Dragon Magazine Annual 2009

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

olandew

Aug 14, 2009 20:41:40
Okay, so several questions in reguards to that product.

1) What is it supposed to be?

2) When is it supposed to be out? It says September on the site, and August 18th on the Barnes and Nobel site, so I am uncertain.

3) Who wants to know what is in it cause I actually have a copy of it? My local chain store must have REALLY messed up if it is not supposed to be out till September
#2

Hocus-Smokus

Aug 14, 2009 20:43:49
I thought it was just supposed to be a compiled book of all Dragon material from the previous year...
#3

arkenos

Aug 14, 2009 21:00:04
Hello, i just browse it at my local RPG store two days ago. I don't know when it's supposed to be out but where i live (in France) we often get Wotc's books earlier (i'm not sure why but it's a fact).
There's 12 articles inside (160 pages). The first one is about Yeenoghu the gnoll demon lord, there's one about kobolds (with a fun kobold victory table), another about the Feywild, one for star pact warlocks, and i don't remember the others. (sorry for any bad english)
#4

batshido

Aug 14, 2009 21:02:55
PC centric stuff includes the Art of the Kill article and it's feats/powers/gear, and the gladiator article with it's combat feats.

It looks pretty good as far as content. I wouldn't pick it up if you've got insider, but if you don't it will likely be useful.
#5

canamrock

Aug 15, 2009 0:10:24
Okay, so several questions in reguards to that product.

1) What is it supposed to be?

2) When is it supposed to be out? It says September on the site, and August 18th on the Barnes and Nobel site, so I am uncertain.

3) Who wants to know what is in it cause I actually have a copy of it? My local chain store must have REALLY messed up if it is not supposed to be out till September

1) As others here have stated, it's a compilation of several of the determined most useful and/or popular of that articles.

2) It's out on Tuesday. It got pushed up because the module that was supposed to be out fell flat.
#6

iakhovas

Aug 15, 2009 14:11:31
I'm very pleased that my Playing Dhamyr article was selected for inclusion.

In addition to the original text, the articles are accompanied by designer notes.
#7

Artifact

Aug 15, 2009 15:58:11
Insider is sorta like going to the theater to see a movie. If I like it enough, then I'll buy the DVD when it comes out, my own personal copy. The Dragon Annual is the same sorta thing. Designer commentary is a kind of DVD extra, a nice touch I think ;).

I hadn't realized the Annual had been released early, better keep my eyes open for a copy then. I'm really glad that Playing Dhampyr made the cut.

I enjoy Dragon/Dungeon but I much prefer print over a digital format. I wish they would compile several complete issues of Dragon at a time, similar to how comic books are compiled into trade paperbacks. Maybe they could release them three or four times a year. Ah well, wishful thinking ;).
#8

Belorin

Aug 16, 2009 14:57:16
Sounds great, glad I pre-ordered it.
Congrats on your Dhampyr article's inclusion Brian! And to all the other authors out there!

Bel
#9

Kalnaur

Aug 16, 2009 19:24:45
Insider is sorta like going to the theater to see a movie. If I like it enough, then I'll buy the DVD when it comes out, my own personal copy. The Dragon Annual is the same sorta thing. Designer commentary is a kind of DVD extra, a nice touch I think ;).

I hadn't realized the Annual had been released early, better keep my eyes open for a copy then. I'm really glad that Playing Dhampyr made the cut.

I enjoy Dragon/Dungeon but I much prefer print over a digital format. I wish they would compile several complete issues of Dragon at a time, similar to how comic books are compiled into trade paperbacks. Maybe they could release them three or four times a year. Ah well, wishful thinking ;).

That idea is solid gold. I would totally go for a seasonal schedule, and put it in paperback instead of hardback.
#10

hitmaninc

Aug 17, 2009 16:04:50
Yeah a Paper back compilation of dragon and even dungeon would be awesome.
#11

MrCelsius

Aug 31, 2009 20:33:27

1) What is it supposed to be?



Considering the nerf to Reaper's Touch (Dragon Annual adds 'Shadar Kai' to the prereqs, even though it wasn't in the final Dragon article), it's clearly supposed to be an errata that you pay extra for.  At first I was turned off from it because it won't contain everything from the year's Dragon articles (if it's not comprehensive, why bother?), but now I see that it's worse than useless, it's actually a detriment.  Awesome. Undecided
#12

Marandahir

Aug 31, 2009 23:30:30

Actually, this "nerfy" action you speak of is for the sake of balance. 


Until the Dragon Annual 2009, there was no reason to take any epic destiny other than Punisher of the Gods, not even Demigod. 


An action point for every KO is way too powerful.  An at-will is MUCH BETTER.


Other "nerfing," such as Reaper's Touch requiring Shadar-kai, are for similar reasons of balance.  Besides, it's supposed to be a SHADAR-KAI article, not a general feat article.  Makes the book worth it, alongside the Behind the Curtain that basically told off all those people who thought that Shadar-kai were melancholic emo losers who go axe-crazy, clarifying them as one of the most awesome races ever.

#13

GordonPasha

Sep 01, 2009 8:32:11


Actually, this "nerfy" action you speak of is for the sake of balance. 


Until the Dragon Annual 2009, there was no reason to take any epic destiny other than Punisher of the Gods, not even Demigod. 


An action point for every KO is way too powerful.  An at-will is MUCH BETTER.


Other "nerfing," such as Reaper's Touch requiring Shadar-kai, are for similar reasons of balance.  Besides, it's supposed to be a SHADAR-KAI article, not a general feat article.  Makes the book worth it, alongside the Behind the Curtain that basically told off all those people who thought that Shadar-kai were melancholic emo losers who go axe-crazy, clarifying them as one of the most awesome races ever.




 


I agree with PotG, but the reaper's touch change is annoying. Why? I can't see really balance issues, but it gave more options to a lot of builds.


But this is not my main beef with this supposed change: Fact is, it was already mentioned in the article errata thread (at least once, I think even several times), that it lacks the shadar-kai only restriction, and it wasn't changed in the final article (although there was more than enough time to do so). But after a few months, bang, it's changed. And while PotG for example is toned down a bit (but IMO still good), some RT builds simply cease to exist. And this is really not cool, also because of the implication that you can never be sure, if you took something out of the dragon, it will not be dramatically changed months after the final issue. That's IMO not a very appealing prospect.


And note, I'm a big fan of shadar-kai, and most things of D&DI.

#14

dowanroden

Sep 05, 2009 20:03:11

What I'd like to know is which issues these articles come from, my DM doesn't allow the magazines but will allow the Annual and I'd like to update the character builder to reflect that but it's a huge list of things.

#15

aliothefool

Sep 05, 2009 20:15:17

Wait a minute. So my eladrin wizard shouldn't have Reaper's Touch anymore? I never read the article, but added it because it was in the Character Builder.


That's flat out angering me if that's the case.


As for the book, I was just looking through it at Borders earlier today, and while it looks nice on paper, I cannot find a single justification for purchasing it when I've already spent the money on DDi. If I didn't have a DDi subscription, it might be worth the purchase, but there's no chance I'm wasting cash on it when I already own all the material digitally.

#16

dowanroden

Sep 05, 2009 21:09:13

Well, it's handy for those DMs that have the requirement of the particular articles being in hard cover ("book or it isn't official" sort).  After much aggravation I've managed to single out the particular issues of Dragon, seems the book is arranged roughly 'in order' from these issues; 364, 366-368 and 371-373.


Personally I don't see why they didn't give the issue numbers in the index or in the glossary...