

Its not so much that I desire Realms only articles (I realise that's a real fantasy), but it would be nice if I didn't simply throw the mag out after a quick glance because the contents are shameful in quality. I don't want to pay for pages of lists.

Elminster's Guide series is a great demonstration of a intelligent, interesting, amusing and useful article. Sadly there seems to be a lack of these sort of things.

I guess Wizards has decided that the Realms will continue growing online and with the occasional nudge from them. Why should they plunge money into products when we'll all do it for free? It leaves them finiancially free to conjure up more minority stuff so that they cover all aspects of the market.
Ranger REG
01-22-04, 04:52 AM Let's face it. Dragon magazine is not your kind of magazine now. It's no longer as it was when AD&D 2nd Edition and FR were prominent during the late 80's and all of 90's (pushing back other games like the original D&D setting,Greyhawk and Dragonlance to one article a month or two).

If you want a Realms-oriented magazine, ask Wizards to grant you a license to make such a thing (expect to pay royatly). Of course, if you'll notice a lot of Dragon readers out there who don't believe that what Paizo is publishing is the official D&D magazines, don't expect them to embrace your FR magazine as definitively official.

Oh, yeah. Paizo is publishing Dragon and Dungeon now.
B4Real
01-22-04, 10:20 AM Originally posted by Ber'gan the Cloak
Well, I think I have just give up on Dragon and Dungeon after 12 years of purchase. I'm frustrated at the lack of Realms oriented articles; the flood of dubious articles on new kits; the alternative fiction featuring Saxon characters and suchlike. Basically the content sucks BIG TIME!

Its just not a patch on what it used to be like, and that's likely to get worse with the launch of Eberoon or whatever its called.

Dungeon is worse with the backwards d20 stuff.

Could no one make even a bi or tri monthly REalms (or traditional) D&D magazine work or worthwhile financially?

:teach:

1. Not everyone likes FR as much as you do.

2. Just because you do not like Dungeon or Dragon magazine does not mean that everyone else feels the same.

3. If you gave up on it(Dungeon & Dragon magazines) that is your choice. Just give up, but do not make an entire thread so that everyone else has to see you whine about it and attempt to promote FR as one of the best things that ever happened. There are some things in FR that others may think are just as corny as you think Dungeon and Dragon magazine is.

~B4Real
Cunning Linguist
01-22-04, 10:34 AM Originally posted by B4Real
:teach:

1. Not everyone likes FR as much as you do.

2. Just because you do not like Dungeon or Dragon magazine does not mean that everyone else feels the same.

3. If you gave up on it(Dungeon & Dragon magazines) that is your choice. Just give up, but do not make an entire thread so that everyone else has to see you whine about it and attempt to promote FR as one of the best things that ever happened. There are some things in FR that others may think are just as corny as you think those magazines are.

~B4Real

Now you remember: This is the Forgotten Realms forum, those who use this forum, loves Forgotten Realms, some more then Ber'gan the Cloak. If he thinks there is a lack of FR articles in Dragon, and he wants to hear support, or at least some arguments for good non-FR articles in Dragon that can be used, then this is the right kind of Forum to post it in. If he had posted this on IMDB forum, or Grayhawk, I would agree with you, however, he is not.

If you think FR is corny, or you think the lack of FR in Dragon is great, I am wondering why you are posting in this forum at all. Would be kinda like a FR fan, posting on GH forum and bashing the Grayhawk world for it's lack of detail and magic.. and that would just be trolling..
B4Real
01-22-04, 10:40 AM Originally posted by Cunning Linguist
Now you remember: This is the Forgotten Realms forum, those who use this forum, loves Forgotten Realms, some more then Ber'gan the Cloak. If he thinks there is a lack of FR articles in Dragon, and he wants to hear support, or at least some arguments for good non-FR articles in Dragon that can be used, then this is the right kind of Forum to post it in. If he had posted this on IMDB forum, or Grayhawk, I would agree with you, however, he is not.

