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

 

[Cadence]

Let people play what they want to play. Sheesh.

Don't agree to play in a game that has a certain setting if you aren't willing to buy into it.

If you invite me to a D&D game, and I just love playing elf characters . . . or orcs, or tieflings, or whatever . . . especially when it's trivially easy to add them in to just about ANY D&D campaign.

Just because you're invited, doesn't mean you have to go if you aren't going to have a good time.

I'm always curious at the attitude of badwrongfun . . . if you don't play my way, you aren't doing it right.

You mean like telling a DM who is interested in running a game that doesn't have X, Y, and Z that they're doing it wrong?

 

[Cadence]

Again, turn the question around and the question is why is it so important to restrict the species players can use because some writer who isn't at your table excluded them?

Because they've decided they like it and want to do it?

 

[Faolyn]

maybe no one is evangelizing about DL in a DL focused thread, as they expect you to already be familiar with it

I've said before that Dragonlance is a story of epic war between good and evil, on dragonback, and been told that's not what Dragonlance is about. The only thing anyone has said that DL is about is that it's American frontier, which is not a useful description as American frontier doesn't preclude an epic war between good and evil, on dragonback. It just assumes... I dunno, prairies? Cowboys? Indigenous people to villainize?

So maybe people should be focusing on the things that Dragonlance has, and why those things are so cool that orcs (or tieflings! People have forgotten about them) aren't needed.

 

[Faolyn]

It's worth noting the only class that Krynn doesn't account for in 3e is warlock, which makes sense as it wasn't a core class yet.

But y'know, considering the stranglehold the Towers have on higher-level wizardry, it makes sense that people might turn to other means to get spells. Sure, the robed wizards might consider you a renegade, but who cares when you have a demon lord on your side?

 

[Minigiant]

But the new book is going to use 5e rules.

Weiss and Hickman designed Dragonlance before TCOE

 

[Micah Sweet]

Weiss and Hickman designed Dragonlance before TCOE

Again, what does that have to do with @Remathilis 's desire to have six races, one for each ability score? That wasn't a part of 1st ed, for which the setting was developed, or 5th ed, for which the book under discussion is being released. That's what I was responding to.

 

[Cadence]

Weiss and Hickman designed Dragonlance before TCOE

Yes. They are obviously well aware of that fact.

It feels like they're saying "If you're going to be playing 5e Dragonlance then the race based ASIs won't matter apparently, because they seemingly wont' be a thing."

If you're not going to be playing 5e Dragonlance, or will be modding it to have race based ASIs, then saying so feels like that would address their query? (Edit: Or similarly for saying you're focussing on the worlds original creation way back when and not on anything modern.)

 

[Demetrios1453]

Let people play what they want to play. Sheesh.

If you invite me to a D&D game, and I just love playing elf characters . . . or orcs, or tieflings, or whatever . . . especially when it's trivially easy to add them in to just about ANY D&D campaign.

I'm always curious at the attitude of badwrongfun . . . if you don't play my way, you aren't doing it right.

Isn't the player doing that when they insist on playing a character from a race the DM says is excluded? If you don't play it the player's way, you aren't doing it right.

 

[reelo]

My gripe with many settings' race choices is that the race set aren't often chosen for actual gameplay. So they stifle fun in use if at many tables if the base ruleset isn't permissive. No reason for 2 Con races and 2 Dex races but no Wis or Str races if gameplay is an important driving factor, the game is heavily attributed to ability scores, and the game going for mass appeal.

When it comes to going for a thematic setting, game-mechanics like attribute-scores should be the least of considerations. Races aren't just a set of modifiers.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Let people play what they want to play. Sheesh.

If you invite me to a D&D game, and I just love playing elf characters . . . or orcs, or tieflings, or whatever . . . especially when it's trivially easy to add them in to just about ANY D&D campaign.

I'm always curious at the attitude of badwrongfun . . . if you don't play my way, you aren't doing it right.

Adding elves to a campaign that doesn't already include them is far from trivial. You need to establish where the elven populations live geographically, their lore, how they interact politically with the other people, etc.

Why go through that to accommodate a player who clearly isn't very interested in your setting, they just want to play D&D, when you can play with someone else instead?