Dragon Reflections #102

This issue features gully dwarves, gaming styles, and a new AD&D adventure!
TSR Inc. published Dragon #102 in October 1985. It is 100 pages long and has a cover price of $3.00. This issue features gully dwarves, gaming styles, and a new AD&D adventure!

show-pic.jpg

The cover, titled “The Pillage of Tantlin,” is by veteran artist Dean Morrissey. It depicts a group of gnomes who appear to be looting a bridge! Interior artists include Larry Elmore, Bob Maurus, Roger Raupp, Jim Holloway, the Marvel Bullpen, David Trampier, Joseph Pillsbury, Richard Tomasic, Lance Foster, and Edward Wagner.

This month’s special attraction is “Valley of the Earth Mother”, a Celtic-themed AD&D adventure by Lise Breakey. The characters must travel to a druidic stronghold to recover a minor relic, but their mission is complicated by a sinister death cult. The focus is very much on combat and exploration. The dungeon encounters are generally conventional, but there is lots of theming in the room descriptions, and the monsters are nicely detailed. Lise Breakey was the designer of the Furry Pirates and Furry Outlaws RPGs, and later published a novel.

In “Realms of role playing,” Gary Gygax suggests that the emphasis in role-playing games has swung away from “game” and more toward “role-playing”, which he thinks is a problem. Tournaments are becoming too theatrical for his tastes. He would like more focus on the gaming aspects, such as problem-solving, exploration, and combat. Years after this column, a designer called Ron Edwards proposed that RPGs could be classified by their focus on Gaming, Narrative, or Simulation. Gygax was always very much into RPGs as a game.

“All About the gully dwarf” by Roger E. Moore describes the hapless comic underclass of Krynn. He explains their origins in the intermarriage of gnomes and dwarves, which resulted in a new race that “lacked all the better qualities of its parents.” He also goes into detail about their clan structure, their chaotic leadership, and their personal traits, especially their legendary stupidity. Moore usually finds some nuance and dignity in the stereotypes attached to the various races, but he doesn’t quite succeed in redeeming the poor gully dwarf. Moore was a staff editor for Dragon.

Stephen Inniss presents “A collection of canines,” which expands the list of AD&D dogs. There are some solid, concise descriptions of each breed, but the new stat blocks overlap a lot, with many virtually identical. It would have been better if each type had a special ability or attack. For example, the coyote could have a hit-and-run attack, while the hunting dogs could deal bonus damage when attacking in packs. Inniss was a frequent contributor to Dragon.

“Nine wands of wonder” by Ed Greenwood describes nine new magical wands from the Forgotten Realms. These range from the prosaic-sounding wand of darkness through to the wand of magical mirrors and the wand of teeth. Each entry contains some Realms-specific lore, such as who made the wand, how many were made, and where they are now. Some of the wands have a single function, whilst others have a package of powers tied together by a theme. These are generally well-executed, though I really wish he included an evocative physical description of each one. Greenwood was a contributing editor for Dragon.

“Now That’s Firepower!” by Desmond P. Varady adds machine-guns and personal rocket launchers to Top Secret. Each weapon is accompanied by a page of rules and multiple tables, no doubt to make it all feel more realistic. Not my idea of fun, though! Varady contributed just two articles to Dragon.

In “Creating a Cast of NPCs,” Jim Dutton describes a method to rapidly generate a large number of supporting characters for your campaign. It feels a little lacklustre compared to other methods I’ve seen. Dutton was president of Entertainment Concepts, which produced a short-lived and controversial play-by-mail D&D game.

“Passing in the Night” by Rob Chilson is a hard-edged military science fiction story. Commander Bazulin is en route to Mars when his light cruiser is attacked by an enemy battleship. The stakes are high, and there’s lots of technical detail about maneuvers and weaponry. The pace does drag a bit, and the characters are underdeveloped, but lots of readers would enjoy this story. Chilson is a science fiction writer and critic with many publications to his name.

