Dragonlance Dragonlance 5E

[Awesome Adam]

It's been a long time since I played Dragonlance, but can't it pretty much be summed up as steel pieces instead of gold, no priests, and Dragonmen ?

 

[Raunalyn]

I've dropped some 5e conversions for the Draconians out in the Resource Database if you're interested. I do run a homebrewed DL...luckily, I've really only had to homebrew the Knights of Solamnia, but I have several ideas regarding the Wizards of High Sorcery.

The campaign is an alternate retelling of the War of the Lance, similar to the Star Trek reboot, but no heroes of the lance. Once you have the Draconians converted, the modules are surprisingly simple to switch to 5e.

 

[GreenTengu]

What would be the benefit of using Dragonlance as a setting?

I mean, most of the differences between it and Forgotten Realms/GreyHawk/Mystara are well... aside from things that seem different by shades just to be different without any of it really leading to any sort of unifying theme, concept or mood... well, its kind of Saturday Morning Cartoonish.

It is the only setting I can recall where there is a single unified evil army and all evil in the setting arises from that singular source and has numerous entire races that exist just to be broadly comedic and tend to be abused when put into the hands of actual players rather than being written into a book-- kender, gully dwarves, tinker gnomes....

It was the setting within the novels in which it seemed the writers felt they could explore just how over-the-top and silly the AD&D rules as written could allow things to be. Like having a minor, ineffectual villain reincarnated over and over again and rubbing elbows with the most powerful forces in the universe while also repeatedly dying in goofy, humiliating ways or having a wizard become a god because he just learned that much magic.

Even if you want to argue that it wasn't always as insane as it well... was at its worst or best depending on how you view it, if you made it any less silly... what exactly unique would it be offering? When you compare it to Ravenloft, Eberron, Planescape, Darksun, Spelljammer, Al-Qadim and Kur-Tara... are there really enough unique elements aside from its goofiness to make it feel like a worthwhile departure from the "norm"?

I guess if you wanted to use it as some sort of beginner, introductory setting that could appeal to young players or those who don't want to deal with any real serious drama or consequences, it could be used in such a way. Even then, you would kind of have to ignore the fact that the setting was designed to tell an overarching story and that story played out, concluding with the ultimate villain and all evil being vanquished from the world and at least one of the heroes ascending to god-hood... It might be a good example of what one can do with a D&D setting, but I don't know that there is any value in actually using the setting

I mean, there might be value in having a broad, silly, ridiculous setting where nothing is meant to be dramatic or taken too seriously like Dragonlance, but is there any particular reason to use that setting simply because it once existed rather than create a new one that has similar themes but needn't carry with it the baggage of having had everything resolved for it like Dragonlance does? Instead of a world where pretty much everything important to do has already been written as having been done in a particular canonical way, I would think a world where no one really knows where it is going or how it is going to turn out would be preferable.

 

[ProphetSword]

Why would anyone want to play in the Dragonlance world of Krynn when the story has been resolved? Same reason people want to play in Middle Earth, when that story is long resolved. There are more stories to tell.

Also, Dragonlance, like any other setting, is only as goofy as the DM makes it. A serious DM can definitely create a serious game with it.

Kender appeared in the playtest materials and were well implemented. So, there are signs that it could happen at some point, I suppose.

 

[wedgeski]

I guess if you wanted to use it as some sort of beginner, introductory setting that could appeal to young players or those who don't want to deal with any real serious drama or consequences, it could be used in such a way.

Not sure if troll, but it sounds to me like you don't get Dragonlance *at all*.

 

[ZeshinX]

I'd welcome a Dragonlance (DL) book (similar to Sword Coast Adventurers Guide...but preferably a little more comprehensive in terms of character options). I never cared for playing in DL (found it waaaaay too restricting, even with a good DM), but I did (and still do) find it quite a good setting to pilfer concepts and ideas from.

 

[Mefistofulee]

I'd welcome a Dragonlance (DL) book (similar to Sword Coast Adventurers Guide...but preferably a little more comprehensive in terms of character options)

I can agree with this but I would also like some of the DM options from Dragonlance like Draconians, or some of the setting specific magic items

 

[joshinminn]

What would be the benefit of using Dragonlance as a setting?

I mean, most of the differences between it and Forgotten Realms/GreyHawk/Mystara are well... aside from things that seem different by shades just to be different without any of it really leading to any sort of unifying theme, concept or mood... well, its kind of Saturday Morning Cartoonish.

It is the only setting I can recall where there is a single unified evil army and all evil in the setting arises from that singular source and has numerous entire races that exist just to be broadly comedic and tend to be abused when put into the hands of actual players rather than being written into a book-- kender, gully dwarves, tinker gnomes....

