Dragonlance Campaign Setting: Missed Opportunity?

[Ranger REG]

Chronicals has been done so many times that i know the geneology of the termites in caramon's house. Dragonlance needs to become a fleshed out, playable setting. Then again, i think that the setting also needs a hard reset, starting over from scratch.

Okay. So I ask you, what part of the Dragonlance world needs to be fleshed out?

 

[talinthas]

what is the government of solamnia? how many people live in tarsis? just what is in nordmaar? are there any minor organizations, or do the Knights of Solamnia, the WoHS, and the KoT run everything?
You know, stuff that the FRCS provides? aka, the details needed to run a campaign that doesnt involve takhisis?

 

[DragonLancer]

Ansalon needs serious fleshing out.

If Solanthus is the capitol of Solamnia, why does it seem that everything revolves around Palanthus? More depth information on the various regions that we don't hear of so much (Noordmar, Ergoth, Sancrist, Lemish...etc).
There isn't anything on the political side of things. How does Solamnia work? Who is the actually ruler?

You could go on and on, with these questions. The FRCS explains to this level of detail so why cna't the DLCS or future sourcebooks also go into that depth?

 

[cybertalus]

what is the government of solamnia? how many people live in tarsis? just what is in nordmaar? are there any minor organizations, or do the Knights of Solamnia, the WoHS, and the KoT run everything?
You know, stuff that the FRCS provides? aka, the details needed to run a campaign that doesnt involve takhisis?

I don't think this level of detail will ever be given about Krynn because fundamentally Dragonlance is a world for novels that happens to have RPG products made for it, whereas the Forgotten Realms is fundamentally an RPG world that happens to have novels written about it.

The difference was best summed up by Ed Greenwood when he was on Mortality Radio and was asked about doing and RPG sourcebook for one of his non-Realms series of fantasy novels. He replied that it was something he was hesitant to do because once he put down the kinds of details DMs would need to run a game in the world he was stuck with them and couldn't change them later if he started writing a novel and his muse drug him off in a direction that would contradict what was in the RPG sourcebook.

And to answer the original question, for me I don't think it would have mattered at all what era they set it in, because my interest in Dragonlance waned a long time ago. Which is kind of sad because it was reading the Dragonlance Chronicles which got me interested in playing D&D in the first place. I even bought a copy of Dragonlance Adventures before I had a Player's Handbook.

I don't think doing a Chronicles-specific book first would've had much effect on sales one way or the other. Probably a certain percentage of the hardcore fans would have bought the book regardless of what era or areas it covered. Whereas the casual, nostalgic fans are probably more diverse in what they would want out of a Dragonlance product, and thus as a whole, a harder group to sell to.

 

[Banshee16]

Certainly you can't please all the people all the time, but would the Dragonlance Campaign setting have pleased more people if it had been more focused on the Chronicles?

I have to think that all the hardcore fans would have bought it -- and quite a few casual fans would have bought it too.

I guess I'm looking at it from a different perspective. I don't own a shelf full of Dragonlance products. I'm a casual fan, if that.

Also, I don't think I'd even try to stay true to the novels; I'd run the setting as a what-if scenario: what if these guys replaced the Heroes of the Lance. Of course, that assumes the original modules could be turned into something more flexible. (I never played the originals, so I don't know firsthand how bad the railroading was.)

Well, I don't know. I prefer Chronicles to 5th Age, but if the DLCS focused on it, I may not have even picked up the book in the first place. The Chronicles have been the focus of Dragonlance for so long, it's bloody frustrating. I remember getting the Tales of the Lance boxed set and feeling like I'd wasted my money because it was rehashing everything I'd already purchased for Dragonlance, didn't introduce anything new, or provide much value aside from updating it to 2nd Ed.

If you can try and get past the idea that you need to be playing through the War of the Lance for 20 years, you'll find that the 5th Age of Dragonlance has some cool things going on. Especially in the era of the hardcover, with the gods returned and all, there's lots going on, and the setting's open for adventure, instead of feeling like you have to tiptoe around events from the books.

I don't like that most of the companions have been killed off, some for no good reason, but I like that they are no longer the focus of the story, and that the setting is *way* more open now.

