Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cam Banks" data-source="post: 1591638" data-attributes="member: 3817">Actually, it was. Dragonlance was very much a setting that drew upon the AD&amp;D rules in every sense throughout its early stages, and even when Dragonlance Adventures was released in 1987 (three years after the modules and novels first began to appear) the rules in that volume went hand-in-hand with the direction of AD&amp;D at the time. It's worth noting that all of the changes in Dragonlance when it first appeared were cosmetic - no orcs, no drow, gold pieces replaced by steel pieces, no clerics (for the first module, at least), etc. The only thing rules-wise that was added to the series were kender, as for the most part everything else was taken from the AD&amp;D core and contemporary supplements such as Monster Manual II.You don't see moon magic, specialized Knights of Solamnia, tinker gnomes, minotaurs as a player race, priests with variant abilities, etc until Dragonlance Adventures was published, and in many ways this was possible because TSR was experimenting with variant and alternate rules at the time (Unearthed Arcana is why the Knights are a subclass of Cavalier and why Fritzen Dorgaard is a thief-acrobat in DL12).Dragonlance continues to follow the trends of whichever edition of the D&amp;D game it is being written for. It took kits in 2nd edition and reassigned classes among the 4 class groups, for example, and in 3rd edition it makes extensive use of prestige classes, feats, templates, and so forth. I think that Eberron and Dragonlance do share the &quot;built with D&amp;D in mind&quot; legacy, something which will no doubt be observed 20 years from now when (and if) Eberron gets updated for a new edition and the gaming audience says &quot;why does it have all of this stuff built-in to the world? how dated!&quot;Cheers,Cam</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cam Banks, post: 1591638, member: 3817"] Actually, it was. Dragonlance was very much a setting that drew upon the AD&D rules in every sense throughout its early stages, and even when [I]Dragonlance Adventures[/I] was released in 1987 (three years after the modules and novels first began to appear) the rules in that volume went hand-in-hand with the direction of AD&D at the time. It's worth noting that all of the changes in Dragonlance when it first appeared were cosmetic - no orcs, no drow, gold pieces replaced by steel pieces, no clerics (for the first module, at least), etc. The only thing rules-wise that was added to the series were kender, as for the most part everything else was taken from the AD&D core and contemporary supplements such as [I]Monster Manual II[/I]. You don't see moon magic, specialized Knights of Solamnia, tinker gnomes, minotaurs as a player race, priests with variant abilities, etc until [I]Dragonlance Adventures[/I] was published, and in many ways this was possible because TSR was experimenting with variant and alternate rules at the time ([I]Unearthed Arcana[/I] is why the Knights are a subclass of Cavalier and why Fritzen Dorgaard is a thief-acrobat in DL12). Dragonlance continues to follow the trends of whichever edition of the D&D game it is being written for. It took kits in 2nd edition and reassigned classes among the 4 class groups, for example, and in 3rd edition it makes extensive use of prestige classes, feats, templates, and so forth. I think that Eberron and Dragonlance [I]do[/I] share the "built with D&D in mind" legacy, something which will no doubt be observed 20 years from now when (and if) Eberron gets updated for a new edition and the gaming audience says "why does it have all of this stuff built-in to the world? how dated!" Cheers, Cam [/QUOTE]

Verification