What is the attraction of Dragonlance?

[Vhane]

Personally I've never liked it. It didn't impress me when it first came out, and started that dredful text box trend in TSR adventures. Just curious.

 

[CRGreathouse]

I've played it fo years and still don't know. I just slowly force the DM to become more generic every session...

 

[Tsyr]

For many people, I gather it more or less introduced them to DnD.

For me...

I like the religion of the setting, it's more... rich, I guess, than say FR... I like the flavor of the knighthood and the towers... I love how legends and songs and poetry and so forth is a big part of the history and flavor of the setting...

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Simple. The origional 6 novels that came out were incredible. Just about the best fantasy I have read.

Even now I ocassionally pick them up to read two of my favorite fantasy characters.

Tanis and Raistlin.

 

[Bastoche]

Wizards of high sorcery. Nuff said.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

I never liked it and never read the books, nor ever will, in all likelihood. My co-DM read the early books and loved them, but never liked the actual game setting (same for both of us with Wheel of Time, though I liked Jordan's early Conan books). The last fantasy novels I read were in 1989/90, Spellfire and Curse of the Azure Bonds, LOL. Those (and the third Shannara book) turned me off to ever reading another fantasy novel again!

Of course, never say never.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Well duhh . You read just shy of the worst out there no wonder you got turned off to fantasy novels.

I never liked it and never read the books, nor ever will, in all likelihood. My co-DM read the early books and loved them, but never liked the actual game setting (same for both of us with Wheel of Time, though I liked Jordan's early Conan books). The last fantasy novels I read were in 1989/90, Spellfire and Curse of the Azure Bonds, LOL. Those (and the third Shannara book) turned me off to ever reading another fantasy novel again!

Of course, never say never.

 

[Randolpho]

That's the appeal all right... the original 3 books rocked. The 2nd 3 were decent, but not as good as the first 3, IMO.

There are so many reason why they were good, some of which have been touched on:

The setting was detailed and thought out, using legends and songs to inform the reader of the history of the setting (Tsyr), the characters were well developed, different and interesting, not cookie-cutter-defined-only-by-what-they-are-supposed-to-do-in-the-book types like you get in certain other books I won't mention.

 

[Eryx]

Dragonlance is what brought me in to AD&D in the first place. The setting is great and really captured my imagination.

I find the original Dragonlance Chronicles to be far better than anything Tolkien ever wrote. But thats just my opinion.

 

[Dúnadan]

Despite my attempts to remain a lurker, this topic has forced me to comment. I never played in the actual setting and as such I am indifferent, but in my opinion, the first three (and only) Dragonlance books that I read were the epitome of dumbed-down, childish fantasty stories, with cliched characters, shoddy writing, and, at best, an amateurish attempt at world-building. Perhaps I'm missing the element that has spurned so many of you to love this series, so please enlighten me if this is indeed the case. If any of you cares to read a series that rivals, and in some cases, suprpasses Tolkien, try A Song of Ice and Fire by George R.R. Martin, who makes Weiss and Hickman seem like two year-olds scribbling with crayons and drooling on themselves.