2010: Is it Dragonlance? (hint)

[ggroy]

Nope, there's no "a" in d20 Modern. Though there is in Urban Arcana.

I don't know how WotC would incorporate d20 Modern into the Points of Light setting, without looking awkward. The easiest solution would be to release 4E d20 Modern as a completely separate game, independent of Points of Light and D&D modulo the structure of the 4E rules.

With a limited number of full time staff and freelancers, they do have to make decisions on how and where to allocate their limited resources and whether that will translate into sales figures they are satisfied with. The days of rpg companies selling "dogshit" masquerading as rpg books that some people would buy, has come and gone many years ago.

 

[Derren]

That goes against 25 years of Dragonlance history.

Yet it is also exactly the thing WotC would do.

 

[ggroy]

Yet it is also exactly the thing WotC would do.

How much "mutilation" was done on Dragonlance during the 3.5E era?

I only had several Dragonlance books and modules from the days of 1E AD&D. I never picked up any of the 3.5E era Dragonlance books.

 

[Dausuul]

My guess would be that all arcane classes would fall under the rubric of the Orders of High Sorcery, with the Test coming at the end of Heroic tier, and a separate paragon path for each of the White, Red, and Black Robes.

That's assuming the Orders and the Test still exist, of course.

 

[doctorhook]

I do. To MWP, for not only bringing Dragonlance back to its roots, but also moving it forward in fresh and interesting ways. Their work has been exemplary.

I am, of course, biased. ;-)

Everything I've heard about DL suggests that its roots really were a lot stronger than many of the more recent developments. With that in mind, a 4E version of Dragonlance will be the first version of it that I explore, and so I naturally hope for it to be interesting; thus, I think I'd like to see 4E's Dragonlance focus upon whatever parts originally made it great, balanced with the basic assumptions of 4E (the world-axis metacosmology, many types of magic, the existance of "monstrous" player races, etc.).

What irks me is when certain individuals who are openly hostile to 4E make pejorative comments towards either that system or WotC for publishing it. I happen to like 3.5E, but I like 4E even more, and I'm generally quite happy with how WotC handles things. I resent when these individuals antagonize my choice of game, or suggest that a 4E version of given setting (say, for example, Dragonlance) would inherently be inferior on account of merely being 4E or published by WotC. I happen to think they mostly do a great job.

 

[Dire Bare]

I don't know how WotC would incorporate d20 Modern into the Points of Light setting, without looking awkward. The easiest solution would be to release 4E d20 Modern as a completely separate game, independent of Points of Light and D&D modulo the structure of the 4E rules.

WotC doesn't have to "integrate" any setting into a points-of-light mode. The core setting is points-of-light, and the Realms was given a makeover to be more points-of-lighty . . . but Eberron has suffered extremely minor changes (mostly additive, like, "where do dragonborn and eladrin come from). Eberron has elements of, but is not, a points-of-light setting.

I don't think we'll see an redo of Urban Arcana anytime soon (but would love it), but if/when it happens, there is no need to make it more of a points-of-light setting. On the other hand, this is perfectly possible to do in a "real world" setting like this. Evil is everywhere, the majority of the populace is unaware, you are one of the few who know the truth, and there are precious few places where you can find refuge . . .

 

[Dragonhelm]

My guess would be that all arcane classes would fall under the rubric of the Orders of High Sorcery, with the Test coming at the end of Heroic tier, and a separate paragon path for each of the White, Red, and Black Robes.

That's assuming the Orders and the Test still exist, of course.

They do. In AD&D, the Test happened between 3rd and 4th level. In 3.5, the Test typically happened at 4th level, with your 5th level being when you could take the Wizard of High Sorcery prestige class.

You could apply the 3.5 scenario to 4th edition with paragon paths, but that's an awfully long time to wait to be able to play a WoHS. Some games never even reach paragon levels. It would stand to reason, then, that the Test be taken at lower levels, gaining access to the ranks of the WoHS. Then the paragon paths could be reserved for specialty roles, such as renegade hunters or the Kingfishers.

In fact, I think organizations in DL will likely be separated from paragon paths, save for specialized roles.

Now, as for the arcane classes and the WoHS, I'm afraid I'll have to disagree slightly. In SAGA, they introduced sorcery and mysticism, which were essentially "replacement magic" for arcane and divine magic, respectfully. After the War of Souls, Dragonlance found itself with four types of magic - 2 arcane and 2 divine.

