To me, that just screams Wild Sorcery.
Frankly when I see "barely controlled magical power" I think renegade magic user in general. I also see that with the Warlock class, since any pact with devils or demons is usually never going to end well. In 3e the Dragonlance world made the distinction between "focused" and "unfocused" magic, but I've always found that to be clumsy and vague. If I had had my way, the difference would have been between "trained" and "untrained". Magic is available to anyone naturally (like Raistlin's mother) but unless one is trained and tested they are not to be trusted with it.
I think it is time for "wild sorcerer" and "renegade" to become synonymous terms, and to encourage a wide variety of magical styles under that umbrella. People are allowed to dabble in minor magics without much interference, but the rare exceptional people outside of the order who become a problem are dealt with extreme prejudice. When these renegades do join the Order (and gain proper control of their power) you get interesting little new traditions, like the Sylvan Mages or the Winternorns.
As a side note, if the rumours about a "wizard training" form of sub-multiclassing is available in 4e, we finally know what to do with Gilthanas who always had too much magical power, but was not considered a renegade. He has a few potent spells, but not enough to be a mage of any particular power.
Since spells and the ways spells are cast are changing, it might be something of a philosophical discussion to decide when one should take a person in to take the test or forced to join the order as an apprentice. If for example, a character can simply teleport short ranges and can do nothing else, would you bother to take them in to take the test? I sure wouldn't bother, even if it is a 4th level spell.
Correct. I am not in a rush to include tieflings and dragonborn as written into Dragonlance. They can serve as interesting suggestions mechanically for writing up non-standard races that are featured as DL race options, however - Irda, minotaurs, draconians, kyrie, and so forth.
I don't think a blanket ban on tieflings is necessary however, just don't make whole societies or communities of them. Frankly, it is long past time that Ansalonians started trafficking in devils and demons. Dragons should still be important (which is why I suggested a Dragon Warlock would be a good idea) but is intentional that Hiddukel sounds like "Duke of Hell".
As for the Dragonborn, we don't know exactly what they look like yet. We don't, for example, know that they will be divided into the 5 metallic colours like Draconians are. I do think we all agree though that the Dragonborn will be a good basis when we design the 4e Draconians, and both the Dragonborn and Tieflings will be a good inspiration for the 5th Age dragonspawn. Along with presumably the wholesale adoption of the Spawn of Tiamat, a natural extension of the dragonspawn and dragonspawn abominations.
To get back to the original topic, 4e is going to be wonderful for playing dragonlance races. That's because, despite being not as magic saturated as Forgotten Realms or Eberron, it has more powerful races that are considered "ordinary" in the campaign world. Minotaurs can be given their size and power back, and be real juggernauts. Ogres were the 3rd civilization along with elves and humans, but playing one as a character has always been a pipe dream before now. You can tick off several fan favourites that were impossible to play in 2e or 3e in a well-balanced way: Balkali, Irda, Sea Elves, Phaetons, Kyrie and Centaurs, that might be viable 1st level alternatives.
Personally, I hope I get to roll up a Aurak Draconian because I have always secretly wanted to play one of those. Heck, an all Draconian Dragonlance campaign would be sweet. A Baaz Fighter, a Bozak Warlord, a Kapak Rogue and an Aurak Wizard would be a very good team.
As for gnomes, of course we have to add them back in. Just think how interesting the paragon path of "Mad Gnome" would be, or the epic destiny of "Life Quest"?
The problem with Kender are not their mechanics , but the way they have been written. My advice to DM's who are nervous about kender is to simply not allow them to be rogues. When forced to adapt the kender personality to another class, it tends to change the outlook of how kender should operate. A kender barbarian would be fearless, first into the fray and collect heads instead of other people's belongings. I wonder what a kender warlord would look like.... Knonin Thistleknot perhaps?
