Dragon for players? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Dragon for players?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
dmjbone
Aug 19, 2008 17:11:36 I'm confused. I thought Dragon was a magazine for players, while Dungeon was a magazine for DMs. What's the point of mixing the "DM stuff" (i.e. Traps for example) into a "player" magazine?

Where's the fun in it for players when half the magazine is devoted to stuff they "shouldn't" read?

With the new digital format, I don't see why you can't make the distinction more clear. Dragon for players, Dungeon for DMs...seems pretty easy.
#2
WolfStar76
Aug 19, 2008 22:27:42
I'm confused. I thought Dragon was a magazine for players, while Dungeon was a magazine for DMs. What's the point of mixing the "DM stuff" (i.e. Traps for example) into a "player" magazine?

Where's the fun in it for players when half the magazine is devoted to stuff they "shouldn't" read?

With the new digital format, I don't see why you can't make the distinction more clear. Dragon for players, Dungeon for DMs...seems pretty easy.

Have they really stated that for the new digital versions, or are we assuming it from the print versions?

If I had to classify the two based on content so far I'd say Dragon is for rules, Dungeons is for adventures.
#3
serphet
Aug 19, 2008 22:41:31 yes, Dungeon is just a publication for adventures.
#4
dmjbone
Aug 19, 2008 23:07:25 Well it's hard to tell since the "editorials" are pretty much useless.

And Dungeon isn't just adventures-there's DM "help" style articles as well.

But let me phrase it another way then.

Dragon should be for Players.

They're already getting the short end of the stick on this whole, "you have to buy both magazines" scheme as it is. What's a player going to do with Dungeon Magazine? What's a player going to do with articles full of DM style background and monster info?

It just seems to me a really obvious and helpful distinction of content between the products and would give more value to "Players."
#5
kouk
Aug 20, 2008 7:16:28 I agree that the magazines should be clearly for one or the other, but they then end up with varying numbers of pages and if they didn't hide so much DM stuff in Dragon then players would say, "Why should I pay for this when I only get one magazine and it's almost empty?"

Currently a player would have to pay for a couple of months before realizing it was half useless to him if he were not a DM also. So, more money for them, and maybe, just maybe, it will inspire a player to try DMing.
#6
the_ragi
Aug 20, 2008 16:33:22 Dragon is for the group, Dungeon is for the DM.
#7
kouk
Aug 20, 2008 18:31:14
Dragon is for the group, Dungeon is for the DM.

I guess that's a decent way to look at it.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 dmjbone Aug 19, 2008 17:11:36	I'm confused. I thought Dragon was a magazine for players, while Dungeon was a magazine for DMs. What's the point of mixing the "DM stuff" (i.e. Traps for example) into a "player" magazine? Where's the fun in it for players when half the magazine is devoted to stuff they "shouldn't" read? With the new digital format, I don't see why you can't make the distinction more clear. Dragon for players, Dungeon for DMs...seems pretty easy.
#2 WolfStar76 Aug 19, 2008 22:27:42	I'm confused. I thought Dragon was a magazine for players, while Dungeon was a magazine for DMs. What's the point of mixing the "DM stuff" (i.e. Traps for example) into a "player" magazine? Where's the fun in it for players when half the magazine is devoted to stuff they "shouldn't" read? With the new digital format, I don't see why you can't make the distinction more clear. Dragon for players, Dungeon for DMs...seems pretty easy. Have they really stated that for the new digital versions, or are we assuming it from the print versions? If I had to classify the two based on content so far I'd say Dragon is for rules, Dungeons is for adventures.
#3 serphet Aug 19, 2008 22:41:31	yes, Dungeon is just a publication for adventures.
#4 dmjbone Aug 19, 2008 23:07:25	Well it's hard to tell since the "editorials" are pretty much useless. And Dungeon isn't just adventures-there's DM "help" style articles as well. But let me phrase it another way then. Dragon should be for Players. They're already getting the short end of the stick on this whole, "you have to buy both magazines" scheme as it is. What's a player going to do with Dungeon Magazine? What's a player going to do with articles full of DM style background and monster info? It just seems to me a really obvious and helpful distinction of content between the products and would give more value to "Players."
#5 kouk Aug 20, 2008 7:16:28	I agree that the magazines should be clearly for one or the other, but they then end up with varying numbers of pages and if they didn't hide so much DM stuff in Dragon then players would say, "Why should I pay for this when I only get one magazine and it's almost empty?" Currently a player would have to pay for a couple of months before realizing it was half useless to him if he were not a DM also. So, more money for them, and maybe, just maybe, it will inspire a player to try DMing.
#6 the_ragi Aug 20, 2008 16:33:22	Dragon is for the group, Dungeon is for the DM.
#7 kouk Aug 20, 2008 18:31:14	Dragon is for the group, Dungeon is for the DM. I guess that's a decent way to look at it.