Dragonlance Dragonlance Creators Reveal Why There Are No Orcs On Krynn

Talking to the Dragonlance Nexus, Dragonlance creators Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman revealed why the world of Krynn features no orcs -- in short, because they didn't want to copy Tolkien, and orcs were very much a 'Middle Earth' thing.

Weis told Trampas Whiteman that "Orcs were also viewed as very Middle Earth. We wanted something different." Hickman added that it was draconians which made Krynn stand out. Read more at the link below!

Why are there no Orcs in Krynn? Weis and Hickman give us the answer! - Dragonlance Nexus

Dragonhelm gets the scoop from Weis and Hickman on why there are no orcs in Krynn. Read More

dragonlancenexus.com

 

[Paul Farquhar]

One interesting thing about Dragonlace's use of goblins and lack of orcs is how it removes the "nearby enemy"

D&D traditionally uses goblins and orcs as the first and closest nearby threat. By banning orcs and making goblins nomadic or home in their own country, there is no real "close humaniod nonhuman threat" at the edge of the forest unless the DM forces it.

Sure it wasn't Weiss and Hickman's intention but it works with the War and High/Epic Fantasy theme very well.

I believe it was very much intentional. Prior to the war, there is no "nearby enemy". The world is peaceful, and there is nothing around scarier than a bear. Thus, Weiss and Hickman wanted to emphasise the difference between a world at peace and a world at war.

 

[Minigiant]

I believe it was very much intentional. Prior to the war, there is no "nearby enemy". The world is peaceful, and there is nothing around scarier than a bear. Thus, Weiss and Hickman wanted to emphasise the difference between a world at peace and a world at war.

It wasn't intentional. They said so.

They could have made orcs and goblins be from a far away place and had the Dragonamries recruit them as they came in. They choose not to in order to not make it feel Middle Earthy.

They more or less lucked onto removing one of the two "most common close threats" by attempting to distance themselves from Tolkien.

Kind how they luck into explaining how sorcerers work with introducing Wild Magic and Lunar Magic to the setting.

 

[mamba]

To mamba, you said:

So which is it? No orcs is a main distinguishing feature that makes it a non-generic world, or it's not a main distinguishing feature?

these two are not contradictory. He said Krynn isn’t generic fantasy minus orcs

 

[mamba]

As with the others, your flippancy and condescension do not help your case. It would be really nice if you actually engaged with what I had to say instead of ignoring it and making fun of me.

I did, and I contradicted every point you made with quotes from the article you were basing your conclusion on.
That is very much as engaged as it gets.

I also was not making fun of you, I kept is light hearted, with one rhetorical / joking question in it.

Well, I guess this explains why you got it so wrong in the first place.

I also notice that you did not engage with my points but instead are resorting to insults. Ironic, you are the one doing what you are accusing me of

 

[mamba]

Exactly this. Nothing more and nothing less.

They could have. they did not want to. Hard to fathom, I know

 

[Remathilis]

only if, and bear with me here, these ideas require Orgzar to be a half-orc. Can't say I can think of anything that would require it, for any char idea


has he been running exclusively DL up to this point ? if not, I would not overly worry that he will play DL exclusively going forward....

Does Legolas need to be an elf? Does Frodo need to be a hobbit? Does Drizzt need to be a drow? I'm sure nothing about them with change if you made them all humans or gnomes...

And let's replace "Krynn" with "personal homebrew he's been running since he started DMing". And you get a little closer to what I've seen over the years. And if that setting has no orcs, then barring finding a new DM (or convincing them to switch settings) you are sol. .

 

[Velderan]

<sigh>

Theros and Ravnica were created for Magic: the Gathering and later converted to D&D. Eberron was created for D&D, specifically for a contest that had specific rules to it.

Different things.

Well then by your argument they probably shouldn't have been converted if they don't support the entire PHB. Any argument about DL can be applied to the MtG based material that are now checks notes campaign settings for D&D.

Bad arguments are bad. Books can suggest a baseline and DMs can work with their players on figuring out if that baseline makes sense for their table. The wording of the DMG already says as DM I can make changes to published stuff, so if I don't want tieflings in the Realms guess what I can do as DM? How many places does WotC need to say make it your own game before people will figure that out? Given the lack of any controversy on the MtG settings, I'm going to guess this is nowhere near the problem you seem to be making it out to be.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I both play and DM. So either/or

And no. Dragonlance has too many things I find dumb and not enough things I find cool to make me want to spend any amount of money. So far, the only thing that intrigues me is when the video (or at least, the synopsis of the video) in the other thread (Everything You Need For Shadow of the Dragon Queen) that said "War is represented by context -- it's not goblins attacking the village, but evil forces; refugees, rumours" because I'm interested in seeing how they accomplish that.

For myself if I did run a DL setting I'd want to lean hard into the history, mythos and religious aspect of the setting - and would prefer if the PCs were tied to the Solamnic Knights, the Robed Wizards etc.
I'm currently at the tail end of a protracted ToD campaign so Takhisis, her spawn and a war is not on the cards again, so soon at least.

 

[mamba]

Does Legolas need to be an elf? Does Frodo need to be a hobbit? Does Drizzt need to be a drow?

no…

I'm sure nothing about them with change if you made them all humans or gnomes...

so you are answering your own question, and we even agree on the answer. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Not sure how people are missing literally 50% of the explanation as they focus on the Tolkien part. They felt it would have been too Tolkien (which clearly was on their mind when they decided how to make halflings into kender) AND they felt goblins and draconians filled the role so they just didn't see the need.

and both fall apart if orc/half orc is no longer "Only token" or "Only the nameless minons of evil" once you have orc/half orc be jsut like elves "Goood, bad, everything between" that entirely hold no water... they are NOT tolken, they are NOT soldiers of evil... they are a people.