If you think FR is corny, or you think the lack of FR in Dragon is great, I am wondering why you are posting in this forum at all. Would be kinda like a FR fan, posting on GH forum and bashing the Grayhawk world for it's lack of detail and magic.. and that would just be trolling..

1. Everyone that uses this forum does not love Forgotten Realms. Some of us like it but at the same time like other settings as well.

2. I never said I thought FR was corny. Read what I wrote for yourself :

1. Not everyone likes FR as much as you do.

&

There are some things in FR that others may think are just as corny as you think those magazines are.

The key word is others there was no I in the sentence at all. Nor did I say the lack of FR in Dragon magazine was great. Where are you getting this stuff from ?

~B4Real
Cunning Linguist
01-22-04, 11:13 AM True, but if you read the implicit parts of your text, we find something else.

However, the last paragraph was for less important then the first one. The last one pointed only toward your oblique trollisem. The first paragraph points out that people who love forgotten realms use this forum. There may be someone out there, using the forum, not loving forgotten realms, but they are few and far between. However, it is not polite to come and post a clearly trollish remark to a perfectly good tread.

Posting in this forum about people who don’t like Forgotten Realms, is like posting on the IMDB forum that “Not all people like movies!”

However, let me also comment on the lack of FR articles in Dragon, so this is not just a random argument.

There are still some good articles in Dragon, or at least I think so. Lets take 314, it was perhaps not the best one out there, but you do get some inside look to the new 3.5 Psionics. That will mix nicely with Mind Flayer fans. The Hot as Hell: Ecology of the Salamander was also a nice bit, and if I ever play an adventure with Fire Salamanders I will be sure to read over that part once more. Guardians of the Deepest Seas: This may not be the best PrC I ever saw, but some of the spells could be nice for a Underdark setting.
The things that really drags that issue down is the overwhelming Crunshiness. The ratio of Fluff VS crunch is 4:1 (or something around that). Take the Heroes of Might and Magic: Magic Item Sets, its 6 pages, just listing Magic Items. Little or nothing tells you about the item.

On comparison, lets take.. Dragon 279: Elves. (now I don’t much like elves, but I still like this issue)
This one talks about all things elves. Little or nothing in the elf part talks about FR, but I find it a GREAT read, since there is almost no crunch in there. Like the Leaf and Thorn: The Secret Life of the Elves: 2 spells, and 7 pages describing the elves and their life.

So it’s kinda gone from: “Fluff with crunch to back it up”, to “Crunch with fluff to back it up”. This is a bad thing..
B4Real
01-22-04, 11:31 AM True, but if you read the implicit parts of your text, we find something else.

However, the last paragraph was for less important then the first one. The last one pointed only toward your oblique trollisem. The first paragraph points out that people who love forgotten realms use this forum. There may be someone out there, using the forum, not loving forgotten realms, but they are few and far between. However, it is not polite to come and post a clearly trollish remark to a perfectly good tread.

Once again there is a heavy line between what was written and what you think I meant when I wrote it. What was written is fact(Being that what I wrote can be clearly seen and verified.), what you think it meant is opinion(Adding your own personal remarks to it.).

Troll-ism not trollisem.

The first portion points out:

1. Not everyone likes FR as much as you do

This is a factual statement being as there are some who do not like FR as much as others. Everyone that is on the FR boards does not love FR as much as everyone else(Some may just like it. I am living proof of that.).

Loving FR is not a prerequisite to posting on the FR boards(Nowhere is it written: YOU MUST LOVE FR TO POST HERE!). Simply having an interest in the setting is enough for one to post upon or browse these forums. The rest of your post is window dressing and does not require my attention.

~B4Real
B4Real
01-22-04, 11:34 AM If he thinks there is a lack of FR articles in Dragon, and he wants to hear support, or at least some arguments for good non-FR articles in Dragon that can be used, then this is the right kind of Forum to post it in.

The above could have been accomplished w/o comments such as this:

Basically the content sucks BIG TIME!

Its just not a patch on what it used to be like, and that's likely to get worse with the launch of Eberoon or whatever its called.

