Dragonlance Dragonlance Creators Reveal Why There Are No Orcs On Krynn

Talking to the Dragonlance Nexus, Dragonlance creators Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman revealed why the world of Krynn features no orcs -- in short, because they didn't want to copy Tolkien, and orcs were very much a 'Middle Earth' thing.

Weis told Trampas Whiteman that "Orcs were also viewed as very Middle Earth. We wanted something different." Hickman added that it was draconians which made Krynn stand out. Read more at the link below!

Why are there no Orcs in Krynn? Weis and Hickman give us the answer! - Dragonlance Nexus

Dragonhelm gets the scoop from Weis and Hickman on why there are no orcs in Krynn. Read More

dragonlancenexus.com

 

[Azzy]

So then there's absolutely no problem if the 5e Dragonlance book doesn't say that orcs aren't native, thus allowing people to play a native orc character in a Dragonlance game, right?

Why? Why is this an issue even? Why is something along the lines of Theros' and Ravnica's suggested exclusion list (which looks to be what they're doing with DL) not enough? Why is this even an argument? It's silly. DL doesn't have orcs by default because that's the way it was created. If you want orcs in your DL campaign, go for it. But why is it necessary to not have the exclusion default when it's carrying on a conscious decision of of the setting when it was created?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

As it is, if somebody wants to play an orc in Dragonlance, the only reason they are given not to is that the original writers--with whom this person will not be playing--didn't want them there. And, as others have said, having draconians take their place doesn't make much sense for people who see orcs as people rather than as monsters to be killed.

not only will none of us be playing with the creators most likely less then a fraction of a % ever will

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Why is this even an argument?

becuse everything seems to be now... it seems every thread is either 2 pages of cool ideas and joke or 100 of arguments

 

[Maxperson]

I just asked you what made Dragonlance unique. You refused to answer, and instead just said "it lacks orcs."

There's not a whole lot. Magic coming from the moon gods. Magic being affected by the phases of the moons. No orcs. Irda. There's little to it that's unique.

Anyone can make a setting that lacks orcs. I have, multiple times. My current setting lacks any and all goblinoids--in fact, really the only sapient races it has are the PHB races, minus dragonborn and plus bullywugs and kobolds, and a small number of monster races like fey, undead, and dragons. Does that make my world more unique than Krynn?

Anyone can make a setting with moon phase magic, lances made to kill dragons and dragon wars, too. So if "Anyone can make it" is what it takes to remove uniqueness, nothing in D&D is unique and we should just not make any more settings.

And I can tell you this: if I had a sudden need to add a new sentient race to my world to accomodate a player... I would.

What could create such a need? A player wanting to play something doesn't create a need to add in a race to the world.

Not at all. It might even be easier, depending on the type of horror I want to go for, the type of players, and what sort of things they're OK with. Because (as an example) tempting them to resort to a more primal nature is prime horror material, especially when only one of those three races is a predator. And I don't even need to resort to that when all the standard horror plots are still available to me and would work whether or not the PCs have fur.

Funny how you're adamant you can run Discworld in D&D, despite how vastly different that setting is from the typical D&D setting, but think it would be too hard to run a horror game with non-human PCs.

A few things. I didn't say non-human PCs. But a rabbit, a turtle and a cat walking into a bar would be more in line with Discworld than Ravenloft. I can absolutely run both settings very well with D&D, because setting doesn't matter to the system, but that doesn't mean that every race or class will fit every setting. You need to curate the options to run D&D and accomplish various goals well.

I feel that you're just being a contrarian for the heck of it.

I almost never do that, and then only to people that have proven themselves to be trolls, which you haven't. At some point when dealing with trolls, I troll them back which sends them into a tizzy since they can't take what they dish out.

Not according to some conspiracy theorists.

Touche. I don't put much stock in what conspiracy theorists say, though.

But orcs aren't Martians and Athas isn't Earth. Why would orcs be any different than any of the other big, buff, violent races that already exist on Athas?

It kinda is, though. Throwing orcs into Athas is going to affect the entire history of the world from the point that they were eradicated to the current time of the Sorcerer Kings. Everything changes because of how interactions work. They would have a big an influence on Athas as martians living here from 10k years ago would have on Earth.

You keep making this claim. Prove it.

I have. It will feel different to me and the others(some of whom are in this thread) who it would feel different to. Done and done. I've proven that it will affect the feeling of the setting for some people.

 

[Maxperson]

look I asked umbra to drop it and I am now asking you.

If you're not a werewolf, the umbra isn't going to listen to you.

 

[Faolyn]

If that's true, then why not just have all humans, and be done with the problem completely?

Well, why not? I'm not advocating for an all-human Dragonlance, but I don't think it would suffer greatly if the different races simply became different human cultures.

 

[Faolyn]

What's the point of settings if DMs are forced to include everything ever published by WotC in the setting? They're all the same then.

Different themes, different genres, different goals, different villain groups, different NPCs, different factions, different religions, different countries...

 

[Maxperson]

now we are back to no it isn't if the ring glowed silver or white or gold does not effect the rest of the book... heck it could be pink with rainbows through it.

And in this you are objectively wrong. Change = change, so it's literally impossible to make a single change and have it be the exact same story. The amount of difference will vary by degree, but you cannot make a change without creating a new story.

the first 2 years the setting was the novels and the adventures... also the time the writer, line editor, story editor, and TSR themselves 'forgot'

So none of that is the Dragonlance setting. The novels aren't a D&D setting at all, and the modules are only a very, very limited setting for the module only, not the setting at large.

I have no need to prove anything.

You keep arguing that change =/= change as you did above when you said, "if the ring glowed silver or white or gold does not effect the rest of the book... heck it could be pink with rainbows through it.", so yes you do need to prove it.

my argument didn't fail you just don't like it...

Here's a fact for you. I don't like it because it alters the feel of the setting for me. Since it alters the feel of the setting for me, your argument that it doesn't change the feel of the setting has failed completely. If you want to restate your argument as, "It doesn't change the feel of the setting for me personally." then I can accept that and you will be correct. As a blanket statement the way you are using it, though, your argument is done.

 

[AnotherGuy]

becuse everything seems to be now... it seems every thread is either 2 pages of cool ideas and joke or 100 of arguments

We definitely need more cool ideas for DL. It cannot be another rehash of ToD, that would be immensely disappointing.

I'd like a timeframe with timed events, some mix into the setting lore, interesting war-time roleplaying events to insert into the campaign, some chaos, effets of trade, possible romance, political espionage, honour loyalty and betrayal, a little bit of what was offered in MiBG with city upheaval, strategical battles affected by prior decisions, character cameo's, fashioning or finding lances, interesting dragon encounters, scaling flying fortresses and crashing them, wizard duels, war

 

[Faolyn]

Maybe I'm missing something, but I would think (using Tolkien as the analogy since that seems to be a common one being used) that replacing Hobbits with Humans changes the whole story. Races in LotR all have a specific purpose where each drives the story in a different way. If you replace hobbits with humans, then the whole discussion with Borimir is moot, and they all go to Gondor with the ring. I can only imagine what would happen in the story if suddenly a race of Tortles were introduced, because I can't see how that wouldn't change things significantly.

I'm not a LotR fan so I could be wrong here but... would the discussion with Boromir still be moot if you were dealing with different castes or social classes or even "races" of humans? If you consider Boromir to be in a warrior or noble class and hobbits to be in a farmer or peasant class, would it still work?