Dragonlance vs. Forgotten Realms

[Mercutio01]

While what Cam says is nice to hear, I think it minimizes the world-shaking that has happened in DL. Not that FR is much better, mind you, but I stopped reading the novels for precisely the reasons mentioned above. Each new descendant generation of the original Heroes of the Lance has met with some new cataclysmic event. I read all the way through the War of Souls simply because I like Weis and Hickman's writing, but I couldn't handle the storylines.

Unlike Dragonblade, I liked Chronicles and wasn't a fan of Legends.

 

[Blackbrrd]

Dragonlance was well supported by Margaret Weis Productions for 3.5, with 21 products that included sourcebooks, campaign adventures, map sets, and a DM's Screen. You can check it all out here. A great deal of this material was rules-independent background and adventure hooks, and the Dragonlance Nexus continues to post fan-created material that supports it. While we have no idea what the official plans are for Dragonlance in 4e, I've already offered to provide unofficial conversions for 4th edition, mainly so that people who bought our 3.5 books can still use them with the new edition.

Cheers,
Cam

I am in a group that is playing the trilogy ending with "Price of Courage" by Cam Banks. We have just started "Price of Courage" and my DM really loves it. If he refers to a good author it goes like this: "Well, if it had been written by Cam Banks..."

My DM is planning on running the original adventures (3.5 version) after we finish with the above, but I think he would really really appreciate a 4.0 version if you can manage that. Personally I would prefer playing a 4th edition version, because it is a lot less random.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I don't think it's fair to characterize Dragonlance as being constantly hit by Krynn Shattering Events.

Including the War of the Lance (which counts), you've got the WotL, the Chaos War and the War of Souls in less than a century - the gods are gone, they're back, and now they're gone (and magic, the moons, and all the stars are gone too!), oh, they're all back now. It's just too much, IMO. Even more troubling than the frequency was the extent of the changes - gods, the nature of magic, races available, nations, Dragon Highlords coming and going, the Great Dragons coming and going, etc. It was essentially a whole new campaign setting each time, without even the map remaining constant.

Not that the Realms are much better, mind you, especially with the 4E reset, and I still prefer DL to FR, but I think I was "fair" in my critique.

But there's a positive spin to all this! DL presents so many choices that a DM can start whenever he wishes to play in the Era that best suits him and then fork the timeline to maintain come internal constancy. The OP should give each era its own consideration - it's like 5 settings in one!

 

[Cam Banks]

Not that FR is much better, mind you, but I stopped reading the novels for precisely the reasons mentioned above. Each new descendant generation of the original Heroes of the Lance has met with some new cataclysmic event. I read all the way through the War of Souls simply because I like Weis and Hickman's writing, but I couldn't handle the storylines.

I actually think "every generation there is a new major event/challenge" is a very appropriate summary, since that is more or less what's happened. I'm not sure this is such a bad thing, though, all things considered; the setting seems to work best when there's some kind of war, conflict, or other kind of global issue going on, to serve as a backdrop to the more personal adventures of the heroes. Dragonlance is at its least interesting when the world is peaceful.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[ZetaStriker]

I've always been a big Dragonlance fan, and although I do like Forgotten Realms, I dislike playing in it. This is primarily because of a single bad experience with a DM I played with. We were running an Evil Undead campaign in the realms(I, of course, decided to play a Pixie Death Knight Rogue XD), and it basically boiled down to this: "Well, the average villager is level 5 or so, and you guys are level 18, so no problem. But the militia and church is made up of dozens upon dozens of level 15s, and if you draw too much attention, Elminister will come kill you. Cheers!"

We, of course, found ourselves killing evil dragons and Chaotic Good Balors(according to the DM, he was in love with an Angel or something...). Not very interesting for a campaign that was supposed to be different, eh?

 

[Dragonblade]

Unlike Dragonblade, I liked Chronicles and wasn't a fan of Legends.

I liked Legends because I think the characters really grow and evolve. Like I felt that Tas really developed a sense of responsibility and character beyond klepto kender. Caramon really developed his character and finally saw his brother for what he was. And Raistlin's character showed more complexity than brooding frail wizard.

I will say this for DL, though. My handle on EN World, Dragonblade is named after my favorite D&D character of all time. Aeron Dragonblade, Knight of Solamnia. I played that character in an old long running 2e DL campaign.

I started off as a rookie knight and worked my way up to Knight of the Rose over many sessions. I knew the character was destined for great things when I rolled 18/00 STR right in front of the DM!

 

[vagabundo]

Thanks, Irda and Cam.

I've never read the novels but some stuff is coming back to me from old (2e) dragon mags, I remember about the different ages (and minotaurs??).

I DM'd in FR for most of 3e but didnt get very attached to it, it was just the WOTC default and it was easier to get modules for it. Greyhawk turns me off because of some of the wacky naming.

At the moment I am running 4e in a setting from my childhood, Magnamund (Lone Wolf) and enjoying it. If my slow-ass players manage to kill off the Darklords I may try something else.

I do know they would enjoy riding dragons into battle.