What is the attraction of Dragonlance?

To be honest, I think that Tolkein's work is good, but VERY dry. Always have, always will.

The Chronicles (and later, the Twins trilogy) were the first books I read which captured the spirit of Tolkein (a living world which didn't just spring up out of nowhere) but which also weren't just a socio-history lesson in disguise as fantasy.

Deadguy said:
But after reading the books, I couldn't imagine playing in the setting. The players either had the choice of playing second string to the novel's NPCs, getting to watch history unfold. Or they ignored the main plot, and then simply had the world change around them.

<shrug> Kinda the same deal if you play the Star Wars RPG. It never really bothered me. Maybe the players won't be saving the world from Tahkisis, but I still think there are a lot of important things they CAN accomplish in the framework of the story.

Of course, the modules which covered the Chronicles timeline actually ENCOURAGED you to use your own characters in place of the established characters. So it's very possible to have an alternate Krynn for your campaign world, where the players ARE epic heroes.

Regards,
Corporate Dog
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Huh...Psion...

...nice hearing your opinion...but don´t you think you´re utterly wrong in this thread with it? *points to title*
How about opening your own thread, something like "10 reasons why I hate Dragonlance", instead of trolling around in a thread where fans are asked what they liked about the game?
 

No, the characters weren't refreshing when they were new. They were parodies of their D&D character classes, for the most part. The only characters that were interesting were Tasslehof (at first, although he got annoying after a while), Laurana and Tanis. Everyone else was a parody of a D&D class or race. And don't get me started on Fizban, or Zifnab, or whatever they called him in this series.
 
Last edited:

Re: Huh...Psion...

Geron Raveneye said:
...nice hearing your opinion...but don´t you think you´re utterly wrong in this thread with it? *points to title*
How about opening your own thread, something like "10 reasons why I hate Dragonlance", instead of trolling around in a thread where fans are asked what they liked about the game?

Do me a favor and go and read the sentiment of the first post? I was just sympathizing with the thread starters sentiment, and I agree with him wholly. So don't pretend I am intruding here, much like the PS whiners where in the PS thread.

Oh, and next time you think about trying to pretend to regulate my posting, please think again.
 

Who says I was pretending?

And to give you a pointer on your posting I don´t need to think..I only need to read the title of the thread, huh? And yes...read the first post...maybe you´ll even do it again, too...then you might find out what Vhane wanted to read here. It´s apparently not sympathizers..

Okay. I think my post here was uncalled for...my apology, before it creates wider ripples than a simple disagreement about post placement should. No personal feelings, I hope :)
 
Last edited:


*sighs*...no PMs here...

Okay...for Psion...before this grows out of hand, as it happens so easily...I didn´t mean to attack you, but when I hit "New Posts" on a thead where DL fans are asked why they like DL so much and get a post where a DL hater describes why he hates DL so much, my first thought is "That post doesn´t belong here". Maybe I´m wrong, but I still think so.
I don´t mind you not liking DL, as there probably are as many reasons not ot like is as there are to like it. No personal feelings involved either.

Sorry for taking this up here, and hopefully it´ll not create any further dissent. Peace, huh?

Wish we had PMs here...then I would have taken it there...sorry
 

Comparing Martin to Weis & Hickman shows a poor grasp of their target markets, as they were OBVIOUSLY written for different age groups (Weis & Hickman being much more "age friendly"). That being said, comparing writers in general is a frivilous exercise of "My purely subjective opinion is better!". Even so, I'm a fan of Tolkien, Weis & Hickman, and Tad Williams (currently reading Martin), they aren't mutually exclusive. As I've gotten older, I have noticed that I lean more towards the "historical fiction" writers whereas I used to favor the high-fantasy authors.

As to the original question, Dragonlance has a sense of history/tradition that I never saw in other settings. This was partly accomplished through the Towers, Knights,etc..., but also through the novel line.

Early on, you could read about the history of Dragonlance through novels such as the Legend of Huma and the Gates of Thorbardin, and the elven wars trilogy. In short, DL was the richest setting I've ever experienced because the novels explored the past, not just the present. It gave the setting substance that I've never seen recaptured by another setting.

