- Dragonlance material appears in printed books, including Cyan Bloodbane in the Draconomicon
- Raistlin shows up in the character generator.
- Numerous Draconians in the next minis set.
- Minotaurs in the next PHB.
- Weis and Hickman to appear at GenCon...where the next setting is to be announced.
- WotC puts out a Dragonlance essay writing contest were the ultimate prize is a trip to where they are announcing the next setting!
- Bill Slavicsec states: "From the origin of the setting ... it's a great year to be a Dragonlance fan!"
Why would the "origin of the setting" mean that the current year is a great year to be a Dragonlance fan?
On the other side, for Dark Sun we have:
- A Dark Sun article appear in the first online issue of Dragon
- April Fool's article contains the word "defiler"
- PHB3 to feature psionics
- A goliath mini has an obsidian sword (i have a hard time believing people take this as a genuine hint, but it gets mentioned a lot anyway)
- Eberron Player's Guide mentions a place where thri-kreen and half-giants live.
- Dark Sun apparently has an editor for its novel line. New DS novels?!
- Eberron Campaign Guide mentions the templar as a player class!
EDIT: I've been going back and forth the last few months but for the most part i've seen a lot of DL stuff all over the place. These last bits of info that an editor was brought in for Dark Sun novels and templars being in PHB3 are pretty strong evidence for DS to come out though. We can only hope it turns out to be DS!
I've seen poeple giving evidence of both. I'm just gonna point and laugh if it isn't either of them.
I thought everyone knew that the 2010 setting would be Birthright. It's so obvious. ;)
Dark Sun didn't impress me too much, but I did only play it once. I do like the darkness of that setting, and I think we need a primitive setting (one where they don't wear metal armor and use metal weapons).
My personal favorite is the Ravenloft setting though. I know it's unlikely to come back as a full campaign setting; being more likely to appear as DDI articles about the various domains of dread in the Shadowfell.
No matter what it is in 2010, it should be worth at least taking a look at.
What's the 'hook' of Dragonlance anyway? The one that makes it feel different than the other Fantasy settings??
I would imagine that depends on the time you're playing in. Playing in a world that thinks the gods have abandoned them is certainly intruiging. As I said though, my preference lies with the dark stuff.
What's the 'hook' of Dragonlance anyway? The one that makes it feel different than the other Fantasy settings??
Its got elves that live in the woods and dwarves that live in the mountains and magical dragons that breathe fire! Thats not original enough for you? ;)
Seriously, what's dragonlance's hook?
I would imagine that depends on the time you're playing in. Playing in a world that thinks the gods have abandoned them is certainly intruiging. As I said though, my preference lies with the dark stuff.
So...it doesn't have a real hook then? Why not just merge Greyhawk, Dragonlance and every other 'generic' fantasy setting that don't have enough to distinguish themselves from the basic Points of Light concept into a NEW and BETTER setting??
You don't need to be original when you have those things.
Besides, it's no less original than Forgotten Realms.
I've seen poeple giving evidence of both. I'm just gonna point and laugh if it isn't either of them.
I'm not going to care either way.
So...it doesn't have a real hook then? Why not just merge Greyhawk, Dragonlance and every other 'generic' fantasy setting that don't have enough to distinguish themselves from the basic Points of Light concept into a NEW and BETTER setting??
Fanboys.
As disappointing as it is, it seems most signs point to Dragonlance as the next setting.
- Raistlin shows up in the character generator.
- Aurak Draconians in the next minis set.
- Minotaurs in the next PHB.
- Weis and Hickman at GenCon
- Bill Slavicsec states: "From the origin of the setting ... it's a great year to be a Dragonlance fan!"
Why would the "origin of the setting" mean that the current year is a great year to be a Dragonlance fan?
On the other side, for Dark Sun we have:
- April Fool's article contains the word "defiler"
- PHB3 to feature psionics
- A goliath has an obsidian sword (i have a hard time believing people take this as a genuine hint, but it gets mentioned a lot anyway)
So it seems that the evidence in favor of Dragonlance seems to outweigh the Dark Sun hints at this point. Is there anything im missing?
The Dragonlance hints aren't as much hints as the fervent hope for them to be.
- Raistlin is the Drizzt of DL - he's in because he's popular, not necessarily as hint to DL in 2010.
- Auraks (and Draconians by extension) could just as easily be included in the next Draconomicon as DL (seems to be a semi-popular theory at ENworld)
- Minotaurs aren't exclusive to DL; I mean WoW =-whiners can just as easily yell "Tauren!" as it being a sign of DL, or you can say Warhammer, or or or - ie Minotaurs aren't the sole province of DL
- Weis and Hickman are there for the anniversary seminar for DL - anniversary does not definitively equal next setting
- Slavicsec could mean anything - hell, there could be a Dragonlance toyline or video game coming! (ok, not likely ...) But it does not constitute a declaration of DL being the next setting
As for other hints, a WotC developer on ENworld said the next setting had an "a" in the name, which is pretty much every DnD setting other than Eberron and Birthright, and also said "$". Which could mean guaranteed money, ie a setting they expect for sales to be big. Or (the theory I prefer
) - it could be translated as Dollar Sign - Dark Sun. ;) The TL;DR version: All hints are circumstantial. Nothing is definite, no matter how much some die-hards want to believe.
At this point the only solid clue we have is a brief tidbit Scott Rouse through out in a thread to drive us speculators nuts: the next campaign setting will have an "a" in its name.
Besides, it's no less original than Forgotten Realms.
I agree totally.
I do like Forgotten Realms though. If I'm too lazy to think of a world for a given campaign, I'll just whip out the FR fold-out map and change the fluff in the book.
The Dragonlance hints aren't as much hints as the fervent hope for them to be.
Fervent hope? Harldy. I would like pretty much any setting other than Dragonlance or Greyhawk but i have to admit that there are far more numerous and generally stronger hints towards DL than any other setting at this point.
You don't need to be original when you have those things.
So Dragonlance doesn't worry about being original. Gotcha. ;)
Besides, it's no less original than Forgotten Realms.
Somehow that doesn't strike me as strong argument in DL's favor.
Dragonlance has more than 20 years of history, a huge fanbase, and iconic characters.
You don't need to be original when you have those things.
Besides, it's no less original than Forgotten Realms.
Soo... if we compare setting to houses FR and DL are the same pre-fab model but with different folks living it in it using different furnitures?
That makes for a boring neigbhorhood --
So...it doesn't have a real hook then? Why not just merge Greyhawk, Dragonlance and every other 'generic' fantasy setting that don't have enough to distinguish themselves from the basic Points of Light concept into a NEW and BETTER setting??
For the same reason we don't squish Lord of the Rings in with it. LotR is also a 'generic' fantasy environment.
For the same reason we don't squish Lord of the Rings in with it. LotR is also a 'generic' fantasy environment.
LotR doesn't belong to WotC though.
All I want is SOMETHING NEW! Something I could call 'MY' favorite official setting without all the baggage that comes with it. Is that so much to ask for?!
Fervent hope? Harldy. I would like pretty much any setting other than Dragonlance or Greyhawk but i have to admit that there are far more numerous and generally stronger hints towards DL than any other setting at this point.
I wasn't talking about you when I said fervent hope. ;)
Cyan Bloodbane was in Draconomicon, so I'm going to have to say yes.
And Strahd is in Open Graves. Obviously Ravenloft is the next setting! :P
LotR doesn't belong to WotC though.
All I want is SOMETHING NEW! Something I could call 'MY' favorite official setting without all the baggage that comes with it. Is that so much to ask for?!
No, it isn't too much to ask. I'd like to see some fresh new stuff too; and I can understand your frustration. I'd love to see some swashbuckling/renaissance era stuff that departs from heavy armor, but I'm not gonna decry generic fantasy settings that people have enjoyed for years. There are many people that have developed sentimental attachments to the campaign setting they're used to. I know I have such an attachment to Ravenloft.
The truth is that WotC is gonna put out old settings that people are attached to, that they know comes with a built-in fan-base over an unknown setting that may not fly terribly well or may be a raving success.
And Strahd is in Open Graves. Obviously Ravenloft is the next setting! :P
I'll believe it when I see it on a bookshelf, not on the interweb.
Unless I'm wrong all the previous edition had a new setting introduced during their lifetimes no?
yeah... don't forget the mages that cast spells...
Seriously, what's dragonlance's hook?
Best guess: People get to ride dragons.
Sadly, the presence of Kender and Tinker Gnomes ruin it utterly, so even that bit of coolness can't escape the quicksand.
No, it isn't too much to ask. I'd like to see some fresh new stuff too; and I can understand your frustration. I'd love to see some swashbuckling/renaissance era stuff that departs from heavy armor, but I'm not gonna decry generic fantasy settings that people have enjoyed for years. There are many people that have developed sentimental attachments to the campaign setting they're used to. I know I have such an attachment to Ravenloft.
*cough*Birthright*cough*
Except Chris Perkins (I think it was him) implied they'd take the Birthright mechanics & apply it to 4e in general rather than update the setting.
Cyan Bloodbane was in Draconomicon, so I'm going to have to say yes.
Haven't we seen a couple references to DL in the published books? Im going to add this and the DS Dragon article to teh OP.
I wasn't talking about you when I said fervent hope. ;)
Sorry, it seemed you were responding to me.
Yeah I guess I shouldn't hate on the old settings just because I'm frustrated. Its just that this is a new edition and it would be nice if it had a new setting of its own!
Unless I'm wrong all the previous edition had a new setting introduced during their lifetimes no?
3.0e Really didn't get a new setting exclusive to it, though if you count Ghostwalk it did (Ghostwalk is a pseudo-setting though). But yes, as far as I know, all the previous whole editions (people have nitpicked edition titles in the past) have all had a new CS come out during them. Honestly, the fact that Wizards hasn't capitalized on the core setting more is really surprising to me, I would play in it in a heartbeat. A lot of the designers all have unique settings that they campaign in, why can't they develop those into a new setting.
Unfortunately, it all boils down to brand recognition. But I agree, something new would be very awesome.
What's the 'hook' of Dragonlance anyway? The one that makes it feel different than the other Fantasy settings??
The original hooks of Dragonlance from the War of the Lance era I can tell you about. The rubbish that's happened since, who knows or cares? I'm enthusiastically on board for Dragonlance if they're prepared to reboot back to the War of the Lance and otherwise fairly indifferent.
So: since you asked - and again, this was War of the Lance era, later stuff has knocked most of this on the head.
* The true gods are forgotten, leaving people worshipping false gods. Divine powers are rare and noteworthy.
* Dragons have not been seen for a very long time and up until recently were believed mythical.
* Evil (chromatic) dragons are actively struggling against metallic (good) dragons. (1st Edition Dragonlance was the setting that made metallic dragons a big thing and a relevant part of the campaign world.)
* About halfway through the War of the Lance dragons become a big and active part of the war effort; characters of all levels have meaningful opportunities to talk with, fight, befriend, and even ride dragons. Dragons are as neurotic and mortal as player characters rather than being giant dungeon-rulers.
* Dragonlance introduced the concept of tinker gnomes and they still play a major part in the setting.
* Dragonlance introduced gully dwarves (childish, stupid, and largely humourous dwarf-kin) and kender (hyperactive kleptomaniac halflings).
* Dragonlance has a rich history largely forgotten by the current age, giving players many opportunities to interact with the past while simultaneously giving them a good reason to not remember or care about giant codexes of campaign backstory.
* Dragonlance introduced draconians, who in my opinion were a vastly more interesting grunt-level enemy than the orcs and goblins that infest many D&D campaign worlds.
* Precious metals are rare; civilisation is uncommon and scattered, and large cities are notable for their rarity and are often the subject of legend very far away.
* Ansalon is a relatively small continent; travelling across it is just hard enough to make an interesting story and just easy enough to be practical without resorting to teleportation magic and other DM-ex-machina.
* The various orders of Solamnic Knights (a dragon-riding chivalric order) are well-realised and a favourite of many fans, as are the alignment-based schools of sorcery.
* The original Chronicles novels were a well-written and memorable fantasy trilogy with great characters and there's a huge attraction to just playing in the world they were set in.
* The original (1st Edition) D-series modules that parallelled the Chronicles were largely well-designed modules with some great set-piece adventures and presented a coherent well-designed campaign that could last players for years of play.
* Dragonlance has been the recipient of some of the best artwork that TSR/Wizards ever commissioned (enough that it got its own coffee table art book) and the very evocative images from that art can get you excited to play it all by themselves.
