Dragonlance Dragonlance Creators Reveal Why There Are No Orcs On Krynn

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

Gortack (Orcs).jpg

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!

 

log in or register to remove this ad

To the broader question of including or excluding ancestries from a setting, I think the assumption that any given option should default to be included is frankly absurd. The number of possible fantasy/sci-fi species is for all practical purposes infinite, and even the most kitched sink of settings will exclude far more than it includes.

That said, any given iteration of a D&D setting exists for the benefit of the half dozen or so people playing in a specific game.
If one of those people is excited about including something, that seems like a very compelling reason to find a way to include it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

That's literally the rationale for everything a writer does. Why does the hero kill the villain's henchman? Because the writer wanted them to. Why didn't the hero grow wings? Because the writer didn't want them to. Why is Vader Luke's father? Because Lucas wanted him to be. Why isn't Palpatine Luke's father? Because Lucas didn't want him to be. Why did Gandalf fall off a bridge? Because Tolkien wanted him to. Why did he come back? Because Tolkien wanted him to do that, too. Why are there dwarves with blunderbusses? Because the writer wanted them. Why are there no dinosaurs/steamtrains/spaceships/orcs? Because the writer didn't want them. Not only is it a compelling reason, it's the most compelling reason -- that's how art works.

Now you can disagree whether it's good art or not (that's also how art works) but an artist's choices not being a compelling reason as to the content of their work? That's how they make stuff.
all of this is 100% true but when reimagining and or rebooting something with a new writer the story can change and the new writer gets to make the story.
 

That's literally the rationale for everything a writer does. Why does the hero kill the villain's henchman? Because the writer wanted them to. Why didn't the hero grow wings? Because the writer didn't want them to. Why is Vader Luke's father? Because Lucas wanted him to be. Why isn't Palpatine Luke's father? Because Lucas didn't want him to be. Why did Gandalf fall off a bridge? Because Tolkien wante dhim to. Why did he come back? Because Tolkien wanted him to do that, too. Why are there dwarves with blunderbusses? Because the writer wanted them. Why are there no dinosaurs/steamtrains/spaceships/orcs? Because the writer didn't want them. Not only is it a compelling reason, it's the most compelling reason -- that's how art works.

Now you can disagree whether it's good art or not (that's also how art works) but an artist's choices not being a compelling reason as to the content of their work? That's how they make stuff.
Fair enough, I suppose.

My mindset is colored by the "if it exists in D&D, it has a place in Eberron" guideline and a personal hobby of brainstorming conversions of various adventure paths and modules to my preferred settings of Eberron and Planescape. When it comes to D&D settings in particular, I tend to look for ways to include things by default, rather than reasons to exclude them, so this particular discussion over things Dragonlance restricts and why/if they should remain restricted runs counter to the way I generally think of these things.
 

I mean from WotC's side of the equation, not homebrew or third-party.

The rationale given for the lack of orcs in Dragonlance is that the original developers of the setting didn't want to include orcs in Dragonlance. I am not making a statement one way or the other on whether that was the correct decision. I don't find the rationale in question particularly compelling, but I am also not a Dragonlance fan, so I have little real investment in the matter.

What I am trying to understand is why there is so much resistance to even the hypothetical that WotC might create a place for orcs in the 5e version of Dragonlance, as they did for Dragonborn and Eladrin in the 4e release of Eberron.
When they redid Battlestar Galactica, they reimagined the Cylons. They didn't add in little green aliens chasing them across the galaxy because the original series hadn't included those. If they had, it would have altered the feel of Battlestar Galactica and a lot of people would have been upset.

A setting has a feel to it and that feel and what has been established shouldn't be altered when a new set comes out just because people want orcs to be included for tradition reasons. There needs to be a compelling reason to alter the setting and build in orcs by default, and there just plain isn't one. "I want to play one." isn't a compelling reason to alter a setting. Talk to your DM if you want to play one.

As for 4e Eberron, I don't like 4e or Eberron, so I really didn't take part in those discussions. I don't know if there was any resistance to adding in more races to Eberron, or if not, why not.
 

When they redid Battlestar Galactica, they reimagined the Cylons. They didn't add in little green aliens chasing them across the galaxy because the original series hadn't included those. If they had, it would have altered the feel of Battlestar Galactica and a lot of people would have been upset.

A setting has a feel to it and that feel and what has been established shouldn't be altered when a new set comes out just because people want orcs to be included for tradition reasons. There needs to be a compelling reason to alter the setting and build in orcs by default, and there just plain isn't one. "I want to play one." isn't a compelling reason to alter a setting. Talk to your DM if you want to play one.
BSG is not a great example! NuBSG has a very different feel to 80sBSG.

Both are awesome, but they ain't the same.
 




As for 4e Eberron, I don't like 4e or Eberron, so I really didn't take part in those discussions. I don't know if there was any resistance to adding in more races to Eberron, or if not, why not.
They were fairly well received because they were weaved into existing lore, Eladrin were recently stranded on Eberron from the plane of Thelanis (Feywild) as a side effect of the Mourning. Dragonborn became the "half-dragon lizardfolk in the jungles of Q'barra" mentioned in passing in the 3e book.

On the other hand, the attempt to shoehorn Baator into the setting as a fourteenth plane was met with anger and derision, and mercifully isn't mentioned in the 5e book.
 

They were fairly well received because they were weaved into existing lore, Eladrin were recently stranded on Eberron from the plane of Thelanis (Feywild) as a side effect of the Mourning. Dragonborn became the "half-dragon lizardfolk in the jungles of Q'barra" mentioned in passing in the 3e book.

On the other hand, the attempt to shoehorn Baator into the setting as a fourteenth plane was met with anger and derision, and mercifully isn't mentioned in the 5e book.
No, but the 5e book engendered a lot of anger over adding it to the cosmology of the multiverse allowing gods to be known fact and travel to and from other settings.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top