It was the setting within the novels in which it seemed the writers felt they could explore just how over-the-top and silly the AD&D rules as written could allow things to be. Like having a minor, ineffectual villain reincarnated over and over again and rubbing elbows with the most powerful forces in the universe while also repeatedly dying in goofy, humiliating ways or having a wizard become a god because he just learned that much magic.

Even if you want to argue that it wasn't always as insane as it well... was at its worst or best depending on how you view it, if you made it any less silly... what exactly unique would it be offering? When you compare it to Ravenloft, Eberron, Planescape, Darksun, Spelljammer, Al-Qadim and Kur-Tara... are there really enough unique elements aside from its goofiness to make it feel like a worthwhile departure from the "norm"?

I guess if you wanted to use it as some sort of beginner, introductory setting that could appeal to young players or those who don't want to deal with any real serious drama or consequences, it could be used in such a way. Even then, you would kind of have to ignore the fact that the setting was designed to tell an overarching story and that story played out, concluding with the ultimate villain and all evil being vanquished from the world and at least one of the heroes ascending to god-hood... It might be a good example of what one can do with a D&D setting, but I don't know that there is any value in actually using the setting

I mean, there might be value in having a broad, silly, ridiculous setting where nothing is meant to be dramatic or taken too seriously like Dragonlance, but is there any particular reason to use that setting simply because it once existed rather than create a new one that has similar themes but needn't carry with it the baggage of having had everything resolved for it like Dragonlance does? Instead of a world where pretty much everything important to do has already been written as having been done in a particular canonical way, I would think a world where no one really knows where it is going or how it is going to turn out would be preferable.

Someone's a Judgy McJudgerson.

 

[GreenTengu]

Not sure if troll, but it sounds to me like you don't get Dragonlance *at all*.

Oh, I get Dragonlance just fine.

It is the only D&D setting where all evil things are rallied under a single cackling bad guy that the heroes rise up and defeat. Because we need all evil things to be clearly labeled so the heroes know who to kill without consequence... there can't be any nuisance or development or anything of the sort. Just this whole "Pendulum" that swings to good or evil.

It is the only setting that has a race whose ENTIRE concept is built around kleptomania and everyone in the setting tolerates it because "hee-hee! it's so funny to have your stuff stolen!!" And people still want to play the race because they want to steal from party members without consequence and act "crazy" i.e. annoying.

It is the only setting that has a subrace literally, in theme, named "Tinkers" who are likely to create a contraption that destroys planets out of scrap metal and bubblegum as a Ruth-Goldberg machine to open a door. Because... you know... humor.

It is the only setting that has a race that exists only to make inbred backwoods redneck jokes. Just walking semi-talking Jeff Foxworthy jokes that make the Beverly Hillbillies look reasonable and clever by comparison. Because... you know... its funny... somehow... to someone.

It is the only setting, as far as I am aware, that follows a character supposedly from level 3 or something as he turns evil and then turns good again and then becomes a god because well... the D&D rules at the time were silly enough that any character could just... do that. Pretty straight-forward and easily, really.

And if you still aren't convinced, go look up the story of Lord Toade (and, yes, that sort of childish naming being canon was standard for the setting) and tell me that it isn't the bumbling minion from a He-Man level maturity cartoon whose death led to even goofier antics.

I mean, really... lay out anything about Dragonlance and its pretty impossible to deny that it was basically the watered down by-the-numbers generic D&D setting where everything was made considerably more goofy just at various attempts at bad humor.


If the game needs a bad juvenile humor setting, then I suppose it works.. but, really, why use the one where all events in its timeline are pretty much set in stone in novelizations and ends in such a way that there really wouldn't be anything meaningful for any future adventurers to do in the setting. Not unless you time jumped about a thousand years and could resurrect dead gods, but... really... how would the world even last that much longer without the Tinker Gnomes setting off a nuclear device that would naturally get stolen by an idiot Kender who was told precisely how dangerous it is, but because she is 'fearless' that just seems to make it all that much more exciting of a toy... and finally set off by a Gully Dwarf who thinks it is a music box?

 

[wedgeski]

And if you still aren't convinced, go look up the story of Lord Toade (and, yes, that sort of childish naming being canon was standard for the setting) and tell me that it isn't the bumbling minion from a He-Man level maturity cartoon whose death led to even goofier antics.

Oh do spell it correctly.

If the game needs a bad juvenile humor setting, then I suppose it works.. but, really, why use the one where all events in its timeline are pretty much set in stone in novelizations and ends in such a way that there really wouldn't be anything meaningful for any future adventurers to do in the setting.

My post-War of the Lance campaign is in real trouble, then.