Plus some other stuff that I'm probably forgetting right now. That's what excites me about the War of the Lance era as a setting and it's why I wish they'd come back to it.
A lot of the designers all have unique settings that they campaign in, why can't they develop those into a new setting.
Unfortunately, it all boils down to brand recognition. But I agree, something new would be very awesome.
We all have good campaign setting ideas, whether we're designers or not. I personally wouldn't subit mine because I write for it and I don't know what the GSL says about retaining intellectual property. Plus it would probably help the campaign along if my storeis were widely read.
We all have good campaign setting ideas, whether we're designers or not. I personally wouldn't subit mine because I write for it and I don't know what the GSL says about retaining intellectual property. Plus it would probably help the campaign along if my storeis were widely read.
The point I was making was the fact that the designers are sitting on gold mines in respect to their current campaigns. Unlike building a new setting totally from scratch, they could start with one of those settings. I still think refining the core setting would be the best thing WotC can do, the legwork is done, we already have bits and pieces of a history and regions thought out, just go further and make a whole setting out of it.
I would imagine that depends on the time you're playing in. Playing in a world that thinks the gods have abandoned them is certainly intruiging. As I said though, my preference lies with the dark stuff.
In Eberron we don't know if the gods even exist.
So...it doesn't have a real hook then? Why not just merge Greyhawk, Dragonlance and every other 'generic' fantasy setting that don't have enough to distinguish themselves from the basic Points of Light concept into a NEW and BETTER setting??
Why not just ignore all of those settings and go with new stuff considering we already have the traditional fantasy setting in the Forgotten Realms.
Besides, it's no less original than Forgotten Realms.
Exactly. We don't need 2 Forgotten Realms campaigns.
Wouldn't that just add another generic fantasy setting to our list of Greyhawk, FR, and DL?
That is true enough. I still don't get why that is a bad thing though.
That is true enough. I still don't get why that is a bad thing though.
Because we're limited to 1 campaign setting per year. Some of us would rather they explore new areas and ideas in their campaigns rather then continuously pumping out the same old setting with a brand new name.
That is true enough. I still don't get why that is a bad thing though.
From a player's/DM's choice perspective, it isn't.
From a business perspective, you're thinning the customer base for your other generic settings and incurring additional costs.
Eberon won and became what it is today.
If I remember correctly, WotC also bought the rights to the 3 runners up!
These WILL be published eventually, (Why pay for it, if your not going to use it?)
It's not going to be 2010, they already stated somewhere that the next Campaign World is a known one, but I'm pretty sure the 2011 one will be brand new and shiny!!
It's not going to be 2010, they already stated somewhere that the next Campaign World is a known one, but I'm pretty sure the 2011 one will be brand new and shiny!!
That would definitely be a breath of fresh air. Even if I try it and don't care for it, I'll be glad to see more versatility in our setting options.
Of course I'm also still waiting for WotC to finally get around to 4e-ing D20 Modern; which still seems woefully abandoned.
From a player's/DM's choice perspective, it isn't.
From a business perspective, you're thinning the customer base for your other generic settings and incurring additional costs.
How can it be good for the players/DMs but not for WotC? What the players/DMs think is good for them, they tend to buy, which is good for WotC. Making products that don't fit well with other products is a bad idea, people won't buy them. The Generic fantasy settings allow for DMs to port stuff over from one setting to the next with minimal work, whereas the non-traditional settings have a harder time doing so.
- Weis and Hickman to appear at GenCon...
Ok, big deal. I mean, they're always at GenCon....
Say whatever else you like about DL, but you must at least agree that Dragonlance IS a highly recognizable, heavily marketed, & popular line.
So would it really be that big a surprise to see it on the schedule ahead of anything short of maybe Ravenloft?
I'd probably settle for a Dragon Magazine article statting out Draconians, giving rules for playable Kender and Tinker Gnomes, and including a half-decent set of aerial combat mechanics that ideally make use of most of the existing combat rules rather than replacing them.
What makes DL different from FR and GH:
- The Knights of Solamnia, in older editions its own class with codes and ranks
- Kender - like 4e halflings but totally fearless (immune at least until the Soul War) and kleptos
- Tinker Gnome - later put in Spelljammer and FR
- Gully Dwarf - the degenerate cousins of other dwarves, not intelligent but able to survive almost anywhere
- Irda - the rare and noble race that became ogres when their ego's ****** off the gods
- Minotaurs - intelligent and while still 'savage' also noble and developed as a very Romanesque culture
- Draconians - later fleshed out to be able to breed rather than having to be created and also the newer generations weren't slaves to Takhisis and not always evil
- Orders of Sorcery - Wizards chose an order and had limited spell selection based on alignment (good, neutral, evil). They even put in an aligment system to allow one to change alignment based on actions to represent Rastlin's going from a Red (neutral) robe to Black (evil) robe. Also based on robe power of spells increased and decreased based on phases of the 3 moons that reflected the three robe colors (the black moon could only be seen by a Black Robe wizard). Sorcerer was the name given to 'rogue' wizards who refused to belong to the Order of High Sorcery.
Other than that though a lot of DL was closer to Tolkein's Middle Earth than was GH or FR in many ways, though the elves of DL weren't immortal and died of old age (it was just much longer than human lifespans).
If I remember correctly, WotC also bought the rights to the 3 runners up!
These WILL be published eventually, (Why pay for it, if your not going to use it?)
Because it's good enough to potentially compete on-par against some WoTC product if were allowed to be published by someone else?
Sure, there is the option for WoTC to use it. But at the very least they control it. It's just a simple matter of hoarding the best ideas for yourself....
Dragonlance has more than 20 years of history, a huge fanbase, and iconic characters.
You don't need to be original when you have those things.
Besides, it's no less original than Forgotten Realms.
only if you know very little about FR
I've seen poeple giving evidence of both. I'm just gonna point and laugh if it isn't either of them.
can I laugh and point if they lied and put them both out in 2010??
can I laugh and point if they lied and put them both out in 2010??
Well that certainly would be a surprise. It be nice for me since I would buy Dark Sun and rip from the Compendium anything that is nice from Dragonlance.
The pleasant surprise(s) I would like to see I know are almost definitely not occurring for 2010 (if ever) that being a Planescape setting, a Steampunk/Pseudoscience setting and a Bas-Lag setting (luckily there is a RPG of it coming out so hopefully easy to convert).
DOMINIA!
Yes, Wizards of the Coast will finally merge their two biggest and most popular franchises and allow us to play exciting D&D adventures in the Magic the Gathering world!
What I can already confirm is that Serra Angel will be a lvl 23 Solo Skirmisher.
Dragonlance, at least, has some unique elements and character to its setting to set it apart from FR. Grayhawk doesn't really have much to set it apart from the default "points of light" or FR settings (partially due to it being the generic setting for 3E, causing most of its basic points to move into the default 4E setting).
If a Dragonlance campaign setting is released, I wonder what races will be featured in the campaign book. Minotaurs were one of the big unique races, but those will be in PHB3 instead. Tinker Gnomes and Draconians are simply gnomes and dragonborn with a different culture, as are the kender (arguably, the modern halfling is simply the kender with the most annoying aspects removed).
Maybe Irda, but I can't think of any other races emblematic to the setting and different enough from existing races to warrant their own write-up.
If a Dragonlance campaign setting is released, I wonder what races will be featured in the campaign book. Minotaurs were one of the big unique races, but those will be in PHB3 instead. Tinker Gnomes and Draconians are simply gnomes and dragonborn with a different culture, as are the kender (arguably, the modern halfling is simply the kender with the most annoying aspects removed).
Maybe Irda, but I can't think of any other races emblematic to the setting and different enough from existing races to warrant their own write-up.
Draconians didn't have a breath weapon but did have wings; Tinker Gnomes couldn't turn invisible but did have a gift for engineering. Kender are immune to fear (which they'd presumably trade away one of the other Halfling powers to get). We'd also need Gully Dwarves and it would be nice to get some feats or paragons paths for the Elf subspecies, the Knights of Solamnia, and the orders of High Sorcery.
I could live without the Irda.
And there is absolutely no need for Gully Dwarves or Tinker Gnomes or Kender or Draconians to be written up as separate races - that goes against 4e design philosophy. A few racial feats or racial PPs are all that is needed. The only sub-race that might, I repeat might need a full write-up for are the aquatic elves, either done up like shifters or genasi (two types in one entry), or done with racial feats to distinguish the two types.
But didn't they show up later in the setting? I remember earlier books that didn't talk about them?
To be honest though, I'm in the 'firmly hoping it will be Dark Sun' camp but I think the evidence is too flimsy to draw a conclusion either way.
Actually what I found more interesting about DL was the continent of Taladas. A fully fleshed out minotaur empire, the same gods but with different names and different origin stories. New races and cultures.
What makes DL different from FR and GH:
- The Knights of Solamnia, in older editions its own class with codes and ranks
- Kender - like 4e halflings but totally fearless (immune at least until the Soul War) and kleptos
- Tinker Gnome - later put in Spelljammer and FR
- Gully Dwarf - the degenerate cousins of other dwarves, not intelligent but able to survive almost anywhere
- Irda - the rare and noble race that became ogres when their ego's ****** off the gods
- Minotaurs - intelligent and while still 'savage' also noble and developed as a very Romanesque culture
- Draconians - later fleshed out to be able to breed rather than having to be created and also the newer generations weren't slaves to Takhisis and not always evil
- Orders of Sorcery - Wizards chose an order and had limited spell selection based on alignment (good, neutral, evil). They even put in an aligment system to allow one to change alignment based on actions to represent Rastlin's going from a Red (neutral) robe to Black (evil) robe. Also based on robe power of spells increased and decreased based on phases of the 3 moons that reflected the three robe colors (the black moon could only be seen by a Black Robe wizard). Sorcerer was the name given to 'rogue' wizards who refused to belong to the Order of High Sorcery.
Other than that though a lot of DL was closer to Tolkein's Middle Earth than was GH or FR in many ways, though the elves of DL weren't immortal and died of old age (it was just much longer than human lifespans).
In addition to the above:
The Silvanesti elves (which would probably translate to the eladrin) are displaced, since the minotaur race has conquered their entire realm.
There is an entire nation of ogres (which I believe are intelligent, I haven't gotten to the novels yet.)
There is a "fallen" god walking the planet, Paladine, who sacrificed his godhood to prevent the Dark Queen Takhisis (Krynn's Tiamat) from taking partial mortal form and ruling the planet.
Kender are no longer fearless, nor are they necessarily cleptomaniacs. They experienced a profound change thanks to the arrival of alien dragons (who are now all dead.)
Tahkisis' former vassal, Mina, was discovered to be a god herself, and has ascended into the pantheon. The fallout from the intrigues laid to cover her godhood could be fruit for further storytelling into the future.
Magic, both arcane and divine, have only recently been rediscovered with the return of the pantheon following the War of Souls. Mysticism (most likely a primal source) was practiced for decades in the absence of the gods.
There isn't a single elf on the planet with jet black skin.
Nor is there an orc to be found.
---------------
In reality, Dragonlance is not very much like Forgotten Realms, except that they're both high-fantasy settings, and both have had iconic wizards who changed the world.
---------------
As for the Irda, AFAIK, they were retconned in. The race is dead now though, killed by Chaos itself. Early in Krynn's history, one faction of Irda split off in service to Takhisis, and became the Ogres.
---------------
Personally, I'll be ecstatic to see Dragonlance in 4e. I have most of the 3.5 materials for the setting, even though I never managed to play any of it. I'd definitely play it in 4e though. I would prefer they don't do a reboot though, but rather take the world's story forward. (I wouldn't object to a reboot though, or better yet, an official move forward, but with guidelines and material in previous eras under 4e rules.) I don't know what they'd do about things such as devils, demons, and orcs though. Those are all core, but none are in Dragonlance as far as I can remember.
People who complain about Dragonlance being a possibility need to keep something in mind; look at the forums for DL at dragonlanceforums.com. There are literally hundreds of thousands of posts from over 1500 members, over 400 currently active. Can Dark Sun boast those kinds of numbers? If you look at the DL Nexus site, you'll still see daily updates. Tons of material is produced for the setting, and novels for it continue to sell well. (The Raistlin book due out soon was actually cancelled by Wizards, and fan outcry managed to bring it back. It takes an awful lot of voices to manage something of that magnitude.)
