Dragonlance Thoughts

[Son_of_Thunder]

Dragonlance Forever!

Oh, I love Dragonlance. I just have to, for my own sanity, pretty much ignore any product produced after the Tales of the Lance box set. I just started a new game at 1st level and we're having a ball.

 

[klofft]

Thanks for the replies and I am eager to hear more.

I also have a related question. In my kitchen-sink homebrew, I have imposed the single limit of only using WotC material (but using all of it). As such, I've found it easy to import FR and Ebb crunch. Other than this, I don't use 3rd party material for a number of reasons, principal among them being an inconsistent power level and occasionally contradictory mechanics that I don't want to hassle with (e.g., magic in Midnight or races in Dawnforge),

DL, however, is in a special category for me: I will incorporate the setting's crunch, as it was formally a WotC book. But the rest of the brand is not. How balanced is the MWP 3.5 material compared to WotC material used outside the DL setting? What books have been the best crunch books? What potential problems might I encounter?

Thanks!
C

 

[Crothian]

The DL books are very consistent rules wise. Some of it may seem a little weak compared to Eberron and the Realms.

 

[klofft]

In my game, a little weak is far better than the alternative.

 

[Crothian]

In my game, a little weak is far better than the alternative.

I fully agree.

 

[Cam Banks]

DL, however, is in a special category for me: I will incorporate the setting's crunch, as it was formally a WotC book. But the rest of the brand is not. How balanced is the MWP 3.5 material compared to WotC material used outside the DL setting? What books have been the best crunch books? What potential problems might I encounter?

Wizards of the Coast, as our licensor, approves everything we do before it gets published. If they don't like something or it needs to be changed, they tell us and we fix it. So, we can only assume that it's at least up to par to their own standards.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[CruelSummerLord]

Our revisions of the classic modules are an attempt at preserving the storyline of the originals without eliminating any freedom on the part of the heroes. I think Clark and Sean did a fantastic job of that in Dragons of Autumn, and I hope to continue that with the next two.

I think Dragonlance works best when you have story arcs that draw on elements of the setting and let the heroes feel as if they are accomplishing something. You can run a campaign from 1st level to 20th and beyond just with our Age of Mortals adventures, or use them and the other sourcebooks to come up with shorter campaigns. The metaplot becomes a canvas, rather than a straitjacket.

Cheers,
Cam

Cam, let me just say for the record that that you're right: Clark and Sean do an excellent job of updating excellent modules. Truth be told, the railroading thing doesn't bother me at all: I actually don't mind being taken by the hand and led through the DM's plotline. As a player, I recall being very annoyed at fellow players when they insisted on wandering off and doing their own thing, straying from his storyline.

I think the "railroading" of the original modules wouldn't be so bad if the players had actually created Tanis, Caramon et al., and had a greater emotional investment in the characters and their goals and quests. Having searched for the True Gods for so long, it's likely they would have jumped at the opportunity to finally find proof of what they're looking for. They'd want to rescue the good people of Solace from Pax Tharkas, and to find a way into Thorbardin for them. The players would likely see these plot developments as natural steps in the ongoing story arc.

Now, what cramps DL's style for me is, believe it or not, the novels. I was extremely annoyed at how characters like Flint, Tika, Riverwind and Goldmoon never got the chance to "save the day" or contribute anything meaningful to the storyline-Weis and Hickman blatantly favored Tanis, Raistlin, Sturm, Laurana and Tasslehoff, and let them have all the fun while the B-list characters just followed them around.

Flint never got any meaningful development; all he did was complain, and then...oh, by the way, he's dead, even when it says in the original DL Adventures book that two hundred years old is the prime of life for a dwarf, and he's supposed to have an 18 Constitution, which presumably would give him the capacity to resist his heart disease and rheumatism.

Riverwind and Goldmoon were similar-did they get the ability to stand out in combat, or do anything meaningful? Not really-they didn't even get to go to Neraka.

The deus ex machina was teeth-grindingly annoying at times; the good dragons just appear out of nowhere, and we don't get to see the Heroes go to Sanction to free the dragon eggs. For a god who's not supposed to intervene in the affairs of mortals, Fizban sure showed up often enough, and directly acted on a couple of occasions. When the Companions are caught red-handed committing a major security breach in Neraka, Kitiara just happens to show up at the last minute and vouch for them.

No King of the Deep. No epic showdown in the Temple of Neraka. No Kronn or Serinda.

So much was cut out, and some of the characters were treated as secondary NPCs by the authors, that the novels were a serious letdown. I can't help but think that DL was overall weakened by its adherence to the weaker novel storyline than the stronger module one, which had more action, and more capacity for development for all of the characters, not just some of them.

 

[Cam Banks]

Tracy and Margaret are giving a little more air time to the B-list characters in the Lost Chronicles novels, but you're right - and they admit it. Margaret even jokes that she forgot about Elistan from time to time and had to remember to stick him in. However, if all of those things had been in the novels, there would have been a lot more than three books.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[mhacdebhandia]

(Although I have never quite understood why Dragonlance feels it necessary to exclude halflings in favor of kender.)

Put simply, the creators of the setting wanted to get away from Tolkien. It's the same reason there are no orcs - now, why didn't they get rid of elves and dwarves, too? My guess - they're just more popular than halflings.

(The introduction to the old Art of Dragonlance softcover summarised the discussion process that led to these decisions, which is how I know.)

Margaret even jokes that she forgot about Elistan from time to time and had to remember to stick him in.

Actually, just last night I was talking to my friends about the thing that irritated me most about the Dragonlance novels - the characters are caught up in the return of the true gods to the world, and yet both of the prominent cleric characters in the story - Goldmoon and Elistan - are "converted" offstage! Elistan's a minor character, so that's understandable to an extent, but why on Earth doesn't Goldmoon's religious awakening get more attention?

 

[Dragonhelm]

In fact, I find the Krynn version of gnomes to be so much more interesting than the "core" gnome that pretty much any gnome I would ever play (or have as a PC in a game I run) would be of the Krynnish style. In my mind, the core gnome is dull as dishwater.

I agree. That's one of the reasons I like Spelljammer so much. The ordinary gnomes of other settings are oftentimes bland. The tinker association gives them their own niche without treading upon the territory of the dwarf.

(Although I have never quite understood why Dragonlance feels it necessary to exclude halflings in favor of kender.)

Kender were created for a few reasons. First, the hobbit-like halflings of the 80's liked to hide in their hobbit-holes and didn't want to have anything to do with adventure. Kender are all about adventure (something that is carried over to the 3e halfling).

Tracy Hickman had some moral issues with the rogue, so the kender are also an attempt to create a rogue who isn't stealing just to be bad. They're kleptomaniacs, in a sense.

Gully dwarves can be fun as well, although it's a little harder to keep them from being a running joke instead of a legit PC-class thing.

I played a gully dwarf once, and the hard part for me was playing a race that is inherently stupid.