Hi Margret, thank you for dragonlance. You are basically responsible for me realising I'm not the only weird kid, others exist and it's ok to be me. When I was younger I crashed my bike into a fence and flew a good ten feet into an unforeseen pile of bottles while pretending to be tasslehoff and no one could understand my intense joy despite the stitches, so thanks for giving me a wonderfully suspect role model. After that long introduction my question is sort of connected. What positive or negative effects do you feel that the sort of prototype 'iconic characters' (a model used by both 3rd ed and pathfinder since) had on the setting and peoples engagement? Did you find that was what people wanted to talk about or did they feel trapped by almost having to play them in the adventures?
Also, hypothetically, if wizards offered MWP the chance to write an adventure, would you take it? And would you use dragonlance, sovereign stone, or some other setting?
Also, hypothetically, if wizards offered MWP the chance to write an adventure, would you take it? And would you use dragonlance, sovereign stone, or some other setting?