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

 

[Velderan]

again it's only a big deal when people complain that "No way it would ruin the setting's uniqueness"

if a player came to me and asked to play something not in theros I would roll with it. By the sounds of it many on here would think I just destroyed Theros. But no body is so invested that an Owlin gloomstalker ranger/assassin rogue in THeros is going to spawn a 200 page thread

And some tables may want more of a cliche ancient Greece experience and a half-orc would destroy their emersion. Some tables don't care, so a suggested baseline on how to enjoy the setting using the creator's intent while allowing people that don't care to deviate is fine.

 

[CreamCloud0]

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. .

The characters from different points of view both do and don’t require to be those races, Legolas the standalone character ‘the prince of the X’ didn’t need to be an elf but Legolas ‘prince of the X resident of Middle earth’ did because it was significant that elf, dwarf and human had allied as that had never happened before, Legolas could of been a dragonborn if there were dragonborn instead of elves as one of the five(?) main races of the world but Legolas should not of been a dragonborn if ‘oh yeah I’m a dragonborn from over the horizon you’ve never heard of my kind but i exist and I’m here’ because it doesn’t fit with the story being told as part of the world.

By the same token frodo and drizzt need to be their respective races because of the significance of what being those specific races as part of their specific settings implies.

There is no significance to being an orc in DL because there are no orcs in DL, or rather any significance they would have is because they don’t exist and would be pointed out as a curio because no-one has ever seen one before.

 

[hawkeyefan]

And my point is that what's important to the feel of the campaign is a case by case decision. Orcs have a lot to do with it for apparently a lot of people.

I think such importance is misplaced. Like if someone was trying to sell me on what made Krynn a cool setting and they led with "there's no orcs", I'd say they missed quite a bit. If "no orcs" was even in their top ten, I'd say they missed a lot.

It should be an afterthought. "Oh, and there's no hordes of orcs, so it doesn't feel quite so Tolkienesque in that regard."

As I've said a few times now, if a player wanted to play one of those in a Dragonlance game that I was running, I'd let him be one from some other world. Krynn, though, would remain orcless as a whole. Just because you don't see how it impacts the setting, doesn't mean that it does not impact it for people.

Right, and that's the kind of setting fidelity that I would say is misplaced. It's not a novel or a movie. It's a game. If you're going to allow an orc in play anyway, then just allow it. The need to allow it, but with the caveat that they're from another world... that's just odd.

Calling people's valid feelings about the subject "latching onto very minor things" is very dismissive and inappropriate.

I don't think it is dismissive or inappropriate at all. I think it is putting things in the proper perspective. It's all fiction, so any idea of what's "true" is just misguided.

People can deny orcs from Dragonlance games if they want, that's their right to do so and my comments cannot stop that, but there's nothing inappropriate about me saying that it's a silly concern.

 

[Maxperson]

it will feel different how?

Try this. Remove elves from Krynn and see if it feels different. If it does, then you will understand. If it doesn't, then I'm not sure what to tell you.

and then did it feel different the first 2 years when half orc assassines where PHB legal?

The first Dragonlance setting book was Dragonlance Adventures and both of those were not in Krynn unless they came from another world.

did it feel different when a canon novel HAD a half orc assassin?

This may come as a shock to you, but a large number of us 1) didn't bother to read all of the novels, 2) don't consider any novels to be canon, and 3) would not count a violation of canon that snuck through as new canon in any case. Arguing that the half orc in the novel is canon is like arguing that if someone breaks the law and gets away with it, new law is created making that illegal act legal. It makes no sense.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

mage robes are color coded, any mage can be in any tower

He meant orders, not towers, obviously. White, black, and red robes. Not the literal buildings.

yes I missed the fact that people didn't get that the robes are members of of the color codeing

 

[AnotherGuy]

maybe... but since my main argument is "a player wants to play something from the core book, so you should have an answer, a reason on why it would change things if it was allowed" and the post you quoted is like a billion posts into this argument I think saying I am focusing on the wrong thing is odd..

Let me explain, you focused not on the lore of the orc or its appearance but rather like Minigiant (in one of the threads, it is all confusing now) on the mechanical aspect of the race which is absolutely fine. IMO people can enjoy the game from a lore or mechanical aspect, I have no issue with any of that.

I'm addressing the posters who decided to drop in and inform us to ignore the orc and to highlight the right aspects of the setting one should focus on in a DL setting. I very much doubt these same posters would pop in to direct you to elements that you should be more focused on such as loyalty, family, love, betrayal and not on the racial features of aggressiveness, relentless endurance and menacing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

again, but what does it hurt? How does a small tribe of orcs 'over there' that is like the elves over here and those dwarves over there and those other dwarves down here and the gnomes over there... change the setting OTHER then letting the player make his half orc?

Because the elves and the dwarves are built into the setting already. They have cultures, and histories, and relationships with other peoples. Adding orcs now as a retcon turns the entire history on its ear. Individual one-offs from  way out of town are one thing. Re-weaving the tapestry to include a new heritage is something else, and I don't believe the official setting should do that.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I know they get to decide. I just think they should decide not to change established history for any reason not related to inclusivity.

And I hope they reimagine every setting

 

[Maxperson]

okay no one asked for you to get it, just that you get some players want them in the setting.

Also GMforPowergamers: "it will feel different how?"

Maybe just get that it feels different to some players.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

You think so? The only part I took away that was that you may not end up the robe you thought you would.

the thing I heard in the video was you had a good alignment but were surprised to find you are in black... since I don't know of anything that would change your alignment, I assume you are a good black robe.

In previous editions, you were allowed to pick after your test when Schneider (to me at least) made it sound like based on choices you make during your test, it may reveal you're not the person you thought you were. To me, that seems controversial because who decides that? The DM?

yeah I wasn't 100% sure about that myself.

I'm interested in what you took away, since you seem to look at things pretty differently (which is fine, the world would be a boring place if we all looked at things the same).

I see it like "Yeah LG necromancers are rare, but it happens" and "The Robes are more like ambition vs order and less evil vs good", I don't know where that leaves red