Dungeon is worse with the backwards d20 stuff

;)

~B4Real
WizO_BigSister
01-22-04, 04:33 PM I am closing this thread as it seems to have deteriorated, and very little constructive discussion is happening. Can I please direct you all to the guidelines about constructive criticism in theCode Of Conduct - Guidelines For Posting (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=148290)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ber'gan the Cloak 01-21-04, 04:15 PM	Well, I think I have just give up on Dragon and Dungeon after 12 years of purchase. I'm frustrated at the lack of Realms oriented articles; the flood of dubious articles on new kits; the alternative fiction featuring Saxon characters and suchlike. Basically the content sucks BIG TIME! Its just not a patch on what it used to be like, and that's likely to get worse with the launch of Eberoon or whatever its called. Dungeon is worse with the backwards d20 stuff. Could no one make even a bi or tri monthly REalms (or traditional) D&D magazine work or worthwhile financially?
Mystery Man 01-21-04, 04:23 PM	That would be so awesome! Never gonna happen. But it would be so awesome!
Mirtek 01-21-04, 04:35 PM	Originally posted by Ber'gan the Cloak (or traditional) D&D magazine work or worthwhile financially? Depends on your definition of traditional. D&D is not about the Forgotten Realms. FR is just one setting out of many. Maybe the single setting with the most players (arguably) but there are certainly as many people who do not play FR as there are people who do play FR. And with the vast flood of D20 products and settings i would say that in these modern days there may be even more players who do not play FR than players who play FR. Thus presenting only articles for generic settings, which can be included into any campaign world seems to be the best way to go.
Mystery Man 01-21-04, 04:39 PM	And with the vast flood of D20 products and settings i would say that in these modern days there may be even more players who do not play FR than players who play FR. They're called homebrewers. Lots and lots of them. As far as I've seen on different polls on different boards (which IMHO reflect the entire gaming community) there's the homebrewers who make up half, then Realms, then Greyhawk, then everyone else. In that order.
Faraer 01-21-04, 04:52 PM	A licensed Realms periodical, such as Brion Wischstadt's RealmSpeak was to be, is perfectly possible in principle. It would be a financial gamble, but so what? So-called 'generic' articles are just set in a world that isn't named and which we know nothing about; the idea that they're more easily adaptable into your own campaign is a matter of perception only. It would be a great shame if Dragon had no 'world-specific' articles, especially given the current Realmslore bottleneck at which rate Ed's notes would take 100+ years to be published. Hearteningly, though, "Elminster's Guide to the Realms" has resumed.
Wooly Rupert 01-21-04, 07:31 PM	Originally posted by Mirtek Depends on your definition of traditional. D&D is not about the Forgotten Realms. FR is just one setting out of many. Maybe the single setting with the most players (arguably) but there are certainly as many people who do not play FR as there are people who do play FR. And with the vast flood of D20 products and settings i would say that in these modern days there may be even more players who do not play FR than players who play FR. Thus presenting only articles for generic settings, which can be included into any campaign world seems to be the best way to go. Agreed. One thing I've seen the magazine higher-ups comment on in more than one issue is the fact that while some people want lots of articles pertaining to a specific world, others want articles pertaining to either a different world, or to a generic one. I, too, would love to see more Realms stuff. But what about the people that play Dragginglance or Greyhawk? I'm sure they'd like to see their worlds receive more coverage, too. So it's a delicate balance the magazine people have to maintain... Besides, even generic articles can have some useful material. Some of my all-time favorite articles were generic ones -- like the one that made cantrips a proficiency (this was during 2nd edition), or the one about magical item quirks... And what about the articles on making memorable NPCs? That's something that can go for any setting, and with only the smallest amount of tweaking, any genre.
