Will d20 kill Dragonlance ?
- Thread starter Shadowlord
- Start date
Ranger REG
Explorer
The 4th Age: Age of Darkness (aka Age of Dragons).Razuur said:
At the end of the 3rd Age: Age of Might (aka Age of the False God). The Cataclysm also heralded the new age (mentioned above).
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Stone Angel
First Post
The dragon lance books are what got me interested in DnD, we chipped in bought the DL tales of the lance boxed set and got an experienced DM to run the campaign. However we found it to linear almost like playing in middle earth, we were inconsequintial compared to hero's of the lance.
So that kind of ruined DL DnD, though I look forward to D20 DL.
Just my two cents
So that kind of ruined DL DnD, though I look forward to D20 DL.
Just my two cents
Shadowlord
Member
Will the DLCS look more like Ravenloft book (black & white) or like the FRCS (full-color) ?
PS: When's this Age of Dreams ?
PS: When's this Age of Dreams ?
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
Ranger REG said:
At the end of the 3rd Age: Age of Might (aka Age of the False God). The Cataclysm also heralded the new age (mentioned above).
Correct me if I'm wrong. [/B][/QUOTE]
Well, one thing worth mentioning is that the name of the Fourth Age was the Age of Despair, and the Third Age was just the Age of Might.
I've seen some fansite or two that use the titles you mention, but its pretty obvious, from what I've read anyway, that they're just descriptors, not the actual titles.
I could be mistaken though, since my Dragonlance collection is fragmented at best.
The Age of Dreams was the Second Age of Krynn. It lasted from 9000 P.C. to around 1000 P.C. or so. I think the exact date it ended may have been 1018 P.C., when the Third Dragonwars end with Huma sending Takhisis back to the Abyss.
Aaron L
Hero
I don't see how a good, solid ruleset (IE: 3E) would hurt Dragonlance any more then the original 1E AD&D, the ruleset upon which the setting was based, hurt it. In fact, I see 3E being of such great help to the setting that I may actually play in it. The addition of Feats and Prestige Classes wil allow such a great range of characters that it will be wonderful.
(All sanctioned wizards must pass the Test of High Sorcery? Prestige Class depending on chosen order. You're a renegade mage? No PrC for you!)
(All sanctioned wizards must pass the Test of High Sorcery? Prestige Class depending on chosen order. You're a renegade mage? No PrC for you!)
Kanegrundar
Explorer
I ran the adventures from Tales of the Lance and, well, hated it. As stated above, it was too linear and the players played second fiddle to the Heroes of the Lance. Poor implementation of rules and setting, IMO. However, I think that 3E will be nothing but good for DL. The rules are much more flexible that previous editions, allowing them to cater to the setting a lot better. I'll probably pick it up when it comes out. The main factor in keeping from messing with DL will be the superior attitude of W&H. The whole Soth going to Ravenloft deal turned me off to both of them. If they can't control their egoes, then I'll take my gaming dollar elsewhere. (Let's face it, DL isn't the end all be all of stories. It's good, but there are a lot better stories out there...Claremont's Shadow War series for one!)
My 2 cents,
Kane
My 2 cents,
Kane
It's all about the fans
The fans make or break the setting. If people just to play a munchie campaign and that's all, it might give it a reputation. However, it does not mean it HAS to be that way. It happened with FR. It's up to you to make it your world.
That said, it would be imperative for SP to make at least some setting specific material (both "crunchy" and sweet) to differentiate from FR and the (bland) kK.
The fans make or break the setting. If people just to play a munchie campaign and that's all, it might give it a reputation. However, it does not mean it HAS to be that way. It happened with FR. It's up to you to make it your world.
That said, it would be imperative for SP to make at least some setting specific material (both "crunchy" and sweet) to differentiate from FR and the (bland) kK.
Last edited:
Ranger REG
Explorer
Yeah, the included adventure kinda suck, but I was more interested in the bigger bulk of the boxed set material ... the 2nd edition rules adaptation (it was a time when I was suckered in and bought the ridiculous "character kit" concept).Kanegrundar said:
Kanegrundar
Explorer
Ranger REG said:
Here's to hoping the idea of character kits are dead and gone! I mainly bought Tales of the Lance for the 2E revisions as well, which I liked for the most part except for the goofy way they handled Gully Dwarves. Why change dice rolling conventions? Give them a big penalty to Int and Cha and move on. Oh well, I can only hope they don't do that this time around.
Kane
