D&D 2E 2E Dragonlance.

[Zardnaar]

I bought the DL boxed set May 1996.

Tried running it back in 2E but didn't like it. A lot if the classes seem badly designed for example the Rose Knights which have a crappy do table no spells and no weapon specialization.

There's also several weapons that seem better than the phb ones.

The Irda also seem just better than almost everything.

Reading it now it seems a hit mess.

 

[toucanbuzz]

Yep. Though if properly run the Irda were pacifists and they made little sense in an adventuring party out to kill dragons, draconians, and the armies of the dark queen.

 

[cbwjm]

I think the main problem with the knights is that you're meant to keep everything that you gained from the previous order, they also gained extra proficiencies, it's why the rose knights required so much experience to advance. Surprisingly the dragonlance monstrous compendium better explains how they are meant to work. It calls them a variant of paladins with a few changes.

• Crown knights have weapon specialisation and specifically calls out that they gain no special abilities of the paladin.
• Sword knights gain all of the special paladin abilities and spells.
• Rose knights don't say they gain anything explicitly (other than more proficiencies) but it is implied they have all of the paladin special abilities. I'd give them the sword knight spells as well, even though the books state that the sword knights are the clerical order.

Something that always struck me as weird was that the heads of the wizard orders we level 17 for red and black and level 18 for white so two of them had no access to 9th level spells. Makes more sense in the context of 1e where the orders gain spells sooner.

It's still one of my favourite settings, but yeah, you would definitely have to work on the knights a bit to make them work better.

 

[Legatus Legionis]

.

 

[teitan]

You think that was bad, look at the map!

 

[Zardnaar]

I think the main problem with the knights is that you're meant to keep everything that you gained from the previous order, they also gained extra proficiencies, it's why the rose knights required so much experience to advance. Surprisingly the dragonlance monstrous compendium better explains how they are meant to work. It calls them a variant of paladins with a few changes.

• Crown knights have weapon specialisation and specifically calls out that they gain no special abilities of the paladin.
• Sword knights gain all of the special paladin abilities and spells.
• Rose knights don't say they gain anything explicitly (other than more proficiencies) but it is implied they have all of the paladin special abilities. I'd give them the sword knight spells as well, even though the books state that the sword knights are the clerical order.

Something that always struck me as weird was that the heads of the wizard orders we level 17 for red and black and level 18 for white so two of them had no access to 9th level spells. Makes more sense in the context of 1e where the orders gain spells sooner.

It's still one of my favourite settings, but yeah, you would definitely have to work on the knights a bit to make them work better.

Makes a bit of sense.

Crown night into one of the others would have weapon specialization.

It's kind of an early form of prestige classes.

 

[Coroc]

Well despite being a wonderful story, the translation approach into the DL modules was not up to todays standards. Beginning with the party starting level at 5th, the starting scene in the inn is rather like level 1 still wet behind the ears absolute fledglings. Also the first encounters are like for 5e level 1 characters. Otoh the chapter endboss black dragon (where they have to get the disks) is pretty tough for the party.
I think this starting level 5 comes from the thought "there be lots of dragons" but on the other side they limit max level to 18th and the rules say every one above that gets the direct attentions from Krynns gods.
That would also explain the "low" levels for your heads of the orders.
One think I instantly would houserule if I would DM DL would be the steel coin monetary system.
The idea makes me wind in agony, why not wood chips?
I mean todays coins are sometimes not worth the material (sometimes in the case of low value copper coins the material is more costly than the depicted value though), but I cannot remember having read anywhere that the coins at least have engravings on them (again steel would be an awful material to do thins) or imprints of a rulers face or such, so that they are at least a little proof against forgery.

 

[Zardnaar]

Well despite being a wonderful story, the translation approach into the DL modules was not up to todays standards. Beginning with the party starting level at 5th, the starting scene in the inn is rather like level 1 still wet behind the ears absolute fledglings. Also the first encounters are like for 5e level 1 characters. Otoh the chapter endboss black dragon (where they have to get the disks) is pretty tough for the party.
I think this starting level 5 comes from the thought "there be lots of dragons" but on the other side they limit max level to 18th and the rules say every one above that gets the direct attentions from Krynns gods.
That would also explain the "low" levels for your heads of the orders.
One think I instantly would houserule if I would DM DL would be the steel coin monetary system.
The idea makes me wind in agony, why not wood chips?
I mean todays coins are sometimes not worth the material (sometimes in the case of low value copper coins the material is more costly than the depicted value though), but I cannot remember having read anywhere that the coins at least have engravings on them (again steel would be an awful material to do thins) or imprints of a rulers face or such, so that they are at least a little proof against forgery.

2E goes to 25. Unified xp tables for the wizards.

 

[Coroc]

2E goes to 25. Unified xp tables for the wizards.

Yes it does, but the 1e rulebook said that max level would be 18 (as a PC).
Did they do an update of the rules for 2e?
I never played it back then so my knowledge is not profound.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Yes it does, but the 1e rulebook said that max level would be 18 (as a PC).

And that was only for wizards. Other classes had their xp tables end abruptly at lower levels. Notably druids ended at level 14, with higher level hierophant druids added later - in Dragon magazine I think.