However, eventually the setting felt small to us, so we moved on. I think that this is mostly due to the fact that the RPG products focused too heavily on the Companions and their travels.

I'm pretty excited about DL coming back, but only if it more closely resembles it's first incarnations (Pre & Post War of Lance, before the 3rd age stuff).
 

DwarvenBrew said:

I'm pretty excited about DL coming back, but only if it more closely resembles it's first incarnations (Pre & Post War of Lance, before the 3rd age stuff).

don't you mean before the 5th age (the age of mortals)?:)

but I think that they have decided to allow 3rd (pre-cataclysm), 4th (original dragonlance), 5th (great dragon), and probably 6th age period (the return of the gods) to be playable, imagine the fun of playing mage who aren't allowed to wield any weapon including dagger:D

to come back on topic, draconians are really cool monsters and are only featured in dragonlance (they haven't been used in other setting after their appearance, while I believe that some kender slipped in other setting).
 

Re: Reasons I hate DL

Obviously Dragonlance is not every fantasy and gaming fan's cup of tea. It might be worth noting, however, that as we develop Dragonlance for the d20 System we are attempting to understand some of the problems of past incarnations of DL in gaming, so we can produce superior product in the future.

Psion said:
Let me count the ways:

1) My first exposure to DL was the adventures, which we quickly learned to hate. They had the tragic flaw of trying to follow in the footsteps of the book. It was a railroad fest of the worst order.

When the original "DL" series of modules was new, they were rather revolutionary. The pre-generated characters were more than just names and stats, the setting was new and unique, and there was an actual STORY instead of a dungeon crawling slayfest. (Please understand that I have nothing against the old hack-and-slash modules, as I played through and ran many of them in my day as well.) The artwork and production value of the Dragonlance product set a new standard in the industry, and these products invented the "tie-in" line of novels which are best-selling to this day.

The very linear plot and use of pre-generated characters were a turn-off to some gamers then and now. Our intention is to provide more souce material than adventures, and the adventures we produce will not use pre-generated characters and should be more "open" in terms of player choices.

2) The fannish book adoration and attempts to invoke the books as law was much worse at its height than it ever was with FR.

The Dragonlance novels are the best-selling gaming tie-in novels ever. People feel very strongly about the novels, so much so that there are daily arguments over tiny details on the DL Mailing List and alt.fan.dragonlance. This may bother some people (Forgotten Realms fans, perhaps?), but it is actually a testament to the love the fans have for the novels.

3) One word: Kender.

4) Two words: Tinker gnomes.

I think people will be pleased to see our presentation of the "little people" races. They are NOT simply comic relief, nor are they all identical clones of one another. (For example, not every kender talks and acts like Tasslehoff. The novel SPIRIT OF THE WIND by Chris Pierson is a great example of this.)

5) And perhaps the most irritating of all, it poisoned Death Knights. It was bad enough that DL fanboys got the impression that Death Knights originated with Krynn, but subsequent 2e text was polluted with campaign garbage about Solamnic Knights, which of course only further muddled the thinking of clueless DL fans.

Poisoned death knights? While it's true that death knights existed as a monster type in the FIEND FOLIO, they were simply collections of stats and abilities until the character of Lord Soth was created--a powerful vision of a fallen hero. Soth's tragic story made an interesting villain, one who stole the scene in the novels and was a terrifying presence in games. The association with death knights and Dragonlance is only natural, since they were never used in this way before.

To me, saying Dragonlance poisoned the death knight is akin to saying Bram Stoker poisoned vampires.

For one, I was please to see a Greyhawk specific take on something -- in a recent LGJ -- to help correct the butchering of Death Knights.

I thought the Living Greyhawk material was very cool. But you can expect the death knight (and Lord Soth!) to appear in upcoming d20 Dragonlance product.

Good gaming!

Jamie Chambers
Managing Editor
Sovereign Press, Inc.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top