Dragonlance has a huge following that I doubt any campaign besides FR or Eberron can boast. I undestand being upset when you don't get the setting you want (I'll still be upset if next year's isn't Dragonlance, and I wasn't even expecting it to be) but in the end, Wizards has to go with what they think will make the most money immediately. If that's Dragonlance, I'll be happy. If that's Dark Sun, I won't. Either way, I'll still be confident that Wizards made the best decision for their company to keep it alive (thereby giving me reason to continue to hope that my favorite settings will get their attention down the line at some point.)
Personally, rather than preview upcoming material in the magazines, I wish that Wizards would run material that compiled into a full campaign setting every year. Chances are they won't do Ravenloft as a setting, but will put out sporadic articles for it. Why not produce the entire setting in pieces over the course of a year. Each year do a different setting that there is no intention to ever produce in hardcover. Then we'd get two settings a year, one of which is never intended to be produced as a hardcover anyway. That would make a lot of people happy, I would think. (I'd love to see Mystara done like this.)
I'm not going to care either way.
The only reason I care which setting it's going to be is because of kender. It's sort of a negative caring, though, because kender are one of those things that should not be. Their whole shtick is "steal from the party and cause the most trouble possible". I've known players with that attitude, and giving them an excuse to be more of a jerk is never a good thing. Giving good players the excuse to be a jerk isn't a good thing, either.
They are going to have to either do another time jump ala Forgotten Realms or a retcon ala Eberron. The only other option would be for Weiss and Hickman to write a book where these realms are "unlocked".
Dragonlance I think, doesn't have enough unique features IMO to make it stand out from the "points of Light" setting that is 4e (- WHAT _IS_ the name of the 4e setting anyway?), Forgotten Realms and now Eberron
All 3 are basically "generic" settings and I know many people hate that term but generic I refer to as something vaguely tolkeinlike/medieval era gaming...
Why not a brand spankin' new setting that is a huge departure from other settings?
Outside of the fact that they've hinted at us getting a familiar setting next year (can't find exactly where, though it's been quoted on the forums, and even in this topic somewhere), I agree. I'd rather see "new and exciting" than "familiar 2.0".
I'd like to see Ravenloft see an upgrade. (even just a 4e rendition of the 3.5 book, hell, even a pdf upgrade that'll let me use my 3.5 book would work for me; I intend to revise it for 4e, but odds are they'd release a 4e book before I got done anyways)
I'd also like to see Ghostwalk. If they revised it, fleshed it out, and did enough to give us a Player's Guide and Campaign Guide, it'd be more "new and exciting" than anything familiar. (and I wouldn't say the 3e Ghostwalk was widespread enough for a 4e version to be considered really "familiar" to begin with)
Why not a brand spankin' new setting that is a huge departure from other settings?
As others have stated, WotC has suggested that 2010 will be a familiar setting. Aside from that, there is a certain amount of logic behind a pattern of alternating between new and old settings each year. 2008 was Forgotten Realms (old), 2009 was Eberron (new), so 2010 should be old, with 2011 hopefully being something new. Yes Eberron was in 3.5, but it's still a fresh young setting. Plus it makes sense to get info out for the two standing settings of 3.5 out as quickly as possible.
Personally I'd like to see Dark Sun for 2010 as I find that out of all the classic settings that are likely to see a revival it was the most unique. Plainscape and Ravenloft were also fairly unique settings, but they've both been incorporated into the base model of 4e.
I'd also like to see Ghostwalk. If they revised it, fleshed it out, and did enough to give us a Player's Guide and Campaign Guide, it'd be more "new and exciting" than anything familiar. (and I wouldn't say the 3e Ghostwalk was widespread enough for a 4e version to be considered really "familiar" to begin with)
I'd love to see a Ghostwalk revival. While I never played in or ran the setting, I did incorporate aspects of it into my Eberron campaign. Considering how little development it got in 3e (just its base release), it could possible qualify as a new "setting" and it's definitely unique, so maybe will see it in 2011. Though to a larger extent I'd prefer to see something entirely new come 2011, and then Dragonlance would be my top pick for 2012, but come 2013 I'd be ready to see the return of Ghostwalk.
[indent]
Magic, both arcane and divine, have only recently been rediscovered with the return of the pantheon following the War of Souls. Mysticism (most likely a primal source) was practiced for decades in the absence of the gods.
I had forgotten about Mystics!
...Mystics were even given proper class treatment in 3XE...
[/indent]
It's an AWEFUL setting to play, because as was seen in 2nd ed, about once a year you had the WHOLE WORLD CHANGE as they put out a supliment to bring things in line with the main novel series.
You're a 20th level Cleric? Well, now all you can do is hit stuff with a club, badly, because the gods went away again. Also, same for the wizard, only with the club.
I really expect it to be Greyhawk. They've even talked in Design articles and Ampersand about the prospective changes in Greyhawk 4e, which is more than they've done for any other setting.
Something about resetting time to before the Greyhawk wars? I.E. Going back and restarting the setting from the start of 2nd ed with 4e mechanics.
If they're doing an OLD setting for 2010, I really suspect it will be Greyhawk. I WISH it were going to be Dark Sun, SpellJammer, Ravenloft, or Something New (Like Rich Burlew's setting that came in 2nd to Eberron). But I believe it will be Greyhawk.
Why not a brand spankin' new setting that is a huge departure from other settings?
1. The older settings have enough fans to guarantee sales, while new settings may blast off or sink faster than the Titanic.
2. Contrary to popular belief, many of the older settings are huge departures from other settings (Dark Sun, Birthright, Al-Qadim, Spelljammer, etc.).
3. The most important reason of all - trademarks. If WotC wants to maintain the trademarks, they have to publish stuff related to the trademarks.
My personal preference would be a remake of Al'Qadim or Kara Tur into its own setting. I never liked them being grouped up with FR. I'd like to get away from the standard western civilization settings and do something much different.
I'd like to see Ravenloft see an upgrade. (even just a 4e rendition of the 3.5 book, hell, even a pdf upgrade that'll let me use my 3.5 book would work for me; I intend to revise it for 4e, but odds are they'd release a 4e book before I got done anyways).
I would love to see that too. Ravenloft has plenty of awesomeness to spare if you reinvent it creatively. I pushed the Ravenloft setting into the information age for one of my d20 Modern campaigns. The internet was a domain of dread ruled by an AI darklord. Good luck finding your porn when he closes his borders.
2. Contrary to popular belief, many of the older settings are huge departures from other settings (Dark Sun, Birthright, Al-Qadim, Spelljammer, etc.).
True enough, though I can't much agree with most of your list.
Birthright is more a campaign style/theme than an actual setting. As I recall, the most notable aspect of the setting was the idea of that the PCs are members of noble courts who eventually rise to become leaders of entire nations. That kind of game can be run in pretty much setting. Sounds like something best covered in a DDi article, possible as a recurrent series.
Al-Qadim, as I recall, is just specific region of the Forgotten Realms setting. Again, it also seems like something that would best be explored through DDi.
As for Spelljammers. At its shallow end it's not very distinct from plainscape, which is now integrated into the core design of 4e. While at its deep end it's a setting so alien to traditional fantasy concepts that it makes Eberron like something written by Tolkien. It's certainly got potential to be a great setting, but it might have trouble finding a modern audience. I don't really see WotC reviving it until near the end of 4e, especially since it will play much better with about half-a-dozen other settings to travel between. Even then it might work better as a DDi feature than a printed hardback.
Al-Qadim, as I recall, is just specific region of the Forgotten Realms setting.
As I've heard it, Forgotten Realms was the only setting that could survive by itself during the reign of TSR, and so all the other independent campaign settings got plugged into the edges of FR's map. Al-Qadim, Maztica, Hollow Earth, etc, they're not 'real' settings any more, they're just smaller bits of this ultra-cool awesome setting that us cool kids are already playing in. Sort of like how Planescape fanpeople automatically assume that their favorite campaign setting is the 'truth' of the multiverse, and everyone else's cool settings and ideas are less than nonsense and fever-dreams. The people who know the 'true cant' know that Planescape is the only setting that actually exists for real, and what you like is stupid.
Al-Qadim was in Abeir-Toril, but wasn't really connected (that is to say, even during 2E's reign they were separate entire campaign settings with it only being a blurb they were connected nothing like the Helmites in Maztica to make a connection).
Maztica was just...an Awful design idea.
Kara-tur was later mashed into Abeir, but originally was loosely associated with Oerth (as was Mystara).
Birthright's hook isn't being kings (well not just that) but playing a descendant of a warrior at the battle the killed the gods, infusing you with divine energy.
And the PCs were regents of kingdoms, or their own churches, or guilds, empowered by the blood of the gods that died at the end of a great war 2000 years ago, so there was a major political aspect to the game.
I have yet-to-be revealed secret information that the 2010 setting will be...
DOMINIA!
Yes, Wizards of the Coast will finally merge their two biggest and most popular franchises and allow us to play exciting D&D adventures in the Magic the Gathering world!
What I can already confirm is that Serra Angel will be a lvl 23 Solo Skirmisher.
Just thought I would note I believe you meant Dominaria... And while I'm by far no expert on the planescape setting, from what I've seen on these forums it looks like M:TG and it are pretty well already compatible.
Moving on to trying to stay more on topic:
I personally would like to see the Dragonlance Campaign setting revived during the war of the lance. If nothing else than because I know a lot of people trying to homebrew that setting in the first place, and feeling overwhelmed in that process.
I don't recall the Irda being retconned in so much as unveiled in a novel then added to the campaign setting. They were there all along, hidden and lost from knowledge. That's not quite a retcon since our finding out about them didn't suddenly change what went before as their major influence on the world was pre-Cataclysm.
Most people on Ansalon still don't know much about what lies off the shores of their continent besides myths and stories. Many probably don't even think anything exists out there but we know there's the continent of Taladas at least (and at least with what I've seen no mention of how Taladas fared through the Age of Mortals and the War of Souls).
I think that if we don't get something totally new in 2010 it'll be one of three settings: Dark Sun, Dragonlance, or Greyhawk.
Spelljammer, Planescape, and Ravenloft have all been incorporated into the PoL base of 4e. This makes sense as while each gave a mechanical variance to the basic game they all were cross-setting material. There was Krynn, Oerth, and Toril in all of those (and theoretically even Athas if you wanted). They were closer to 'meta settings' than full settings. Birthright we will likely only get some of the mechanics for empire building rather than the setting itself as it'd be a major departure from the default of 4e playstyle and invalidate most of the material out there (no gods, most monsters gone or turned into unique entities).
Al'Qadim, Maztica, and Kara-Tur/OA while adding interesting cultural flavor might be hard to be seen as a 'stand alone' campaign setting. Even FR shows elements of many different cultures just from the FRCG. I think the best spot for these three would be DDi material that gives feats, PPs, equipment, buils/powers, and fluff for running a campaign in that cultural setting (whether homebrew, PoL, or one of the published settings).
Birthright we will likely only get some of the mechanics for empire building rather than the setting itself as it'd be a major departure from the default of 4e playstyle and invalidate most of the material out there (no gods, most monsters gone or turned into unique entities).
Birthright still has gods.
And frankly the changes to it that would be needed for 4e compatibility are no greater than would be needed by DL or DS. Less in some respects, since Birthright already had a form of the Shadowfell, and more in other respects - the various races (though some like tieflings could easily be explained as awnsheigh spawn).If they do Dragonlance I suspect it'll be punted forward like FR was. There's too much in 4e that wouldn't fit in DL during any of it's published timeline (demons, devils, orcs, warforged, tieflings, drow, all the other planes outside of Takhisis/Tiamat's realm). It'd likely include another cosmic shift like the War of Souls where it was uncovered that Takhisis 'stole' the planet from it's home (which allowed the interloper dragons to find Krynn) and shook up things.
I don't recall the Irda being retconned in so much as unveiled in a novel then added to the campaign setting. They were there all along, hidden and lost from knowledge. That's not quite a retcon since our finding out about them didn't suddenly change what went before as their major influence on the world was pre-Cataclysm.
Most people on Ansalon still don't know much about what lies off the shores of their continent besides myths and stories. Many probably don't even think anything exists out there but we know there's the continent of Taladas at least (and at least with what I've seen no mention of how Taladas fared through the Age of Mortals and the War of Souls).
You're right about the Irda. Yes, they were "always there" and were more "revealed" when they lost control of the Greygem to start the war against Chaos.
As far as off the shores of Ansalon, there is Taladas, as well as Adlatum (a newly "discovered" continent.)
