Dragonlance [+] What do you like most about DRAGONLANCE?


My multiplanar adventure's first leg outside of my own campaign setting was in Dragonlance, and running 7+ games set in this setting has given me the opportunity to see a lot of things I had missed when I first read the setting in middle school:
1- As another big fan of Dragons, I really like the ways in which the setting puts them at the centre.
2- Dragonlances and Orbs of Dragonkind are really awesome items, and I tend to include one Orb of Dragonkind in every game I run regardless of the setting.
3- For a setting that was supposedly too centred on one single conflict, I think the Age of Mortals (pre-Mina and the whole One God shenanigans) and the Dragon Overlords is a really interesting direction for the setting to take. There's no clerical magic, no High Sorcery, and dragons bigger than any native dragon divide the map between themselves. It gives a real post-apocalyptic feel to the setting, and I think it might even do it better than the initial post-Apocalyptic form at the start of the War of the Lance (mostly because there's a clear apocalyptic force ruling over your head, so the campaign turns into one of survival very quickly).
4- Like Oofta says, I really like how the game is unapologetically epic fantasy. There are people fighting for good even if they know they are doomed, and I think that's a really fresh theme compared to the gunk of cynicism that permeates some settings.
5- The Three orders of High Sorcery (as well as their extremely taxing entrance exam) is a really sensible way of putting spellcasters in your world without making them overpowered.

log in or register to remove this ad


  1. The proper sweep of history, the before times, the cataclysm, the lost years, and the urgency of the Dragon wars. Things actually happened that changed the world properly, and each era has its own flavor. As a contrast, The Forgotten Realms, despite the various hastily bolted on "Gods come to earth and do X" storylines has had nothing that actually changed its core as a fantasy western in an essentially culturally and politically static world. I say this as someone who loves FR, and thinks Greenwood is a killer world-builder with an extraordinary knack for fleshing out cultures and choosing names.
  2. The tone: It's a serious world, drenched with regret about the past, yet it's somehow a younger, more earnest world as well where the threats are fresh and raw, and we haven't seen it all before.
  3. The books are full of characters that are really wrestling with what it means to be a hero, and that it's a lot easier on many levels to not be one!
  4. The unity and bold choices that go beyond a generic fantasy setting... the iron pieces, the missing gods, the orders of high sorcery, the knights of solamnia, the apocalyptic dragon war.

She has a good one, definitely. As iconic as they are, not a lot of the characters get a bona fide arc with growth and transformation in the Chronicles. That's not to say that they all lack depth or character journeys. They resonate with people for a reason. And that brings me to another plus. The characters are a huge part of how Dragonlance was filtered to us at first. It was all through their eyes and personalities. Unlike other D&D settings, we had the novels before we had a proper setting book.

I like Laurana’s character arc. I think she has the most growth of all the characters in the Chronicles series.


The characters, the 'lost history' of the gods, the return of mythological beings in the form of dragons and said gods, the robes of magic, the fact it is a very epic fantasy, but you have Good working alongside Evil.

There is a grit to it, it wasnt all shining heroism, but there was still heroism.



Just kidding. Kitiara, Lord Soth, Tanis, Sturm, Raistlin initially and later Caramon are all relatable characters in their own very different ways and were a big part of what made the early stories so engaging.

Game-wise, I love the concept of the Solamnic Knights. And Taladas is an exciting setting that's sadly been underutilised.


So many things... the chronicles, the dragons, the art, the characters (their personalities, stories, and names), the kender, the gully dwarves... As a kid, Dragonlance was magical.


I liked the various races, the split between the elven people creating similar but separate cultures, the wizards of high sorcery and knights of solamnia, and later the knights of Takhisis that opposed both.

The war of the lance was epic, you have the creation of draconians, the return of the gods, and the defeat (again) of Takhisis.

I liked the whole balance between good and evil aspect with good turning to evil with the kingpriest of Istar, and the eventual retribution of the gods, which could have been averted except for jealousy and doubt.

Lord Soth.


I like Laurana’s character arc. I think she has the most growth of all the characters in the Chronicles series.
I can't quite recall the start of her story (spoiled princess?) But, from memory, she goes on to become one of the greatest generals for the side of good, inspiring those around her.

In the age of mortals her homeland is occupied but she never stops fighting, she just finds other ways to do it. She was definitely a great character.



These guys. As a kid, I spent many nights trying to decide if I wanted to be more like Raistlin or Caramon when I grew up...

An Advertisement