Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Irda Ranger" data-source="post: 130247" data-attributes="member: 1003">I could not have said this better. The setting makes the game, and the rules only exist to describe it. Do not let the rules dictate the setting.I think the templates from Mongoose's Quintessential Collector's series are an excellent example of how this could be done. I agree it is a good thing. Also consider templates that are regional based, making a Plainsman ranger slightly different than an Elven or Solamnic one. This would necessarily entail the detailing of regions that the Companions did not visit, which I highly encourage.This is a good example of K.I.S.S. Whenever possible, avoid unnecessary rules complexity. I still remember a bargain I made with a PC: &quot;If you can make heads or tails of the invention charts in the back of DL Adventures (and explain it to me), you can make a Tinker.&quot;Amen to that. I think that the 4th Age should be the &quot;official Age&quot; and that all others should be optional under the rules, perhaps with supplements published later. I have not read the War of Souls books yet (I gave up after the 5th Age books), so cannot comment on how they affect things.As others have mentioned, I have a few things I want to see1) Regional information. Languages, races, political situation, class templates. Plainsmen were plainsman, Solamnics were Solamnics, and no one ever forgot this. Regionalization is integral to the setting.2) Playable &quot;wee folk&quot;: Kender and Gnomes (personally, I don't think Gullys were ever meant to be PCs).3) Most importantly, the &quot;feel&quot; of Dragonlance. Do _whatever_ it takes to make Dragonlance **DRAGONLANCE**Thanks very much to Michael Tree for putting things so succinctly. I highly recommend that all gamers who care about Dragonlance send a note to Sovereign Stone so that your vote can be counted. Irda RangerEdit: Spellchecker just isn't the same as good, old-fashioned proof reading.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Irda Ranger, post: 130247, member: 1003"] I could not have said this better. The setting makes the game, and the rules only exist to describe it. Do not let the rules dictate the setting. [B][/B] I think the templates from Mongoose's Quintessential Collector's series are an excellent example of how this could be done. I agree it is a good thing. Also consider templates that are regional based, making a Plainsman ranger slightly different than an Elven or Solamnic one. This would necessarily entail the detailing of regions that the Companions did not visit, which I highly encourage. [B][/B] This is a good example of K.I.S.S. Whenever possible, avoid unnecessary rules complexity. I still remember a bargain I made with a PC: "If you can make heads or tails of the invention charts in the back of DL Adventures (and explain it to me), you can make a Tinker." [B][/B] Amen to that. I think that the 4th Age should be the "official Age" and that all others should be optional under the rules, perhaps with supplements published later. I have not read the War of Souls books yet (I gave up after the 5th Age books), so cannot comment on how they affect things. As others have mentioned, I have a few things I want to see 1) Regional information. Languages, races, political situation, class templates. Plainsmen were plainsman, Solamnics were Solamnics, and no one ever forgot this. Regionalization is integral to the setting. 2) Playable "wee folk": Kender and Gnomes (personally, I don't think Gullys were ever meant to be PCs). 3) Most importantly, the "feel" of Dragonlance. Do _whatever_ it takes to make Dragonlance **DRAGONLANCE** Thanks very much to Michael Tree for putting things so succinctly. I highly recommend that all gamers who care about Dragonlance send a note to Sovereign Stone so that your vote can be counted. Irda Ranger Edit: Spellchecker just isn't the same as good, old-fashioned proof reading. [/QUOTE]

Verification