I definitely agree with you that it makes the most sense to fast forward like they did with FR, but it would be really cool if they could find a way to redo the WotL stuff to use 4e rules.
I definitely agree with you that it makes the most sense to fast forward like they did with FR, but it would be really cool if they could find a way to redo the WotL stuff to use 4e rules.
They've already used the "time travel + kender" reset button at least twice, right? Why not go for broke?
They've already used the "time travel + kender" reset button at least twice, right? Why not go for broke?
You mean someone using time travel to "fix" Kender?
I think that if we don't get something totally new in 2010 it'll be one of three settings: Dark Sun, Dragonlance, or Greyhawk.
Spelljammer, Planescape, and Ravenloft have all been incorporated into the PoL base of 4e. This makes sense as while each gave a mechanical variance to the basic game they all were cross-setting material. There was Krynn, Oerth, and Toril in all of those (and theoretically even Athas if you wanted). They were closer to 'meta settings' than full settings. Birthright we will likely only get some of the mechanics for empire building rather than the setting itself as it'd be a major departure from the default of 4e playstyle and invalidate most of the material out there (no gods, most monsters gone or turned into unique entities).
Al'Qadim, Maztica, and Kara-Tur/OA while adding interesting cultural flavor might be hard to be seen as a 'stand alone' campaign setting. Even FR shows elements of many different cultures just from the FRCG. I think the best spot for these three would be DDi material that gives feats, PPs, equipment, buils/powers, and fluff for running a campaign in that cultural setting (whether homebrew, PoL, or one of the published settings).
So do you think 4E will only last another 3 years? Maybe 4 if they make a whole new setting? At one setting a year I am hoping for a few more than 3 more settings.
It's an AWEFUL setting to play, because as was seen in 2nd ed, about once a year you had the WHOLE WORLD CHANGE as they put out a supliment
But we know for an absolute fact that won't happen in a 4th edition Dragonlance.
The newer posts do seem to indicate that the setting is fairly different to the Forgotten Realms, so I'm certainly more in favour of it. It also seems like most races would a place in the setting (Half-Orcs are the last remnant of the orcish race, eladrin were forced to retreat into the Feywild). The only player race that doesn't have a spot are drow and a DM could easily include a small drow tribe (much like a DM can easily include Warforged in the Forgotten Realms).
I really expect it to be Greyhawk.
In Greyhawk's favour we've seen it mentioned in some splatbooks (Draconomicon apparently). So far the only other settings that have been mentioned like that are the Forgotten Realms (already published before the splat-books) and Eberron (announced to be published before the splatbooks were printed). There is a chance that Greyhawk has been known as the 3rd setting since day 1.
2. Contrary to popular belief, many of the older settings are huge departures from other settings (Dark Sun, Birthright, Al-Qadim, Spelljammer, etc.).
For those specific settings you mention:
1) I can't actually find any information all that specific to Spelljammer. It seems like a Dragon article could cover what I've found (I'm not saying there isn't any, simply that I haven't found it). Planescape is similar, although it at least had Sigil going for it (of course, Sigil has been stolen and thrown into core which doesn't bode well for Spelljammer).
2) Birthright was largely notable for a mechanic (from what I've heard). Someone mentioned earlier that the devs would prefer to bring that mechanic to core D&D rather then produce a new setting specifically for it.
3) Al-Qadim appears to be largely the "middle-eastern" setting. Given the failure of the KI power source, I don't see much hope for Al-Qadim.
Of course I agree completely that Dark Sun is a new setting and would definitely be worthy of a republish :P
3. The most important reason of all - trademarks. If WotC wants to maintain the trademarks, they have to publish stuff related to the trademarks.
That's a very good point. How much use would a trademark need to get to keep it active? Would a mention inside a book be enough? Or would it need to adorn a cover?
I don't plan on buying the Eberon books, nor will I buy the Dark Sun ones. DL I will buy if and whenever it comes out.
There's a pretty good chance I'll get 2010's campaign player book regardless of what setting it is. I'm using half the pages from the Forgotten Realms book in my Eberron campaign so it seems like I'd be able to use at least as much from 2010's campaign player book.
So do you think 4E will only last another 3 years? Maybe 4 if they make a whole new setting? At one setting a year I am hoping for a few more than 3 more settings.
Well assuming an 8 year life cycle and we've got 2 years down (as far as settings) that leaves 6 more settings. Amongst those we have Dragonlance, Greyhawk, Mystara/Hollow World, and Dark Sun as established complete settings.
They could bring out a new OA/Kara-Tur based setting and bring back Al-Qadim or Maztica. Also instead of a full setting they might give us a PG/CG that instead covers how to modify the PoL to fit cultural flavors so mix them together.
We could see all new campaign settings as well. Honestly though at 1 campaign per year of the 4e lifecycle they'll be hard pressed to make distinctive campaign settings unless it's a short lifecycle. They'd also have trouble filling that many DMGs and PHBs (MMs are easier since you can always create more unusual monsters, though we'll likely get some of the 'silly' ones again like older editions).
I think after the first 3-4 years we'll see a slow down in the rate at which certain books come out which isn't a bad thing. It frees up resources to cover other books and areas that otherwise get neglected and keeps them from having to strain the system trying to fill a book.
1) Forgotten Realms
2) Contest winner 1 (ebberon)
3) DS/DL
4) Contest winner 2 (OotS guy)
5) DL/DS
6) Contest winner 3
7) Spelljammer
8) Dragonstar/something completely new
"It's got gully dwarves, kender & tinker gnomes!" Not really selling it for me, guys. At all.I really, really hope DL isn't the 2010 setting...
Go read the Chronicles. If you're not sold after that, you're not going to be.
I wasn't talking about you when I said fervent hope. ;)
And Strahd is in Open Graves. Obviously Ravenloft is the next setting! :P
Well, considering Tracy Hickman had a hand in both, the chances are equal given the so-called "evidence". I'd rather see the 'Loft return, though, given a choice.
I really, really hope DL isn't the 2010 setting...
Unfortunately for you, there are a hell of a lot of people who are already sold, and have been for years.
Go read the Chronicles. If you're not sold after that, you're not going to be.
The Chronicles aren't bad, but I really enjoyed the War of Souls far, far more. Skie gets to show how much of a hardass he is one last time.
Honestly, if they revive Lance, I won't mind, but I don't really see it happening this soon. Greyhawk might get just as much attention these days, if not more, and Dark Sun would seem really fresh to newer players. If they're going to dredge up another generic fantasy supplement, they may as well create a zombified Mystara - it's got as much to distinguish it as GH or DL. However, since I've got it on good authority that Mystara will probably never see the light of day again, it leaves me skeptical that DL will return soon, if at all.
What's the 'hook' of Dragonlance anyway? The one that makes it feel different than the other Fantasy settings??
Kender Kiffles, Ranger Bread, Dragon-Blasted Steaks.
As settings go, DL is the only one that has ever really gotten my attention, and it's the only setting our group plays :D
1) Forgotten Realms
2) Ebberon (Contest winner 1)
3) Dragonlance
4) Contest winner 2 (OotS guy)
5) Dark Sun
6) Contest winner 3
7) Greyhawk
8) PoL or something completely new
I'd really like to see Mystara/Hollow World redone, but it seems it's not that favored with the dev's.
I don't see Planescape, Ravenloft or Spelljammer as settings being done, although I'd like to see rules for ship to ship combat and horror checks.
Bel
In Greyhawk's favour we've seen it mentioned in some splatbooks (Draconomicon apparently). So far the only other settings that have been mentioned like that are the Forgotten Realms (already published before the splat-books) and Eberron (announced to be published before the splatbooks were printed). There is a chance that Greyhawk has been known as the 3rd setting since day 1.
Krynn has been mentioned too (Draconomicon, MotP).
For those specific settings you mention:
1) I can't actually find any information all that specific to Spelljammer. It seems like a Dragon article could cover what I've found (I'm not saying there isn't any, simply that I haven't found it). Planescape is similar, although it at least had Sigil going for it (of course, Sigil has been stolen and thrown into core which doesn't bode well for Spelljammer).
2) Birthright was largely notable for a mechanic (from what I've heard). Someone mentioned earlier that the devs would prefer to bring that mechanic to core D&D rather then produce a new setting specifically for it.
3) Al-Qadim appears to be largely the "middle-eastern" setting. Given the failure of the KI power source, I don't see much hope for Al-Qadim.
1. What made Spellljammer interesting was that it was a spell-punk.
2. What they meant really was bringing regency (ruling of a country) to the book, the mechanic that seperated birthright was the bloodline...
3. What does Ki have to do with Middle-eastern? Middle-eastern (especially Al-Qadim which used the Zarathursata Middle Eastern, not Arabic) would be Elemental, not Ki.
it leaves me skeptical that DL will return soon, if at all.
For what it's worth, WotC pulled he license for DL back from the 3rd party group that was making the 3e version of DL. IIRC the devs even mentioned that their looking to do soemthing with DL. Whether that means this year, who knows.
3. What does Ki have to do with Middle-eastern? Middle-eastern (especially Al-Qadim which used the Zarathursata Middle Eastern, not Arabic) would be Elemental, not Ki.
WotC is hesitant to produce products that are largely composed of one non-caucasian civilization (nationality? race? I'm struggling for the right word). If they're unwilling to create a power source that is basically "the asian power source" I think they'd also be hesitant to create a setting that is basically "the middle-eastern setting" for very similar reasoning.
It of course doesn't rule it out completely. But I do think it isn't a good sign for Al-Qadim.
Krynn has been mentioned too (Draconomicon, MotP).
Interesting. From my understanding (I unfortunately don't have many of the monster supplements), Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms and Eberron got sections in some of the supplements on detailing locations in that particular setting (e.g. an undead location specific to Forgotten Realms). Did Dragonlance get something similar? Or a mere passing mention?
1. What made Spellljammer interesting was that it was a spell-punk.
What is spell-punk and how is it different to Eberron's "magic as technology" base.
What is spell-punk and how is it different to Eberron's "magic as technology" base.
The difference would be the "punk" aspect. It implies a strong, overarching, and antagonistic authority, a gritty and depressing atmosphere and an abnormal level of moral ambiguity for a D&D setting. How this would merge with Spelljammer I have no idea, but the concept isn't represented by Eberron in the least.
2) Birthright was largely notable for a mechanic (from what I've heard). Someone mentioned earlier that the devs would prefer to bring that mechanic to core D&D rather then produce a new setting specifically for it.
No offence John but the in bold part is bunk (and annoys me when people say it), Birthright written by WotC's own Rich Baker and Colin McComb had a rich setting and a feel that no other has successfully emulated, it was my go to setting whether playing in a traditional style AD&D game or it's own pioneered lord of the land approach. Yes the developers could rip out it's unique mechanics for use in other settings but they would be leaving the best parts behind. Here ends the fan boy rant.
3) Al-Qadim appears to be largely the "middle-eastern" setting. Given the failure of the KI power source, I don't see much hope for Al-Qadim.
Sigh, as much as I love 4e, these conversations really make me miss my AD&D days, another great setting that was completely ignored during 3e and it looks like that mistake will be repeated in 4e. Yes Al-Qadim was "the middle east" setting, but it was also more than that. Al-Qadim captured the essence of all the great Arabian tales (book & movie) Sinbad, Alladin & Ali-Baba etc. and gave us a chance to immerse ourselves (our characters) in a fantastical story and game. My childhood was spent watching the pre-digital effects movies inspired by the tales told in One Thousand and One Nights and I do mightily miss this setting, even though my players could never get out of their mediaeval mindset whilst playing it.
Of course I agree completely that Dark Sun is a new setting and would definitely be worthy of a republish :P .
I wouldn't mind seeing Dark Sun the original box set redone, the later supplements were very hit and miss for me.
There's a pretty good chance I'll get 2010's campaign player book regardless of what setting it is. I'm using half the pages from the Forgotten Realms book in my Eberron campaign so it seems like I'd be able to use at least as much from 2010's campaign player book.
I'm the same but I still lament all the classics being allowed to gather dust.
Go read the Chronicles. If you're not sold after that, you're not going to be.
I read it awhile back. Just kinda fries my brain to see people fist-pumping over a world with intentionally annoying small people and tons of elves.
About the Greyhawk suggestion... Quite apart from it being a boooring choice (and I say that despite nostalgia for the first published D&D setting I ever played in), I can't help but wonder: what class and races could they possibly put in a GPG that feel unique, or at least iconic, to that world? Valley Elves?
