Okay so you hate Dragonlance, how can the current designers improve it?

[rowport]

Am I the only one who read the novels and didn't like them?

You are not. I read the original series, and loathed them- I only kept reading because a friend assured me that they would grow on me as I 'knew the characters better.' Seriously, they are really bad books. :\

 

[Kai Lord]

Please get out of my head.

[Anti-Canon mode engaged]
(And I think there are actually a handful of truly good metallic dragons--Silvara, Sunrise, and Mirror come to mind.

Agreed, but in my campaign, dragons who become good transform into what we call "Ascended Griffons." Huge, awesome griffons that can go toe-to-toe with dragons and are ridden by heroes of good (...on "wings of eagles")

Silvara was the first to make the change.

 

[Ranger REG]

Nope. The only time that DL was railroady was in the original module series. The setting bu itself isn't at all. Some people think that the novels add to that aspect when they don't. All the novels do is tell a story about X characters. What your characters do is just as important to the setting they just don't get novels written about them.

Wow. I have never heard this kind of criticism back in the mid-80's, during their initial release and introduction of Dragonlance.

So fast-forward 20 years, you don't want more of that kind in adventure modules published today?

P.S. Don't let diaglo know, but I'm beginning to relate to those innocent days behind us.

 

[Kalendraf]

For a campaign setting, I avoid anything "over-developed" and to me Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms are both examples of it. Those settings have too many novels written. If I even attempted to play, I'd have players that are more knowledgeable than the DM, and they would likely throw a fit about something being non-canon if I stepped the least bit out of bounds. Such a setting is just too constricting for my style.

I realize some novels have been published for Greyhawk, but those are nowhere near as abundant as the ones for FR or DL. Thus, I don't feel nearly so boxed in trying to run GH. I'd happily run in the Scarred Lands for the same reason.

So for me, it all boils down to this... A setting is either made for novels OR for campaign play.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Maybe we need a DM book that teaches how to railroad a campaign without letting the players know, especially when it has to do with prophecies-type, event-driven, story-based adventures.

That would actually be quite valuable.

Skillful railroading can make for a wonderful campaign with a compelling story and a place for every PC in the party.

Clumsy railroading, which, unfortunately, includes the original DL modules, leads to trainwrecks.

 

[MrFilthyIke]

My only coppers to add here are that I don't like Krynn to play in (but love Taladas). However, the d20 DL books ARE top notch looking, and I give props to the d20 DL team. The books are darn nice, keep 'em coming (even if I'm not a customer buying)

 

[Kalendraf]

Am I the only one who read the novels and didn't like them?

You're definitely not alone in that regard. I read them because there was a certain cool-ness about having novels available based somewhat on D&D. However, I never really enjoyed them that much.

 

[Ranger REG]

For a campaign setting, I avoid anything "over-developed" and to me Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms are both examples of it. Those settings have too many novels written. If I even attempted to play, I'd have players that are more knowledgeable than the DM, and they would likely throw a fit about something being non-canon if I stepped the least bit out of bounds. Such a setting is just too constricting for my style.

Not unless you tell your players beforehand -- as a ground rule -- that this is YOUR Forgotten Realms, not Ed Greenwood's. I mean we are all thankful for the truckloads of his campaign notes so that it will be easier for us DM, but it doesn't mean you're running his or WotC's or TSR's version. Make it your campaign.

For example, I don't give a doof's ass about the presence of firearms in Faerun. Those weapons do not exist in my Faerun.

I realize some novels have been published for Greyhawk, but those are nowhere near as abundant as the ones for FR or DL. Thus, I don't feel nearly so boxed in trying to run GH. I'd happily run in the Scarred Lands for the same reason.

Meh. Then perhaps you should thank WotC for their current level of support for Greyhawk. However, GH fans think WotC should do more.

So for me, it all boils down to this... A setting is either made for novels OR for campaign play.

Before the novels came out, it was Ed Greenwood's homebrewed campaign setting he played. He didn't think it was set out to be a setting for a novel.

I'm certain that TSR didn't plan for Dragonlance as a setting made for the novels, any more than Star Wars is a universe not fit for gameplay but for the films and TV series.

IOW, I disagree. As long you don't overthink and overanalyze all of this, all of them can be good game worlds to play in.

 

[Kanegrundar]

Am I the only one who read the novels and didn't like them?

I liked the first Trilogy to a point. It was interesting to me at the time. I had just gotten into reading fantasy, so I was pretty new to the whole genre. The characters were OK and the story was alright (though it annoyed me that they glossed over parts that seemed integral to the story). However, now that I've read some really good fantasy and my personal tastes in fantasy literature have changed, I don't really like the original trilogy at all. It's too bland, but it was always just good enough to make me think the series would get better. (I quit reading DL after "Dragons of Summer Flame".) As for the rest of the series, the book on Lord Soth (was it titled "Lord Soth"?) is the only one that holds any place in my heart.

Kane

 

[Dragonhelm]

I'm certain that TSR didn't plan for Dragonlance as a setting made for the novels, any more than Star Wars is a universe not fit for gameplay but for the films and TV series.

In fact, the novels were meant to support the game. Funny how that one worked out.


One thing I've noticed on this thread is that a lot of people mentioned that they liked playing in Taladas the best. Perhaps one way of making Dragonlance more appealing to players is by developing Taladas further, and present it as an alternative to Ansalon.