Banshee

 

[Banshee16]

I'm a fan of DL, and have been ever since I read the Chronicles way back in the day.

I don't understand the hostility that the setting draws in. The heroes of the lance were just a single band of heroes that the books followed. There were others who did deeds just as important, but it seems people don't think of that. Yes, the novels did just stick with the same people over and over again, which was the reason I stopped buying the novels.

Then SAGA came out (which is when I stopped buying DL) and the whole thing went to hell. Far too much change, far too quickly, and it it spoilt the setting. It wasn't DL anymore. The period following the Blue Lady's War was perfect for TSR to leave the setting alone. Release sourcebooks and adventures, but don't screw around with a destructive metaplot like they did.

I've come back into the fold now that SovStone are releasing materials but I have been forced to make more than a few changes to how Krynn will play out between the War of the Lance and where it currently stands.

Look beyond kender, gully dwarves, gnomes and the same old characters. Look at the vibrant, and epric potential the setting has.

I agree here....I think that the period following the Blue Lady's war was ripe with opportunity that was never explored because TSR couldn't get past the idea of rehashing the Chronicles. That said, I've been pleasantly surprised by what Sovereign Stone has been doing. Admittedly, they repeat way too much material....there are several places in Age of Mortals where literally entire pages seem to repeat each other...mainly when describing the history of what's happened. But there are excellent rules for Ogre Titans, undead batteries, advanced dragons, etc. And lots of NPCs detailed (including Palin and Dalamar), as well as details on just what has been happening with various areas of the world.

Banshee

 

[Banshee16]

eh, technicalities =) i'm not an FR sage by any means.

suffice to say, the first two series of FR novels took place in far parts of the world from each other, and thus allowed for a lot of room to adventure in between.

let's put it this way- you hear of drizz't clones, but never of people who think that FR should have stuck with the icewind dale trilogy only when they made their campaign setting.

Chronicals has been done so many times that i know the geneology of the termites in caramon's house. Dragonlance needs to become a fleshed out, playable setting. Then again, i think that the setting also needs a hard reset, starting over from scratch.

Talinthas....that's a good analogy. Drizzt and Elminster do generate a certain amount of resentment against FR....just as hearing stuff go on and on about the Chronicles over and over generates in many people I know, a certain amount of resentment against Dragonlance.

AoM and the DLCS seem to be a good start. And of all things, we have a book about High Sorcery coming out this year, and a few other books as well that aren't just rehashing of what's already been detailed. This is rather exciting. In 20 years, they've never had a D&D supplement talking about the Wizards of High Sorcery.

Banshee

 

[Wolffenjugend]

The FRCS explains to this level of detail so why cna't the DLCS or future sourcebooks also go into that depth?

Because DL is a secondary product for D&D and doesn't have the resources behind it that FR does. FR is a primary, "official" campaign setting whereas DL has never really had that level of support. Thus, the inability to provide supplements with the degree of detail that FR has. Also, I don't think there has been as big a demand for specifics as there is in the FR. DL fans are generally happy to see something (anything!) get published...

Hopefully, DL will now go the way of Ravenloft in terms of campaign setting specifics (the RL gazeteers are quite good and could serve as an excellent model for DL gazeteers).

And so far, the upcoming releases seem to indicate good things to come...

 

[Guilberwood]

Just glad to see that there's hope to Dragonlance after all

People seem to be willing to give the setting another chance, and it looks like Soverign Press is doing their job too (although the release dates should be respected!!!!!)

Maybe one day DL will stand as one of the favorites settings out there

 

[talinthas]

ok, dragonlance subscribes to the tolkien theory of the "Castle on the Hill", where the castle is there, but is left fully to the imagination to flesh out. Thusly, no one is constrained by one fixed image or what have you.

this works great for novels, or one shot settings, or campaigns like the original greyhawk, which was little more than a map and a list of monsters.

But dragonlance has 200 novels and 200 castles on 200 separate hills. Don't you think a bit of consolidation is necessary? I mean, its all well and good to leave enough room to make up your own adventures, but without a firm framework, i can't build a house to play in. Too often have dragonlance fans asked for a quilt and been given a stack of unconnected patches, and told to fill it with their minds.

This isnt the way to run a campaign setting.