Snow Elves. Kobolds... they have to represent Meepo!
No offence John but the in bold part is bunk
I freely admit my opinions are based entirely on what I've heard. The only thing I've heard about Birthright that sets it apart is the mechanic. So while my opinion might be complete and utter bunk, its the bunk most new people will believe because of what we're being told ;)
I read it awhile back. Just kinda fries my brain to see people fist-pumping over a world with intentionally annoying small people and tons of elves.
Ummm, okay, so you feel an entire setting is bad because of the fact that they have different versions of the small races, and a new one that no other setting has? Kender aren't all kleptomaniacs, it is pretty irritating that people focus so damn much on that aspect of the race. A large portion of the Kender race is composed of "Afflicted" kender now, kender that not only know fear, but are gritty and all sorts of awesome stuffed into a little package. People tend to look at Tasslehoff Burrfoot, and think the entire race is like him. Tasslehoff is a very unique and exceptional kender, and quite honestly, has saved the ENTIRE world's bacon several times. One can also take the kender Nightshade Pricklypear, who was an awful thief and practiced mysticism (he was a ghost-talker).
As for gnomes, one has to read a lot more about them to realize just how interesting the culture is. Tinkering isn't the only thing the culture does, there are also plenty of sage gnomes as well as bureaucrats and politicians. There are more gnomes than just the Tinker gnomes. There are mad gnomes that have functioning inventions and whatnot. There are wild gnomes that focus on studying plant and animal life (many are druids and rangers).
As for gully dwarves, just read the novel, the Gully Dwarves, it is one of the greatest D&D novels ever written. Flint the King also has plenty of gullies in it.
And if you want an awesome small race exclusive to Dragonlance besides the commando afflicted kender, look no further than the huldrefolk, the primordial fey. They focus on elemental spellcasting and can immerse themselves into their elemental focus.
Ummm, okay, so you feel an entire setting is bad because of the fact that they have different versions of the small races, and a new one that no other setting has? Kender aren't all kleptomaniacs, it is pretty irritating that people focus so damn much on that aspect of the race. A large portion of the Kender race is composed of "Afflicted" kender now, kender that not only know fear, but are gritty and all sorts of awesome stuffed into a little package. People tend to look at Tasslehoff Burrfoot, and think the entire race is like him. Tasslehoff is a very unique and exceptional kender, and quite honestly, has saved the ENTIRE world's bacon several times. One can also take the kender Nightshade Pricklypear, who was an awful thief and practiced mysticism (he was a ghost-talker).
However because Tasslehoff is such an iconic character he created the stereotype for the race. And i have been in too many games ruined by kender i wish them to die in a fire. You might say it was the player not the race, the race just enables the player. I have yet to see a drow, scimitar wielding ranger disrupt the game as much as someone playing ANY kender.
And the fact that his name is related to Hasslehoff doenst help.
However because Tasslehoff is such an iconic character he created the stereotype for the race. And i have been in too many games ruined by kender i wish them to die in a fire. You might say it was the player not the race, the race just enables the player. I have yet to see a drow, scimitar wielding ranger disrupt the game as much as someone playing ANY kender.
And the fact that his name is related to Hasslehoff doenst help.
Ultimately, the players are to blame for kender being not fun for most people. When players hear that kender tend to rummage through the pockets of other people, they think kender are pickpockets, thieves, and go around swiping everyone's gold/steel and anything of value. Let me be clear, KENDER NEVER TAKE ANYTHING ANYONE WOULD FIND OF VALUE!!! A kender is much more likely to take the lint out the pocket than the gold in it.
But, fearful and non-thieving kender are a very large part of the setting, with the Afflicted and Marak kender(from Taladas), and I would rather see kender approach them more.
Ultimately, the players are to blame for kender being not fun for most people. When players hear that kender tend to rummage through the pockets of other people, they think kender are pickpockets, thieves, and go around swiping everyone's gold/steel and anything of value. Let me be clear, KENDER NEVER TAKE ANYTHING ANYONE WOULD FIND OF VALUE!!! A kender is much more likely to take the lint out the pocket than the gold in it.
But, fearful and non-thieving kender are a very large part of the setting, with the Afflicted and Marak kender(from Taladas), and I would rather see kender approach them more.
the problem for me is, and i am probably not alone in this, is that thieving stereotype. i played 3 different games involving kender, under 3 different DMs, and and with three different players playing the kender. in all 3 instances the kender could rob you blind wihtout you ever knowing he was doing it BECAUSE they were natural kleptomaniacs. and it as all "in character".
sadly the baggage of a natural klepto is hard to shake of, as for MANY people that was the defining characteristic of the race.
For many people, SJ wasn't a setting per se but just a way to have cool adventures when you wanted to move from campaign world to campaign world whereas from the start, planescape was its own campaign setting.
Birthright got tagged by two problems. 1. Being a regent isn't actually that popular among gamers and 2. The focus on not only kingdom management and mass battles even in 2e was better served by having it as a general accessory.
Personally, I would like to see either Al-Qadim (I'm not sure how willing WOTC would be to touch on this setting given the hyper-sensitivity with regard to the Middle East), Mystara (hasn;t seen an update since middle of 2e or Jakandor (I loved how the setting was presented from two differing but conflicting viewpoints)
Then a couple of times a session you just say "Hey! That's my soap mermaid!" or whatever and you don't have to worry about your magic rings or amulets and such.
Ummm, okay, so you feel an entire setting is bad because of the fact that they have different versions of the small races, and a new one that no other setting has?
Nah...more like these don't exactly seem like good selling points, yet they appear to be the most distinctive parts. I actually have the old 3e Dragonlance book, and feel it wouldn't be hard to run a 4e game using it, no new races or classes needed.
So with Dragonlance you've got a big struggle dealing with the timeline. It'd be less of a problem if the canon timeline hadn't moved so far forward from the War of the Lance. With the FR time jump there's this huge initial concern from fans "what happened to so-and-so?" For DL fans, 90% of their favorite characters died on-screen in the books.
Also, Krynn has been hammered over and over and over by god wars. I'll come back to this in a moment.
I think with the DL timeline you still have a couple options, but they're mostly on the radical side:
1 - Go all KotoR on things, setting the current meta-story in the deep past where things are mostly fuzzy myth. There's more than enough space in between major plot points that the PCs can do everything short of nuking the planet without disrupting the timeline. In the specific case of Dragonlance, the time of Huma is prime candidate, though the time 100 years before the Cataclysm would also be prime.
2 - Parallel Canon, so you'd roll right back to year 1 of the War of the Lance, basically pretending that the timeline presented in the books hasn't happened yet, then publishing an adventure path that amounts to an update of the original modules. The meta-events of the War still happen, Everman is still out there, but the Heroes of the Lance aren't necessarily Tanis, Caramon, Raistlin, et al.
3 - Inverse KotoR, fling yourselves so far into the future that even the elf characters would be dead of natural causes. This bypasses a lot of the "I didn't read those books" problems by moving so far away that all of it is myth. A big advantage here is that you can afford to be a little recursive during the move, going so far into the future that the world once again resembles a period in the history that fans identify with, but because it's not sitting adjacent to any written history you get the atmosphere without the baggage. The problem here is that it's almost making a new setting, and can be a bit of a sour compromise for fans: they get their world with the feel they remember, but many of the things they loved just aren't around. You need a really good new hook to carry this one.
Then there's my 4th suggestion: merge Dragonlance and Dark Sun.
It's been suggested before on these boards that if they go with Dark Sun they won't even really bother with the "official canon" since the books were never as popular as the campaign setting, and the setting was largely viewed as "more fun to think about than to play." This is a similar approach to #2 above, but without the winking, nodding, or re-treading of history. It's more like "canon? what canon?" From suggesting this before it's very much seemed like fans of the setting wouldn't mind, and interested non-fans wouldn't notice.
Okay, so what does that have to do with merging them?
Krynn has problems. Every 50 years or so since the War of the Lance some deity or almost-deity has come down and stomped up the place. For a pantheon with a strict behavioral code it seems to be really hard to keep their fingers out of the pie. Well, what if after so long of constant interruptions, Elder Gods kicking things over, cataclysms, 300' long dragons, soul harvesters, and all that the world has finally broken, as in stopped working, and the Gods have said "you know what, we've screwed this up enough, there's no way we're going to recover now" and have walked away?
People begin to panic, divine magic stops working properly, and arcane magic, long fed by the three moons, becomes erratic. Ancient primordial beings, forgotten by the gods, awaken and begin whispering secrets into the ears of the power hungry. "You can sap power straight from the planet itself!" they say. The Wizards can hold onto their power, but the planet begins to wither and die around them. They are nicknamed Defilers by the elves. The name sticks.
Clerics, believing that this is just another testing of the world, find that the residue of the Gods' presence is still there, like background radiation, and they are able to weave spells that do not damage the world, or even manage to keep the decay at bay. They call themselves Preservers as a contrast to the Defilers.
Draconians, a thousand years separated from their origins, have bred out of their most fantastical powers, but have achieved stability and taken the name Dragonborn to distance themselves from the abominable practice that spawned them in an effort to integrate with the rest of the races of Krynn.
In this changing world panic and war erupts as many give up hope.
On the eastern shores a powerful Defiler who crowns himself Sorcerer-King founds a new city-state, Athas, and begins to march his depraved, desperate troops west-ward, conquering land and taking slaves.
Characters play at the turning point, where the world has yet to be consumed, though much of it is already falling apart. Even in lands not controlled by Athas Defilers and Preservers fight a shadow war, with little regard for the collateral damage they cause to civilians and the world itself.
Yeah, I'd tap that.
WotC has secretly purchased the rights to Middle Earth, and will be releasing the setting in 2010!
ok maybey not... ;)
I am one of those people who have only read the Chronicales and the Twins series, so I dont have the world changing events from other books clouding my vision of Krynn.
So I would love to see DL as the setting.
Another way of compaison of the the first 3 settings (assuming DL is the 2010 setting)
Forgotten Realms - World at Peace
Ebberon - World recovering from war
Dragon Lance - World about to begin a war
On another note, if the 2011 setting is the 2nd place setting winner (Rich Burlew is the OOTS guy), does that mean he'll finally convert the comic to a 4e mind set?
On another note, if the 2011 setting is the 2nd place setting winner (Rich Burlew is the OOTS guy), does that mean he'll finally convert the comic to a 4e mind set?
He's said he won't do a "conversion moment" like he did in the first page because the story has moved so far away from just being a way of poking fun at the absurdities we accept in game systems.
That said, there's already been some 4e jokes, and when the books first came out Kubuto was reading a 4e DMG standing over an open Amazon box.
As for Spelljammer, it was and is a great setting. The main problem was that, lacking a central world/station, it required a lot of DM work. I also don't recall how well or badly it was supported with adventure modules. I did love the pack of ship cards that came with the set, detailing what races used what kind of ships and the layout of those ships. And the number of races was just wild. The giff, the mantis guys (I forget the name) that grafted weapons to their bodies, and the neogi; it was totally badass. I would love to see it come back, especially if we can get "speljammer tiles" for ship-board combat, ship minis, and "space tiles" for ship-to-ship combat.
As for the Kender changes in DL. I was out of the setting before those things happened and I know nothing of kender beyond Tasselhoff and the Monstrous Compendium description of them.
Speaking of the old Monstrous Compendium and Spelljammer... Giant Space Hamster for the win!
My take on Dragonlance as 2010 is that there's an inherent problem with the timeline: many of the longest standing fans have abandoned the series and have no idea what's happened since Dragon's of Summer Flame. It gets complicated once you consider that even though a lot of players have no clue what's in those years the timeline is still pretty cluttered in there, so you'd need to introduce another time jump to really get a clean slate. At that point you're so far removed from Krynn as fans remember it that you instantly lose the base appeal: it's not just an advancement in the world's timeline, off-setting what you read by a few decades or even a century, it's a world that's forgotten about the world that you loved. But there's still all this nearby crap, like the War of Souls, that you didn't read and don't care about.
So with Dragonlance you've got a big struggle dealing with the timeline. It'd be less of a problem if the canon timeline hadn't moved so far forward from the War of the Lance. With the FR time jump there's this huge initial concern from fans "what happened to so-and-so?" For DL fans, 90% of their favorite characters died on-screen in the books.
Also, Krynn has been hammered over and over and over by god wars. I'll come back to this in a moment.
