The Dragonlance Saga--your experiences

[Cam Banks]

I'm not sure about this - there was a "split the party" up part midway through, which became troublesome.

Not at all. The modules were set up so that the pregens weren't required. They were there to help the story, but there wasn't anything that demanded their use. We decided, however, to use archetypes in the revision, so that you could just pick one player to fit the Leader archetype, another the Sage, and so on. Nice compromise.

Well... keep fighting the good fight!

Oh, I will!

Cheers,
Cam

 

[DaveyJones]

Eh? How was Raistlin important to the plot? The modules were perfectly playable without the pre-gen characters. I don't recall any references to a Raistlin-dependent plot in the modules. The books were different, obviously, but the modules had none of that in it.

yes and no.

you didn't have to use the pregens. but it meant some reworking. like Goldmoon or whatever the cleric you made not having powers... except the staff.

or the need for a ranger/ Riverwind to even find the place to use the staff.

or a thief to open locks or find traps or map the complex.

or...

there was a reason the iconic DL PCs were the class and race they were.

edit: and that was just DL 1

 

[Morrus]

yes and no.

you didn't have to use the pregens. but it meant some reworking. like Goldmoon or whatever the cleric you made not having powers... except the staff.

or the need for a ranger/ Riverwind to even find the place to use the staff.

or a thief to open locks or find traps or map the complex.

or...

there was a reason the iconic DL PCs were the class and race they were.

edit: and that was just DL 1

So what was Raistlin essential for? The above post said the game broke down because he was essential to the plot (he isn't) and the player wasn't roleplaying him correctly. I can't see needing a rogue to pick locks being a "weakness" in an adventure; in fact, I can't think of an adventure I've ever played which didn't have locks and traps in it. That's D&D.

 

[MerricB]

So what was Raistlin essential for? The above post said the game broke down because he was essential to the plot (he isn't) and the player wasn't roleplaying him correctly. I can't see needing a rogue to pick locks being a "weakness" in an adventure; in fact, I can't think of an adventure I've ever played which didn't have locks and traps in it. That's D&D.

Interestingly, there are notes in the early adventures that "these PCs have to be included, as they are essential for later developments"... which don't later develop.

Raistlin is called out in DL3 - as there is a special relationship between him and Fistandantilus. I don't think it is even called out in DL12, when the Dragonorb is fully developed...

Cheers!

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I think they were an amazing attempt to make RPGs something more (and something much, much more accessible) than what they had been, and that they partially succeeded.

I also think that the intial promise of the concept was squelched because it never reached the right audience in sufficient numbers. It eventually came to brilliant fruition in the structure of Japanese-style console RPGs, which embrace the character- and story-driven focus and the tight scripting in a format where people weren't predisposed to object to both.

Personally, I would love to play the DL modules with a group that really loved the DL novels - but not with a group of gamers.

On a completely different track, I think the story and setting focus the DL modules attempted to achieve inspired the entirety of 2e, which, though a bad fit for D&D, put people on the track to developing RPGs that were genuinely suited to creating and exploring stories.

 

[Ulrick]

Wow, this is really good advice! Thank you!

As I've been reading through the series there is, indeed, a lot of railroading. However, I do like the idea of being chased by an army in DL1. Yeah, the army forces you to go to Xak Tsaroth but...it's still cool.


I wonder if a DM could just make the campaign his own, not use the pre-gens, and just use the locations have have the PCs explore as they see fit. Because I think the location descriptions are wonderfully detailed.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Wow, this is really good advice! Thank you!

As I've been reading through the series there is, indeed, a lot of railroading. However, I do like the idea of being chased by an army in DL1. Yeah, the army forces you to go to Xak Tsaroth but...it's still cool.


I wonder if a DM could just make the campaign his own, not use the pre-gens, and just use the locations have have the PCs explore as they see fit. Because I think the location descriptions are wonderfully detailed.

It's easy to make it your own. Go for it. Really, the greatest concerns are player pre-conceived notions and your own pre-conceived notions.

Approach it from a fresh perspective and you'll have fun.

My advice: try to get away from DL1 and DL2 as fast as you can. These modules were detailed blow by blow in Dragons of Autumn Twilight - which your players have probably read once upon a time.

The sooner you get away from those two mods to get to DL3 and 4 - the sooner you'll be making the campaign your own.

Avoid pre-gend characters. IF you use them - the impulse to be playing the books may overwhelm you or the players. Stay away from this and you'll be fine.

 

[Crust]

I loved how the Classics modules paralleled the novels. I thought that was an incredible thing when I was first discovering both D&D and Dragonlance back in the early 90s. I saw it (and still do) as a fantastic merging of two mediums.

I was able to run the campaign back in '97. My neighbors in college were gamers and were familiar with Dragonlance but had never gamed in DL. It was a very fortunate thing, as I was itching to run those modules, and I was already in the middle of Rod of Seven Parts with my home group.

Of the players, we had Caramon (who was killed by Ember's breath atop Derkin's Tomb), Raistlin, Sturm, Goldmoon, Riverwind, and Tasslehoff. Two new additions were Orson, a human fighter/berserker kit (tailored after the berserker Orson in Lodoss Wars) and Azerum Flamesmith, an aspiring hill dwarf cleric of Reorx.

We made it as far as splitting the group at Tarsis. Orson, Azerum, and a number of NPCs headed to Icewall and slew Feal-thas, while the others journeyed to Silvanesti and slew Cyan Bloodbane, claiming a dragonorb.

Dragons of Dreams was quite tedious, let me add. It was interesting and fun as the dream sequences took hold, but it was a bumpy road.

The railroading is a given. The use of modules suggests railroading, typically, and everyone involved understood the quest from the beginning.

It's so interesting seeing Skullcap, Icewall, Thorbardin, Derkin's Tomb, Neraka, and the Temple of Takhisis laid out. The Classics modules are like the Dragonlance extended version, giving us a level of detail that makes the saga come alive in new ways.

It's also incredible seeing how events unfold in comparison to the novels. In our campaign, the PCs fought Verminaard on three separate occasions, the third and final encounter ending with Orson decapitating him with the vorpal sword found in Skullcap.

I'd love to go back and give it another shot. In fact, as a sort of homage to the modules, I'm using Dragons of Despair in my Age of Worms campaign, using Xak Tsaroth as the lair of Illthane and her brood. Draconians will be replaced with black draconic lizardfolk, gully dwarves replaced with black draconic kobolds, and Khisanth will be replaced by Illthane. PCs will have to rescue Allustan, who will replace Raistlin.

 

[Nightfall]

I like the new version better myself.

But then they've got better artists now working on Dragonlance.

 

[Hussar]

To be honest, I got more use out of DL15 and 16 - the booklets with a slew of mini-modules. They were loads of fun.

I had the same problem that most here seem to have had. My players just couldn't give a toss about the problems of the NPC's. Getting them grounded in the setting was, eventually, impossible.