bclarkie wrote:That's not Wizards, that's Paizo.  

Isn;t WotC running with the online version?  or Paizo still involved?

bclarkie wrote:Paizo kept all the extra subscription monies and made the rules on how you could use it of which Wizrd's has no input on.

If it was up to Wizard's they would probably just roll your money into their online subscription.

Center_Stage_Hobbies wrote:Don't know how common this is with subscribers (since I wasn't one), but my ex-wife's boyfriend subscribed to Dungeon...and was only offered credit on BACK ISSUES to fill the balance of his subscription.

If I were the subscriber, I would be REALLY pissed about that...she said he wasn't even offered "credit" towards Pathfinder.

You ex-wife's boyfriend must have been confused, I had four options for rolling over my Dungeon subscription-

1) Buy back issues of either Dungeon or Dragon. 1 for 1 at subscription prices, not newsstand prices.
2) Roll over my subscription into a Pathfinder subscription and get the pdfs free.
3) Store credit at 120% cash value, they sell tons of games, comics and dvds.
4) A refund check at 100% cash value.

Everything was automated and they refused to customize it further, so he had the same offer.

Paizo turned Dungeon into a good money maker and have to give that up for what is an unproven new set of books, they would gladly roll his subscription over and hope he gets hooked on Pathfinder.

What might have happened is that he had so few issues left of his Dungeon subscription that it would not cover the cost of 1 or 2 issues of Pathfinder, and so he would have to put more money in to get the minimum subscription number of Pathfinder books they were offering at that subscription rate, I am not sure what that is.

That is most likely what happened, and he balked at putting in more money, and then gave a sob story about how he was wronged.

As for the Dragon magazine mention of acaeum, they interviewed Gygax and he says he did not recall the intended designations of WG1, WG2 and WG3 indicated here on the acaeum. It is it time to add a notation? Then again, Gygax might have forgotten.

Center_Stage_Hobbies wrote:Don't know how common this is with subscribers (since I wasn't one), but my ex-wife's boyfriend subscribed to Dungeon...and was only offered credit on BACK ISSUES to fill the balance of his subscription.

If I were the subscriber, I would be REALLY pissed about that...she said he wasn't even offered "credit" towards Pathfinder.

I'm pretty sure that's not true.  I've seen on mail and on the web that said conversion credit or refund available.  I don't see how some subscribers would be offered one set of options and some a different set.

Mars wrote:
I thought about picking up the last issue of Dragon and Dungeon but then though the $23 could be better spend and more enjoyed on a good Thai dinner.

Just confirmed:  $12.99 is the Canadian cover price.  That works out to $29.88 for the pair, after tax.

Mars wrote:I was in comic shop today and had a few issues of the newer Dragonlance comic.  I asked what rate they were going to use and they add 25%.  I said its flippin ridiculous since the actual rate is only about 6% - 8% even with the bank taking their cut.

I remember when the Canadian dollar was worth what seemed like 60-75% of the American dollar.  And long after that, the American dollar was worth more than a Euro.

Now the Canadian dollar and American dollar are worth about the same, and the Euro is kicking the greenback's ass.  That should make collectibles in North America easier to buy for the Europeans, yes?

Xaxaxe wrote:Man, this better be one hell of an issue.

Sadly, it wasn't. Not for $11, anyway ... not even close.

That's not to say that #359 doesn't have its moments. I'd guess just about every user here would enjoy the "Mysteries of D&D" article, for example. But, for the most part, it's just a big issue of Dragon.

And the "top 10 Dragon issues" thing? That was just plain strange. Not a single issue mentioned in that piece is in my personal top 40. And not one issue mentioned from the hyper-creative era of roughly #30 through #70? That's just wrong on many, many levels.