I think with the DL timeline you still have a couple options, but they're mostly on the radical side:
1 - Go all KotoR on things, setting the current meta-story in the deep past where things are mostly fuzzy myth. There's more than enough space in between major plot points that the PCs can do everything short of nuking the planet without disrupting the timeline. In the specific case of Dragonlance, the time of Huma is prime candidate, though the time 100 years before the Cataclysm would also be prime.
2 - Parallel Canon, so you'd roll right back to year 1 of the War of the Lance, basically pretending that the timeline presented in the books hasn't happened yet, then publishing an adventure path that amounts to an update of the original modules. The meta-events of the War still happen, Everman is still out there, but the Heroes of the Lance aren't necessarily Tanis, Caramon, Raistlin, et al.
3 - Inverse KotoR, fling yourselves so far into the future that even the elf characters would be dead of natural causes. This bypasses a lot of the "I didn't read those books" problems by moving so far away that all of it is myth. A big advantage here is that you can afford to be a little recursive during the move, going so far into the future that the world once again resembles a period in the history that fans identify with, but because it's not sitting adjacent to any written history you get the atmosphere without the baggage. The problem here is that it's almost making a new setting, and can be a bit of a sour compromise for fans: they get their world with the feel they remember, but many of the things they loved just aren't around. You need a really good new hook to carry this one.
Then there's my 4th suggestion: merge Dragonlance and Dark Sun.
It's been suggested before on these boards that if they go with Dark Sun they won't even really bother with the "official canon" since the books were never as popular as the campaign setting, and the setting was largely viewed as "more fun to think about than to play." This is a similar approach to #2 above, but without the winking, nodding, or re-treading of history. It's more like "canon? what canon?" From suggesting this before it's very much seemed like fans of the setting wouldn't mind, and interested non-fans wouldn't notice.
Okay, so what does that have to do with merging them?
Krynn has problems. Every 50 years or so since the War of the Lance some deity or almost-deity has come down and stomped up the place. For a pantheon with a strict behavioral code it seems to be really hard to keep their fingers out of the pie. Well, what if after so long of constant interruptions, Elder Gods kicking things over, cataclysms, 300' long dragons, soul harvesters, and all that the world has finally broken, as in stopped working, and the Gods have said "you know what, we've screwed this up enough, there's no way we're going to recover now" and have walked away?
People begin to panic, divine magic stops working properly, and arcane magic, long fed by the three moons, becomes erratic. Ancient primordial beings, forgotten by the gods, awaken and begin whispering secrets into the ears of the power hungry. "You can sap power straight from the planet itself!" they say. The Wizards can hold onto their power, but the planet begins to wither and die around them. They are nicknamed Defilers by the elves. The name sticks.
Clerics, believing that this is just another testing of the world, find that the residue of the Gods' presence is still there, like background radiation, and they are able to weave spells that do not damage the world, or even manage to keep the decay at bay. They call themselves Preservers as a contrast to the Defilers.
Draconians, a thousand years separated from their origins, have bred out of their most fantastical powers, but have achieved stability and taken the name Dragonborn to distance themselves from the abominable practice that spawned them in an effort to integrate with the rest of the races of Krynn.
In this changing world panic and war erupts as many give up hope.
On the eastern shores a powerful Defiler who crowns himself Sorcerer-King founds a new city-state, Athas, and begins to march his depraved, desperate troops west-ward, conquering land and taking slaves.
Characters play at the turning point, where the world has yet to be consumed, though much of it is already falling apart. Even in lands not controlled by Athas Defilers and Preservers fight a shadow war, with little regard for the collateral damage they cause to civilians and the world itself.
Yeah, I'd tap that.
Lol, that's not combining the two, that's straight up converting Dragonlance into Dark Sun. There'd be nothing left of Dragonlance in what you are saying, it'd just be Dark Sun with Dragonlance being what happened before everything went to hell :P
I would rather have a kender in the party than another Dritz clone. I can at least depend on the kender to never run away.
You must be kidding me. Brooding dual wielder who's a boon to the party beats out "oh, did I steal your sword/staff/gold/socks/armor/wife while you weren't looking? I didn't notice. Tee Hee!" every single time.
And no, it's not bad players who make bad kender. The race itself leads to the bad behavior. Bad players are worse kender, but good players are still bad kender.
Someone pointed out to me that 2010 will be the 20th anniversary of the Dark Sun setting. I think that's the most logical reason so far to conclude that it will be DS instead of DL.
No, 2010 is not the 20th Anniversary of Dark Sun, 2011 is (Dark Sun was published in October of 1991). So it would make more sense for Dark Sun to be the 2011 setting.
And no, it's not bad players who make bad kender. The race itself leads to the bad behavior. Bad players are worse kender, but good players are still bad kender.
No, it is bad players and bad DMs that don't know a damn thing about the race that are to blame for kender. Kender don't steal things of value when they handle, they take things like chunks of marble that look like something to them, half-eaten chunks of cheese, chicken feathers, a robin's egg, etc. Collecting junk they see does not equate to stealing weapons, armor, or anything else of value. Occasionally, yes, they will end up with something of value, but not very often. Other people know what to do when around kender (hold on to money purses and the like), it isn't like they are new race to the setting.
No, 2010 is not the 20th Anniversary of Dark Sun, 2011 is (Dark Sun was published in October of 1991). So it would make more sense for Dark Sun to be the 2011 setting.
Oops. Sorry about that SB. I misread your DS thread post in that regard. Also, check the dates in your above post again. You said DS was published in 2011, I think you meant 1991 as I corrected it in the above quote.
Lol, that's not combining the two, that's straight up converting Dragonlance into Dark Sun. There'd be nothing left of Dragonlance in what you are saying, it'd just be Dark Sun with Dragonlance being what happened before everything went to hell :P
Well, sort of, but entirely.
The world hasn't been fully subsumed, and the history of Krynn is still there, buried in the crust.
Maybe the Gods haven't truly abandoned Krynn, but they're pre-occupied with a greater threat?
Maybe salvation lays in the old ways, hidden in forgotten crypts, buried temples, and lost rituals?
The important key here is that Athas is consuming Krynn, not that it has consumed Krynn. There's so much that would be happening at the transition point, so many reasons to visit just about everywhere in the world, and distinct conflict to revolve adventures and campaigns around. What's going on in Thorbardin? How are the Knightly Orders handling things? Maybe there's large groups of people trying to seek refuge in Taladas, but getting there is dangerous. With the world in chaos the party can fight for the status quo, champion the inevitable, or look to carve out a chunk of the future for themselves. In my head I see it as an opportunity for the players to decide if they want to dig deep into the history of Krynn or embrace the future of Athas.
OOOH! The Gnomes have been hard at work trying to rebuild a time-altering device mentioned in some obscure texts. A sect has formed around recovering as much information of the past as possible, in the hopes that they can alter the timeline and save the world.
Hooks galore.
Now that I've thought about it more, I'm starting to change my mind, but only so much as they stick to their old method of exclusion from the setting rather than changing the setting itself. hat means Draconians as a new race or monster, not just a renaming of Dragonborn, exclusion of Orcs and Drow, etc... I'm not at all interested in a Krynn that now includes all those elements that were intentionally left out of it at it's creation.
I think the new 4e mechanics would work very well with most DL themes, such as the Tinkergnomes and Holy Order of the Stars, and I'm starting to think some of the WOTC designers might just be talented enough to adapt the WOHS to 4e without losing their unique feel.
I'm also a big fan of the Dragonlance Reloaded idea. While it probably would have fallen flat for it's 3e reiteration, I believe the popularity of the reloading of the Batman and Star Trek franchises wold lead to a pretty wide acceptance.
Something post-Legend is my hope, as I really like the Knights of Takhisis of that period, though just post-War of the Lance would be cool too.
Oops. Sorry about that SB. I misread your DS thread post in that regard. Also, check the dates in your above post again. You said DS was published in 2011, I think you meant 1991 as I corrected it in the above quote.
Now no one will ever know... Yeah, I meant October 1991. Kinda hard to have a 20th year anniversary on the year you are published.
Ultimately, the players are to blame for kender being not fun for most people. When players hear that kender tend to rummage through the pockets of other people, they think kender are pickpockets, thieves, and go around swiping everyone's gold/steel and anything of value. Let me be clear, KENDER NEVER TAKE ANYTHING ANYONE WOULD FIND OF VALUE!!! A kender is much more likely to take the lint out the pocket than the gold in it.
And legions of Kender players sing a vastly different tune. ;) They're annoying. Maybe it's stereotyping, but who cares, they're a fictional race from an RPG. They should snuffed in a gencidal rage. One of the worst parts of the setting. If they killed them all off, it might be a setting worth looking at.
mind you I've seen more of DL and GH than I have of DS.
on the otherhand they could still put out both.
maybe to you.......
mind you I've seen more of DL and GH than I have of DS.
on the otherhand they could still put out both.
And again if they put out both ill be very disapointed because that means fewer newer truly unique settings. Why do people want old settings anyway? Whats wrong with something new? Why not let the old fade away and new take over? Why should the NEW eddition of the game use the same old settings? I honestly do not get it I think every eddition should leave the old settings alone and come out with new ones.
Ill be dispapointed if its DL because then nothing usable will be in the books. We dont play FR but I can rip stuff out of the FR books, with DL I wont be able to because the setting is just that bad. There is nothing in DL worth using nothing.
Minotaur PCs
Dragon mounts
Dragonlances
Half-ogres
Draconians...
You know, I never played Hollow World (before my time) but having read up on it a bit, I gotta vote for bringing that back. Cool concept.
No offence John but the in bold part is bunk (and annoys me when people say it), Birthright written by WotC's own Rich Baker and Colin McComb had a rich setting and a feel that no other has successfully emulated, it was my go to setting whether playing in a traditional style AD&D game or it's own pioneered lord of the land approach. Yes the developers could rip out it's unique mechanics for use in other settings but they would be leaving the best parts behind. Here ends the fan boy rant.
TESTIFY!
Sigh, as much as I love 4e, these conversations really make me miss my AD&D days, another great setting that was completely ignored during 3e and it looks like that mistake will be repeated in 4e. Yes Al-Qadim was "the middle east" setting, but it was also more than that. Al-Qadim captured the essence of all the great Arabian tales (book & movie) Sinbad, Alladin & Ali-Baba etc. and gave us a chance to immerse ourselves (our characters) in a fantastical story and game. My childhood was spent watching the pre-digital effects movies inspired by the tales told in One Thousand and One Nights and I do mightily miss this setting, even though my players could never get out of their mediaeval mindset whilst playing it.
TESTIFY!
I read it awhile back. Just kinda fries my brain to see people fist-pumping over a world with intentionally annoying small people and tons of elves.
Forgotten Realms has around twice as many varieties of elves as Dragonlance.
And the fact that his name is related to Hasslehoff doenst help.
Nothing related to the Hoff can be bad - proof: Pain: The Hoff trailer :D
3 - Inverse KotoR, fling yourselves so far into the future that even the elf characters would be dead of natural causes. This bypasses a lot of the "I didn't read those books" problems by moving so far away that all of it is myth. A big advantage here is that you can afford to be a little recursive during the move, going so far into the future that the world once again resembles a period in the history that fans identify with, but because it's not sitting adjacent to any written history you get the atmosphere without the baggage. The problem here is that it's almost making a new setting, and can be a bit of a sour compromise for fans: they get their world with the feel they remember, but many of the things they loved just aren't around. You need a really good new hook to carry this one.
Translation: Instead of Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, go Star Wars: Legacy. :P
Minotaur PCs
Dragon mounts
Dragonlances
Half-ogres
Draconians...
PHB3
DMG3 (the Epic focused one)
Adventurers Vault 2, 3, whatever
Large PCs will never happen
Dragonborn
Irga= Goliaths
Kender = 4E halflings. (read the fluff, they totally are)
Translation: Instead of Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, go Star Wars: Legacy. :P
If only that were true. I'd like the Star Wars Legacy era so much more if it were a 1000+ years removed from the OT, unfortunately it only about 100 years removed.
Fundamentally that's not much different than how the Forgotten Realms was updated to 4E (save that in FR the world shaking event happens near the beginning of the 100 year gap, while in SW:L the major change happens near the end of said gap).
If only that were true. I'd like the Star Wars Legacy era so much more if it were a 1000+ years removed from the OT, unfortunately it only about 100 years removed.