Ber'gan the Cloak 01-21-04, 08:57 PM	So now I'll have to buy Dragon JUST to read Elminster's column! :rolleyes: Its not so much that I desire Realms only articles (I realise that's a real fantasy), but it would be nice if I didn't simply throw the mag out after a quick glance because the contents are shameful in quality. I don't want to pay for pages of lists. Elminster's Guide series is a great demonstration of a intelligent, interesting, amusing and useful article. Sadly there seems to be a lack of these sort of things. I guess Wizards has decided that the Realms will continue growing online and with the occasional nudge from them. Why should they plunge money into products when we'll all do it for free? It leaves them finiancially free to conjure up more minority stuff so that they cover all aspects of the market.
Ranger REG 01-22-04, 04:52 AM	Let's face it. Dragon magazine is not your kind of magazine now. It's no longer as it was when AD&D 2nd Edition and FR were prominent during the late 80's and all of 90's (pushing back other games like the original D&D setting,Greyhawk and Dragonlance to one article a month or two). If you want a Realms-oriented magazine, ask Wizards to grant you a license to make such a thing (expect to pay royatly). Of course, if you'll notice a lot of Dragon readers out there who don't believe that what Paizo is publishing is the official D&D magazines, don't expect them to embrace your FR magazine as definitively official. Oh, yeah. Paizo is publishing Dragon and Dungeon now.
B4Real 01-22-04, 10:20 AM	Originally posted by Ber'gan the Cloak Well, I think I have just give up on Dragon and Dungeon after 12 years of purchase. I'm frustrated at the lack of Realms oriented articles; the flood of dubious articles on new kits; the alternative fiction featuring Saxon characters and suchlike. Basically the content sucks BIG TIME! Its just not a patch on what it used to be like, and that's likely to get worse with the launch of Eberoon or whatever its called. Dungeon is worse with the backwards d20 stuff. Could no one make even a bi or tri monthly REalms (or traditional) D&D magazine work or worthwhile financially? :teach: 1. Not everyone likes FR as much as you do. 2. Just because you do not like Dungeon or Dragon magazine does not mean that everyone else feels the same. 3. If you gave up on it(Dungeon & Dragon magazines) that is your choice. Just give up, but do not make an entire thread so that everyone else has to see you whine about it and attempt to promote FR as one of the best things that ever happened. There are some things in FR that others may think are just as corny as you think Dungeon and Dragon magazine is. ~B4Real
Cunning Linguist 01-22-04, 10:34 AM	Originally posted by B4Real :teach: 1. Not everyone likes FR as much as you do. 2. Just because you do not like Dungeon or Dragon magazine does not mean that everyone else feels the same. 3. If you gave up on it(Dungeon & Dragon magazines) that is your choice. Just give up, but do not make an entire thread so that everyone else has to see you whine about it and attempt to promote FR as one of the best things that ever happened. There are some things in FR that others may think are just as corny as you think those magazines are. ~B4Real Now you remember: This is the Forgotten Realms forum, those who use this forum, loves Forgotten Realms, some more then Ber'gan the Cloak. If he thinks there is a lack of FR articles in Dragon, and he wants to hear support, or at least some arguments for good non-FR articles in Dragon that can be used, then this is the right kind of Forum to post it in. If he had posted this on IMDB forum, or Grayhawk, I would agree with you, however, he is not. If you think FR is corny, or you think the lack of FR in Dragon is great, I am wondering why you are posting in this forum at all. Would be kinda like a FR fan, posting on GH forum and bashing the Grayhawk world for it's lack of detail and magic.. and that would just be trolling..
B4Real 01-22-04, 10:40 AM	Originally posted by Cunning Linguist Now you remember: This is the Forgotten Realms forum, those who use this forum, loves Forgotten Realms, some more then Ber'gan the Cloak. If he thinks there is a lack of FR articles in Dragon, and he wants to hear support, or at least some arguments for good non-FR articles in Dragon that can be used, then this is the right kind of Forum to post it in. If he had posted this on IMDB forum, or Grayhawk, I would agree with you, however, he is not. If you think FR is corny, or you think the lack of FR in Dragon is great, I am wondering why you are posting in this forum at all. Would be kinda like a FR fan, posting on GH forum and bashing the Grayhawk world for it's lack of detail and magic.. and that would just be trolling.. 1. Everyone that uses this forum does not love Forgotten Realms. Some of us like it but at the same time like other settings as well. 2. I never said I thought FR was corny. Read what I wrote for yourself : 1. Not everyone likes FR as much as you do. & There are some things in FR that others may think are just as corny as you think those magazines are. The key word is others there was no I in the sentence at all. Nor did I say the lack of FR in Dragon magazine was great. Where are you getting this stuff from ? ~B4Real