The ARES Section returns, presenting about a dozen pages of science-fiction and superhero gaming material. It includes five articles:
  • “Sticks & Stones & Death Machines” by John M. Maxstadt describes how to balance encounters in Gamma World.
  • “A Thousand in One” by Mark Graham Jones is all about balkanising your science-fiction campaign worlds.
  • “The Marvel-Phile” by Jeff Grubb presents Marvel Super Heroes stats for the Impossible Man.
  • “Active Duty” by Jefferson P. Swycaffer shows how to continue your career in Traveller.
  • “Silvertwin!” by Michael Therrien describes two new vehicles for Star Frontiers.
And that’s a wrap! Another solid issue, with my favourite feature being “Valley of the Earth Mother”. Next month, we have the centaur papers, all about gnomes, and an update on the future of AD&D!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

M.T. Black

M.T. Black

“All About the gully dwarf” by Roger E. Moore describes the hapless comic underclass of Krynn. He explains their origins in the intermarriage of gnomes and dwarves, which resulted in a new race that “lacked all the better qualities of its parents.” He also goes into detail about their clan structure, their chaotic leadership, and their personal traits, especially their legendary stupidity. Moore usually finds some nuance and dignity in the stereotypes attached to the various races, but he doesn’t quite succeed in redeeming the poor gully dwarf. Moore was a staff editor for Dragon.
I get why they left the gully dwarves behind for Shadow of the Dragon Queen, but I do think that they could've been brought back as a sort of survivalist species of dwarf without the ableism.

“Nine wands of wonder” by Ed Greenwood describes nine new magical wands from the Forgotten Realms. These range from the prosaic-sounding wand of darkness through to the wand of magical mirrors and the wand of teeth. Each entry contains some Realms-specific lore, such as who made the wand, how many were made, and where they are now. Some of the wands have a single function, whilst others have a package of powers tied together by a theme. These are generally well-executed, though I really wish he included an evocative physical description of each one. Greenwood was a contributing editor for Dragon.
If I recall correctly, this was one of the articles that was collected into The Magister sourcebook. Still a high water mark for magic item sourcebooks. The way each item felt interesting and unique and told a story is the perfect presentation.

I've just been looking back at my old articles, and realized you commented on "Dragon Reflections #1" back in 2018! @Ralif Redhammer did as well - I guess the two of you are my most enduring readers. Thank you!
These trips back in time are always a treat to read!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

“Nine wands of wonder” by Ed Greenwood describes nine new magical wands from the Forgotten Realms.

As I mentioned in my review, while I ended up liking some of these, I was disappointed overall when I first got the issue because I though the article was going to describe nine variation on an actual Wand of Wonder. And after 40 years in my memory that is what they had been, so I felt the disappointment all over again when I went back to check out the issue. But that is a problem of editorial not considering the title causing potential confusion, not the fault of the wands or Greenwood.
 

I get why they left the gully dwarves behind for Shadow of the Dragon Queen, but I do think that they could've been brought back as a sort of survivalist species of dwarf without the ableism.
I do think there are good stories to be told about a dwarven underclass -- I've done some of that with lizardfolk in my Ptolus campaign -- but it would require a ripping out old lore and canon elements, which I think a certain segment of Dragonlance fandom would freak out about.

It's probably easier for WotC to just memory hole them, but maybe they're up for the challenge of handling these kinds of stories sensitively and well.
 

Gully dwarves do not hold up, presuming they ever did.
I found them interesting when I read the first Dragonlance book when it came out, but I thought they would grow old quick. When the 1e Dragonlance Adventures came out with PC stats for them I thought they would make terrible PCs for more than a joke one shot. I had zero interest in ever playing one.

I pretty much thought the same about tinker gnomes and kender, a joke caricature characterization that would grow old quick and be annoying for a whole sustained culture or ongoing campaign.