Fundamentally that's not much different than how the Forgotten Realms was updated to 4E (save that in FR the world shaking event happens near the beginning of the 100 year gap, while in SW:L the major change happens near the end of said gap).
A 100 year jump is admittedly worthless when you have races that can live for 100's of years. Any jump would have to exceed the lifespan of any mortal humanoid. That's the only way to get a mostly-clean slate with a time jump.
I agree with the praise for Al-qadim. From the art to the actual written product, Al-qadim captured the "1001 Arabian nights" we all watched on Hollywood or read about...
However, there's no way in these times I can see Al-qadim being published. Seriously, how is the theme of Al-qadim NOT a pastiche of Islam and the Arabian empire of old.
Sure, I thought it was one of the more respectful "hollywood" treatments that has ever been made (including the old actual Hollywood films about arabian nights) but still...
(Let me put it this way...I personally believe there was no way Disney's Aladdin was being made AFTER 9/11)
Draconians = Dragonborn
Irga= Goliaths
Kender = 4E halflings. (read the fluff, they totally are)
Irda are nothing like Goliaths. If anything, the Irda are a cross between Drow and Changeling/Dopplegangers. Goliaths would better serve as a half-ogre substitute, just like in Dark Sun they'd best serve as half-giants.
A 100 year jump is admittedly worthless when you have races that can live for 100's of years. Any jump would have to exceed the lifespan of any mortal humanoid. That's the only way to get a mostly-clean slate with a time jump.
Which is a benefit for Star Wars vs FR - very few of SW's species are capable of living that long - there's only been 5 characters from earlier eras that have survived that long, and of them one is a droid, and two survived through stasis pods and the Force; only two have lived so long due to species. Whereas with FR, half of the main races (at least) routinely live multiple centuries.
However, there's no way in these times I can see Al-qadim being published. Seriously, how is the theme of Al-qadim NOT a pastiche of Islam and the Arabian empire of old.
Sure, I thought it was one of the more respectful "hollywood" treatments that has ever been made (including the old actual Hollywood films about arabian nights) but still...
(Let me put it this way...I personally believe there was no way Disney's Aladdin was being made AFTER 9/11)
Prince of Persia games still keep getting made, and a movie is coming next year ....
Remember that an AQ setting isn't going to be the "muslim"/"islamic" setting. They'll (most likely) have a pantheon of fictional gods/goddesses. Though it would certainly possess some of the trappings of the near east, it would be its own world. The tricky part is what to do outside of the civilized areas. If they can't make the rest of the world unique and interesting enough, then it will fail as being a generic setting with a cultural twist.
Which is actually a very good source to use for settings. Since a lot of what we know is from external sources or just legends and rumours. So you have lots and lots of room to make stuff your own.
Cyan Bloodbane was in Draconomicon, so I'm going to have to say yes.
By that logic, it'll just as likely be Greyhawk, as Asharldarlon was in the Draconomicon as well. OR, it could be Ravenloft, considering Strahd Von Zarovich is in Open Grave.
And again if they put out both ill be very disapointed because that means fewer newer truly unique settings. Why do people want old settings anyway? Whats wrong with something new? Why not let the old fade away and new take over? Why should the NEW eddition of the game use the same old settings? I honestly do not get it I think every eddition should leave the old settings alone and come out with new ones.
whoah, now there is a loaded question.
which would be one of those that you would ask 100 different people and get 100 different answers.
one of them being that some dms and players prefer to use the current rule setting.
another is: cash crop
I personally dont like
Richard Baker's Point of Light setting which is the primary core setting in 4e.
re: Al-Qadim
I agree with the praise for Al-qadim. From the art to the actual written product, Al-qadim captured the "1001 Arabian nights" we all watched on Hollywood or read about...
However, there's no way in these times I can see Al-qadim being published. Seriously, how is the theme of Al-qadim NOT a pastiche of Islam and the Arabian empire of old.
Sure, I thought it was one of the more respectful "hollywood" treatments that has ever been made (including the old actual Hollywood films about arabian nights) but still...
(Let me put it this way...I personally believe there was no way Disney's Aladdin was being made AFTER 9/11)
I loved the old sinbad movies they were really cool to watch. In that vein Id love to see something like Al Qadim. Could be really interesting and unique unlike dragonlance. Seriously its the most generic fantasy setting their is. Every race acts just like they do in every other fantasy setting. Ridable dragons dont interest me at all really they should rare beings encountered rarley.
I used to think that way myself, but I don't really see it as being a problem. AQ was a great setting, and as long as they respect the culture that inspired it, It could be a great setting again.
Remember that an AQ setting isn't going to be the "muslim"/"islamic" setting. They'll (most likely) have a pantheon of fictional gods/goddesses. Though it would certainly possess some of the trappings of the near east, it would be its own world. The tricky part is what to do outside the areas of the civilized areas. If they can't make the rest of the world unique and interesting enough, then it will fail as being a generic setting with a cultural twist.
The big problem I see with Al-Quadim is...how to make the setting work for all three tiers of play. I mean in the E series of adventure you get to meet the friggin' Raven Queen. In Epic tier you have the Dark Wanderer who WALKS BACK FROM HELL and plane jumping starts happening all the time by PARAGON.
Al-Quadim, from what I hear, sound more like an Heroic tier setting, a place worth converting and exploring with good history and all, but hardly a place to spend 30 levels. A lot of those 'restricted' settings should get write ups in a book gathering multiples of that kind. Like a 'Points of Lights' books about kingdoms and cultures you can drop wherever you want and suggestions on how to integrate them into your games.
The big problem I see with Al-Quadim is...how to make the setting work for all three tiers of play. I mean in the E series of adventure you get to meet the friggin' Raven Queen. In Epic tier you have the Dark Wanderer who WALKS BACK FROM HELL and plane jumping starts happening all the time by PARAGON.
Al-Quadim, from what I hear, sound more like an Heroic tier setting, a place worth converting and exploring with good history and all, but hardly a place to spend 30 levels. A lot of those 'restricted' settings should get write ups in a book gathering multiples of that kind. Like a 'Points of Lights' books about kingdoms and cultures you can drop wherever you want and suggestions on how to integrate them into your games.
That isn't quite true. Granted that eventually the players will deal with things beyond their world of origin, but this is true for every other world that's published (FR, Eberron, etc). What makes it unique once the characters start going to the elemental chaos and the astral sea is the gods and demons of the campaign. An elemental chaos populated by genies is a much different place than the demon infested one of PoL. This where people's concept of a campaign setting breaks down. If your concept is not able to reinvent all the required planes, then you have the equivalent of another generic fantasy setting.
Simply be explicit in the mechanics for Kenders; have it be their racial ability.
Kleptomania
Encounter * Free Action
You reveal yourself to have earlier stolen an item from another player who you have previously met; you must have that player's permission. You now have that item in your inventory and they lose it from theirs.
Note: you may never steal any significant item from another player's inventory, but you may steal any non-significant item (handkerchief, etc) at any time without permission and without rolling or using this power. Significant items are those with a monetary value of 1 gold piece or above, or any determined as significant by the DM.
All the flavour, none of the burn, and you're implicitly reminding players that being a kender doesn't give them a licence to be a jerk.
Contest
I dont know but they seem to be pimping Dragonlance more and more. See the new contest on the main page:
Contest
I was just about to say! After all, the prize for winning the contest to be "The Ultimate Dragonlance Fan" is a trip to GenCon Indy 2009, the location of the announcement of the next (2010) campaign setting for 4E.
This is getting more and more suspicious...
Think about it this way, if they send the biggest Dragonlance fans to GenCon and then announce Dark Sun ... those fans are going to be some angry people. After all, if you were going to announce Dragonlance, wouldn't you want its biggest fans at the announcement? It just makes marketing and logical sense.
In fact, while it would be a blindside to announce something else, it would also be the worst move they could possibly make from a PR standpoint. As much as I would like to see Dark Sun, it would be stupid for them to announce anything else at this point.
Yours,
Lord Dreadman
Yup. Looks like Dragonlance. (Not that this excites me, but that's what it seems like).
Think about it this way, if they send the biggest Dragonlance fans to GenCon and then announce Dark Sun ... those fans are going to be some angry people. After all, if you were going to announce Dragonlance, wouldn't you want its biggest fans at the announcement? It just makes marketing and logical sense.
In fact, while it would be a blindside to announce something else, it would also be the worst move they could possibly make from a PR standpoint. As much as I would like to see Dark Sun, it would be stupid for them to announce anything else at this point.
Yours,
Lord Dreadman
Wow, I never thought of this from the angle you put forth, that is a pretty good insight. I know I would be pretty torqued. Sure, I would have the time of my life, not just for getting to meet my favorite authors and other Dragonlance fans I have talked with for years on the internet, but it would ruin the whole trip to have my heart broken at the end by WotC announcing something else.
WotC is hesitant to produce products that are largely composed of one non-caucasian civilization (nationality? race? I'm struggling for the right word). If they're unwilling to create a power source that is basically "the asian power source" I think they'd also be hesitant to create a setting that is basically "the middle-eastern setting" for very similar reasoning.
It of course doesn't rule it out completely. But I do think it isn't a good sign for Al-Qadim.
I actually don't know if pulling a Power Source for its classes only have ethnic ties is the same as 'no campaign settings based on ethnic ideologies' as a CS is kinda meant to be a grouping of culture, where as a Power Source is meant to be well, a source of power. You don't get power for being european, but you do get people on horses charging each other while wearing enough steel to make a punk rocker think you like metal too much.
Interesting. From my understanding (I unfortunately don't have many of the monster supplements), Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms and Eberron got sections in some of the supplements on detailing locations in that particular setting (e.g. an undead location specific to Forgotten Realms). Did Dragonlance get something similar? Or a mere passing mention?
...the Sages of Faerun call their world Abeir Toril. Those who study such matters in the city of Greyhawk know their world as Oerth, and sages of Anaslon call their world Krynn
In MotP three worlds are mentioned that way, Faerun, Greyhawk and Krynn.
In Draconomicon, there is Blue Orb of Dragonkind and Cyan Bloodbane. (Though my memory of Krynn is foggy on if the Orbs of Dragonkind were colorised or not).
What is spell-punk and how is it different to Eberron's "magic as technology" base.
To be fair, Eberron is really Spellpunk as its a portmanteu of Spell and Steampunk. That is victorian ideals with magic replacing steam.
Spelljammer is really Spellopera. Think Buck Rogers/Star Wars only with magic replacing technology (for the most part) and as the means of locomotion.
To be fair, Eberron is really Spellpunk as its a portmanteu of Spell and Steampunk. That is victorian ideals with magic replacing steam.
Spelljammer is really Spellopera. Think Buck Rogers/Star Wars only with magic replacing technology (for the most part) and as the means of locomotion.
Spellopera ... yeah, that's a far better fit.
break down
no...no 
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
why...not the
tinkering gnomes, and the theif kenders, and the gully dwarf, and the kendar lier that destroyes games 
....NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
please be a night mane please be a nightmare
:headexplo
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOwhy...not the
tinkering gnomes, and the theif kenders, and the gully dwarf, and the kendar lier that destroyes games ....NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO please be a night mane please be a nightmare
:headexplo
same with the elves.
the three surface elves and the two sea elves.....
but as far as it goes, you think darksun will work any better with their Cannibal halflings??
even more so since they have no gods, and will likely have someone down the road wanting to play a servant the Raven Queen bimbo there, and not even knowing that there are no gods in DS.
all said and done, I only knew about DArk Sun from what I read on the wiki and fan pages of it.
not really something I'd want to read, mind you, but the 4e eberron has some good art, so maybe I will look into it one day...( and I hate Eberron)
I do believe that the kender will likely yes become the halfling, just have their racial powers switched.
I just hope beyond hope they spell out almost the exact oppsate of what was said before about them,,,
but as far as it goes, you think darksun will work any better with their Cannibal halflings??
I think if the darksun right up gaave them athe fluff that said they often turn on and eat there companions in there sleep that there would hundreds of players if not thousands of them that would rather have thos cannibal back stabiing face eating hafling with them then kenders...
To be fair, Eberron is really spellpunk
That's what I was thinking ;)
Spelljammer sounds like itS more Firefly rather then Indiana Jones based on what everyone's said about it.
please don't keep kendars as is. Please make them a feat for haflings. or something.
I think that's a pretty safe assumption. People were convinced we'd get racial stats for gold elves, wild elves and moon elves in the FRPG. People were hoping we'd get more shifter builds in the EPG.