Cunning Linguist 01-22-04, 11:13 AM	True, but if you read the implicit parts of your text, we find something else. However, the last paragraph was for less important then the first one. The last one pointed only toward your oblique trollisem. The first paragraph points out that people who love forgotten realms use this forum. There may be someone out there, using the forum, not loving forgotten realms, but they are few and far between. However, it is not polite to come and post a clearly trollish remark to a perfectly good tread. Posting in this forum about people who don’t like Forgotten Realms, is like posting on the IMDB forum that “Not all people like movies!” However, let me also comment on the lack of FR articles in Dragon, so this is not just a random argument. There are still some good articles in Dragon, or at least I think so. Lets take 314, it was perhaps not the best one out there, but you do get some inside look to the new 3.5 Psionics. That will mix nicely with Mind Flayer fans. The Hot as Hell: Ecology of the Salamander was also a nice bit, and if I ever play an adventure with Fire Salamanders I will be sure to read over that part once more. Guardians of the Deepest Seas: This may not be the best PrC I ever saw, but some of the spells could be nice for a Underdark setting. The things that really drags that issue down is the overwhelming Crunshiness. The ratio of Fluff VS crunch is 4:1 (or something around that). Take the Heroes of Might and Magic: Magic Item Sets, its 6 pages, just listing Magic Items. Little or nothing tells you about the item. On comparison, lets take.. Dragon 279: Elves. (now I don’t much like elves, but I still like this issue) This one talks about all things elves. Little or nothing in the elf part talks about FR, but I find it a GREAT read, since there is almost no crunch in there. Like the Leaf and Thorn: The Secret Life of the Elves: 2 spells, and 7 pages describing the elves and their life. So it’s kinda gone from: “Fluff with crunch to back it up”, to “Crunch with fluff to back it up”. This is a bad thing..
B4Real 01-22-04, 11:31 AM	True, but if you read the implicit parts of your text, we find something else. However, the last paragraph was for less important then the first one. The last one pointed only toward your oblique trollisem. The first paragraph points out that people who love forgotten realms use this forum. There may be someone out there, using the forum, not loving forgotten realms, but they are few and far between. However, it is not polite to come and post a clearly trollish remark to a perfectly good tread. Once again there is a heavy line between what was written and what you think I meant when I wrote it. What was written is fact(Being that what I wrote can be clearly seen and verified.), what you think it meant is opinion(Adding your own personal remarks to it.). Troll-ism not trollisem. The first portion points out: 1. Not everyone likes FR as much as you do This is a factual statement being as there are some who do not like FR as much as others. Everyone that is on the FR boards does not love FR as much as everyone else(Some may just like it. I am living proof of that.). Loving FR is not a prerequisite to posting on the FR boards(Nowhere is it written: YOU MUST LOVE FR TO POST HERE!). Simply having an interest in the setting is enough for one to post upon or browse these forums. The rest of your post is window dressing and does not require my attention. ~B4Real
B4Real 01-22-04, 11:34 AM	If he thinks there is a lack of FR articles in Dragon, and he wants to hear support, or at least some arguments for good non-FR articles in Dragon that can be used, then this is the right kind of Forum to post it in. The above could have been accomplished w/o comments such as this: Basically the content sucks BIG TIME! Its just not a patch on what it used to be like, and that's likely to get worse with the launch of Eberoon or whatever its called. Dungeon is worse with the backwards d20 stuff ;) ~B4Real
WizO_BigSister 01-22-04, 04:33 PM	I am closing this thread as it seems to have deteriorated, and very little constructive discussion is happening. Can I please direct you all to the guidelines about constructive criticism in theCode Of Conduct - Guidelines For Posting (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=148290)