I had a friend though who thought gully dwarves were awesome and was dying to play one.
 

I found them interesting when I read the first Dragonlance book when it came out, but I thought they would grow old quick. When the 1e Dragonlance Adventures came out with PC stats for them I thought they would make terrible PCs for more than a joke one shot. I had zero interest in ever playing one.

I pretty much thought the same about tinker gnomes and kender, a joke caricature characterization that would grow old quick and be annoying for a whole sustained culture or ongoing campaign.

I had a friend though who thought gully dwarves were awesome and was dying to play one.
Kender and tinker gnomes have also been given a lot more room to grow and have nuance.

"Hyuk hyuk, poor people are dumb" was all gully dwarves were allowed to be in the novels I read. (That said, I never read the entire body of Dragonlance novels, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were novels that went further than that. They certainly had the page count available to do so.)
 

I do think there are good stories to be told about a dwarven underclass -- I've done some of that with lizardfolk in my Ptolus campaign -- but it would require a ripping out old lore and canon elements, which I think a certain segment of Dragonlance fandom would freak out about.

I do similar stuff in my homebrew around the assumptions about goblins and the like, wherein their common depiction in stories told among "the free folk" (aka the traditional good guys aka dwarves, halfling, elves, gnomes and sometimes human) is very much at odds with the diverse reality possible among actual goblins, etc. . . reinforced by generations where contact between these people was severely limited - so that way in the game's present people remember these stories and they color their impressions, but the PCs experiences can still vary widely. In this way, I can keep (some) old "lore" in place and only shift them at the point of contact or when I specifically want to for an encounter I am developing.

In the case of gully dwarves, I think it'd be easy to make their depiction be a result of their socio-historical position and not because of their nature (whose origins, to make matters worse, are biracial inadvertently reinforcing gross ideas about race-mixing diluting or degenerating a people).

As I wrote about them in my review:

Personally, it is not so much that the lore of gully dwarves has them historically treated abysmally by other peoples but that they are depicted and described even in the meta-materials explaining their history and culture, as actually as contemptible and abject as the prejudiced opinions of in-world characters. Moore does not hold back in describing an entire “race” as “prideful and stupid” and that just isn’t acceptable anymore and never should have been. Moore’s writing, like much of the writing for D&D in the early days through today, adopts a kind of naturalist/anthropologic tone to discuss animals and monsters but also peoples and cultures. My guess is that some scholar a lot more knowledgeable than me about the history of wargaming and RPGs has written about this perspective and its adoption of a “neutral” view that nevertheless reinforces Eurocentric and Orientalist ideas. It is a form of writing that I not only find troubling because of its real-world reflections but because I know it has infected my own approach to D&D world-building and resonates with actual foundational and problematic anthropological reading I had to do as an undergrad back in the 80s and early 90s.
 

If I recall correctly, this was one of the articles that was collected into The Magister sourcebook. Still a high water mark for magic item sourcebooks. The way each item felt interesting and unique and told a story is the perfect presentation.
That was it, the Magister. And indeed, looking at the TOC it's right there on page 53, the Wand of Teeth. Great classic supplement.
 

I was intrigued by Talaran because Larry Elmore did the cover art.

I mean, in the eyes of teenage me, that and the official license made the PBM pretty legit.

They did a sci fi PBM, too. Traveller, maybe? I don't recall. I think I paid for my book and whatever the first few turns cost but never played for some reason.
The image was the same one used for the Companion Set, I believe. One of my favourites!
 

It's probably easier for WotC to just memory hole them, but maybe they're up for the challenge of handling these kinds of stories sensitively and well.
Yeah, I feel like there would have been ways to redeem the race and provide explanations for the things that the others found amusing/contemptuous. For example, there could be cultural reasons why they don't have a precise numeric system (there are human societies like that). Done well, it could turn them into an interesting group. But I understand the risks.
 


Recent & Upcoming Releases

Related Articles

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top