What that means, is that in 3.5, the sorcerer wasn't drawing from the arcane magic of the moons. He drew his power from the ambient arcane magic of the world itself. Unless continuity is thrown out, then the sorcerer would exist outside of the WoHS. This adds a nifty dynamic and conflict.

Warlocks, then, would be problematic since they make pacts. Now, if you had one pact per moon god, they would work out fine.

As for swordmages..."A warrior has his sword. A wizard has his magic." They really don't fit the theme of the Orders. I could see them being practitioners of the same wild sorcery that sorcerers use.

Artificers and bards also work out in Dragonlance, though in both cases, I would also go with wild sorcery. One of the SAGA schools of sorcery dealt with the same sort of stuff that artificers deal with, and bards in the WoHS just seems weird.

So yeah, all the arcane classes can work in Dragonlance, the warlock requiring the most work. There may need to be some tweaking, but that's the case with any world. With the existing setup on magic, there can be some nifty dynamics.

That being said, if there is a total reboot, then it may be best to lump everything together under the WoHS. *shrugs*

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Nope, there's no "a" in d20 Modern. Though there is in Urban Arcana.

My new prediction, based on nothing but snarkiness and the desire to be different, is that the 2010 setting is indeed Dragonlance, but is not Ansalon. It's Taladas! The letter "a" appears three times, so mathematically I can't lose!

Maybe it is "Advanced d20 Modern"? Or "d20 Modern Advanced" or "d20 Advanced Modern"?

Well; I would would love a D&D4ified d20 Modern.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Well you know, that kind of happens when you make an entire race of subconscious kleptomaniacs with no regard for personal property (or space apparently) under the protection of gods. Sometimes you just have to sit back and ask "What were they thinking when they made this?" It seems as if the purpose of Kender is simply to annoy everything else, which is even backed up mechanically.

Well, remember that DL was a novel first, and then a campaign setting. While having ultra-powerful main characters and annoying races like Kender and Gully dwarves work in novels, where you can use them to further the plot, develop unique worldviews, and such things these plot devices sometimes do not translate well to RPGs.

 

[Dragonhelm]

Everything I've heard about DL suggests that its roots really were a lot stronger than many of the more recent developments. With that in mind, a 4E version of Dragonlance will be the first version of it that I explore, and so I naturally hope for it to be interesting; thus, I think I'd like to see 4E's Dragonlance focus upon whatever parts originally made it great, balanced with the basic assumptions of 4E (the world-axis metacosmology, many types of magic, the existance of "monstrous" player races, etc.).

You're absolutely right, the main focus of Dragonlance has always been the War of the Lance. This begs the question of whether they will go back to this era, or create a new starting point like they did with the Realms. Hard to say, though I'd guess they'd go with the WotL era due to the popularity of Chronicles and Legends.

What irks me is when certain individuals who are openly hostile to 4E make pejorative comments towards either that system or WotC for publishing it. I happen to like 3.5E, but I like 4E even more, and I'm generally quite happy with how WotC handles things. I resent when these individuals antagonize my choice of game, or suggest that a 4E version of given setting (say, for example, Dragonlance) would inherently be inferior on account of merely being 4E or published by WotC. I happen to think they mostly do a great job.

I hope none of my comments have been misconstrued as anti-4e or anti-WotC. If so, then I apologize if I have inadvertently given that impression.

Like you, I like 3.5e, but I like 4e even more. I am also a fan of WotC. Nothing against them. I've enjoyed the 4e products quite a bit.

That being said, I'm also one of the freelance writers for MWP who helped to shape and mold Dragonlance for 3.5, as well as the administrator for the Dragonlance Nexus fan website. I've been a Dragonlance fan since the early 90s. So the setting is very near and dear to my heart.

When I look at 4e for Dragonlance, I know that WotC would put out a good product. Yet I also have certain misgivings, based largely on the Realms reboot. I also have questions about certain items, like how to do gully dwarves when there are no negative ability score modifiers.

While WotC may do a good job, MWP would be better still (in my opinion). The reason I say this is because MWP and their freelances are vested in the setting. They know the setting inside out, and worked hard to integrate 3.5-isms into the setting. The MWP era of Dragonlance gaming is considered by many fans to be the "golden age of Dragonlance gaming."

So that's where I'm coming from on this.