Both were disappointed. For WotC to then turn around and create a new race called kender, they would be doing a complete reverse on their earlier choices.
I'll admit I'm disappointed its Dragonlance. But I'll still get the DLPG (unless its decidedly fluff-heavy compared with the FRPG).
same with the elves.
the three surface elves and the two sea elves.....
There's aquatic elves in Dragonlance
How prominent are they in the setting?I was just about to say! After all, the prize for winning the contest to be "The Ultimate Dragonlance Fan" is a trip to GenCon Indy 2009, the location of the announcement of the next (2010) campaign setting for 4E.
This is getting more and more suspicious...
*sigh* Looks like I know what the first 4th edition book I won't be buying is.
I'm leaning towards Dark Sun, it's got the most actually relevant material coming out in 2010. And it's not High Fantasy.
There's aquatic elves in Dragonlance
They have been featured quite a bit throughout the history. They are called the Dimernesti(Shoal elves) and the Dargonesti(Deep Elves). They have the ability to polymorph into aquatic animals (Dimernesti turn into sea otters, Dargonesti turn into dolphins). They mostly keep to themselves and don't interact with the surface, especially the Dargonesti, but occasionally help out the air breathers. The Dargonesti helped out the Heroes of the Lance in the novel Dragons of Spring Dawning (Chronicles book three).
I know I would like to see the sea elves updated to 4e. Their racial ability could be the transformation ability.
However just because they are celebrating 20 years of DL does not mean it is the next setting. There are a lot things they could be annoucing DL related not just that it will be the new setting. In the last year they cut back on the amount of DL novels, to the point that many though they were going to drop the setting. So they could just be anoucing some new novels, perhaps a new Wies/Hickman Trilogy (which is a huge deal for us DL fans). They might also be anoucing the release of the second direct to video DL movie which was hinted to be in the works of at last years Gen Con. So I would not read to much into it yet.
I know I would like to see the sea elves updated to 4e. Their racial ability could be the transformation ability.
Or they could just be druids. We don't need no more stinking elves.
I know I would like to see the sea elves updated to 4e. Their racial ability could be the transformation ability.
As would I. Although with Wild Elves, Gold Elves and Moon Elves only getting feats, it would be a departure if Sea Elves suddenly got an entire race. Although the argument could be made that Sea Elves are as different to most elves as drow are.
It's not gonna happen. DL has been stated as a low priority at best (as had Greyturd)
I'm leaning towards Dark Sun, it's got the most actually relevant material coming out in 2010. And it's not High Fantasy.
I can't recall that ever being said by anyone at WotC. Care to share a link?Anyways, as much as I want the next setting to be Dark Sun, I know in my gut that it is going to be Dragonlance. I'm praying and hoping against all odds, but just like the time with the invoker I already know how this is going to end sadly enough.
But it was always my suspicion that it would be Dragonlance for 2010.
Will have link soon. Searching now.
Announce a new Weis/Hickman trilogy (even as a long time fan, I find it funny that the trilogy is the base unit for the setting) for release in winter/summer/winter that will lead into Dragonlance as the 2011 setting.
No reason they can't announce two years into the future. It would also give them an opportunity to take care of the timeline advancement before releasing the setting, thus skirting the FR fiasco.
Take, for example, the following possible Racial power.
[Kleptomania]
Encounter * Racial
Free Action
Effect: Use the daily power from an item in the possession of an ally adjacent to you. A daily item use of yours is expended normally. The owner of the item may still use the item normally.
That would be a way to have the Kender constructively 'steal' things from players without harming the other players. Alternately,
Kender Taunt
Encounter * Racial
Immediate Interrupt
Trigger: An enemy within 5 squares of you attacks an ally
Target: The triggering enemy
Effect: The enemy is marked by you until it successfully hits you with an attack or the mark is superceded normally.
There are many things you can do with kender to make them 'play nicer'.
Also, for those that want to know the 'big draws' of Dragonlance, for me it would have to be the Orders of High Sorcery, and the very Greco-Roman gods.
I might point out that the kender may receive 'directed assistance' to be more group-friendly than they were previously, a la Warlords being made to give the 'bossy tactical types' ways of working with the system rather than against it.
Take, for example, the following possible Racial power.
[Kleptomania]
Encounter * Racial
Free Action
Effect: Use the daily power from an item in the possession of an ally adjacent to you. A daily item use of yours is expended normally. The owner of the item may still use the item normally.
That would be a way to have the Kender constructively 'steal' things from players without harming the other players. Alternately,
Kender Taunt
Encounter * Racial
Immediate Interrupt
Trigger: An enemy within 5 squares of you attacks an ally
Target: The triggering enemy
Effect: The enemy is marked by you until it successfully hits you with an attack or the mark is superceded normally.
There are many things you can do with kender to make them 'play nicer'.
Also, for those that want to know the 'big draws' of Dragonlance, for me it would have to be the Orders of High Sorcery, and the very Greco-Roman gods.
There was nothing greco roman about dragonlance gods. You had gods that were clearly good and those that were clearly evil, thats not greco roman at all. And no please god leave the kleptomania at home. The orders of sorcery were too simple for my taste, then again I despise alignment and any and all alignment based mechanics. Id rather see people actually role play, but thats another discussion entirley.
There was nothing greco roman about dragonlance gods. You had gods that were clearly good and those that were clearly evil, thats not greco roman at all. And no please god leave the kleptomania at home. The orders of sorcery were too simple for my taste, then again I despise alignment and any and all alignment based mechanics. Id rather see people actually role play, but thats another discussion entirley.
Of course if they're going to release 4e Dragonlance, they're gonna take the chance to correct mistakes, polish things, and bring something new to it. I just hope they don't put in a magical disaster of sort with correlated big and ugly magic-struck region on the map, I'm getting sick of that ****.
Oh and of course, to my slight disappointment, it seems rather obvious that the new setting will be Drafonlance.
It also makes sense. Dragonlance is very appealing to non-D&D players. They want to pull the novel readers and general fantasy community into playing the game. Selling the game to newbies and D&D insider subscriptions to them eventually is one of their most important business goals. Dragonlance will achieve that. The other settings - not. Only "hardcore" veteran D&D players even know Dark Sun. Greyhawk is too much like Forgotten Realms, and also by far not as popular among outsiders as is the Dragonlance setting.
And I also hope for a relaunch of the campaign from scratch, with the same basic story idea, but modified and improved adventures, so they still come as a challenge.
I really didn't think it was gonna be DL, but this lends a lot of credence to that theory...
They should hold a poll.
It's going to be Dragonlance. WotC is dropping too many teasers and hints. There are no official hints or even mentionings of other settings. It's totally obvious.
It also makes sense. Dragonlance is very appealing to non-D&D players. They want to pull the novel readers and general fantasy community into playing the game. Selling the game to newbies and D&D insider subscriptions to them eventually is one of their most important business goals. Dragonlance will achieve that. The other settings - not. Only "hardcore" veteran D&D players even know Dark Sun. Greyhawk is too much like Forgotten Realms, and also by far not as popular among outsiders as is the Dragonlance setting.
And I also hope for a relaunch of the campaign from scratch, with the same basic story idea, but modified and improved adventures, so they still come as a challenge.
No if they do it I want it far in the future. I dont want anything attached to war of the lance thats old material. If they have to make it dragon lance at least make it interesting with something new please not just a rehashing of the same tired worn out crap. And if you do DL Ill have to say could you at least give us a new setting the next year please? Pretty please with ice cream on top? Something original that hasnt been done to death that doesnt have every fliping bad stero type like DL does? Oh also all the fantasy fans I know that are not dnd players havent really heard of DL they read other stuff like wheel of time, dresden files, mercedes lackey. There is more to fantasy literature than dnd books. Side note a game system or campaign setting based in the Aloren codex would be awsome.
Side note a game system or campaign setting based in the Aloren codex would be awsome.
Pokemon in Roman times, you mean? :D
I love the series, BTW, and would love to see a game based on it.
Looks like Dragonlance is a lock for the 2010 setting.
I had my money on Dark Sun as well, but it's not a total shocker. Dragonlance does have some solid support and a novel line that still sells well.
Dragonlance might be really, really tricky through. I can't see it doing well at all!
Mostly because which Dragonlance do you do?
Do you do the classic Dragonlance of the War of the Lance and the original novels? But that does tend to lock the future into what's already happened.
Or do you do the SAGA Dragonlance of the Dragon Overlords?
Or do you do the modern War of the Souls Dragonlance? But it's completely different from the classic novels new fans will likely start with?
Picking the classic seems the best way for new fans but alienates those who've been following the world for years. Picking the current incarnation or skipping ahead alienates the fans of the classic world and will cause cries of "FR nuking" from those unfamiliar with the recent changes.
There's also the big issue of MWP content (Margaret Weis Press, formerly Sovereign press).
They managed the 3e Dragonlance line with some of the best fluff the line has ever see (great, great books), but fairly terrible crunch. Average 3PP stuff.
Does the brand new official books acknowledge what has happened in that line (such as the death of the last Dragon Overlord)? Can they use the fluff from those books for shared continuity? Will the writers from that line have input in the new books or will it be generic WotC staff?
I envision the latter with Wizbro using in-house writers, which might annoy fans of the MWP line and its writers (who are quite active and popular in that community). I expect lots of new contradictions and breaks from canon.
Since we're talking about D&D literature, some of the best D&D novels IMO were the Ravenloft novels. I've read Scholar of Decay at least six times, and I'll probably read it at least once more. I think Dragonlance is a nice setting (nice, not great), and I'll at least take a look at the books that come out for it. I will say that Ravenloft filled a specific genre niche that no other setting does. If I had my druthers, I'd rather see the gothic horror setting over the generic fantasy one (and that is not a slam, there is nothing wrong with generic fantasy). If 2010 is the year of the Lance, I seriously hope 2011 will give us something that is a departure from mainstream Tolkeinish fantasy.
Well, the Ravenloft style of setting is popular, but that's likely why we have the Domains of Dread articles. Really, that could cover Ravenloft fairly well can't it?
Well, the Ravenloft style of setting is popular, but that's likely why we have the Domains of Dread articles. Really, that could cover Ravenloft fairly well can't it?
I don't know. I'm not a DDI subscriber.
Kender are the Jar-Jar Binks of D&D. They are too annoying to like.
I know generic world is supposed to be Greyhak but sorry..IT"S NOT!!!
The default world is no longer Greyhawk. And thank god for that.
I like Dragonlance. I love kenders. I'd be happy to see Dragonlance announced this summer, much happier than if they announced Dark Sun. I have nothing against Dark Sun, I've just never played it while I did play Dragonlance waaay back in the day. I agree with Starglyte when they said they'd like to see a reboot and perhaps the War of the Lance adventures released. I doubt that'd happen, but that would be super-awesomeness in my world.
So not everyone out there is super-bummed it might be Dragonlance.
I beg to differ. If Dragonlance is going to get the 4th edition treatment, the only way I will buy it is if goes back to the War of the Lance. Extra bonus if they republish the original modules and set it up so that the PCs use their characters instead of the companions.
WHY? Seriously dont you want to see something new done with it? Why must we get the same old material all over again? This is what I dont get. Why do people want to see old stuff rehashed rather than new material? Cant you just switch your old dragon lance material over to 4e if thats what you want? IF they fastforward the timeline and do something unique with it it might might be worth picking up, but if its war of the lance then it wont be.
Sure, I could go back and convert the old modules, but I don't have the time (which is saying a lot as I'm a teacher and as of this coming Friday I'll have three months off).
Newer does not automatically mean better, just like older does not automatically mean worse.
True, however it is also true that older does not automatically mean better, nor does newer automatically mean worse.
WHY? Seriously dont you want to see something new done with it? Why must we get the same old material all over again?
Keeping the metaplot, all the old junk that weighted down the setting is a terrible idea. If it were up to me, I'd reboot the setting, ignore the decades of world-shattering crap and the dozens of novel series. Get back to what makes the setting work, and don't try to pretend that the setting is a 'living world' with its own history.
This is what I dont get. Why do people want to see old stuff rehashed rather than new material?
New material that builds on the decades of bad material from previous edition is much, much worse than starting completely over without any existing metaplot. I'd rather not have to deal with all the crap that has gone on in the setting during previous editions and have to try to pick up out-of-print books just so that I know what's going on. I don't want to read decades of novels, and I don't want to be the background player to Hasselhoff. I would much prefer a complete reboot of any setting released for 4e.
I ask this as someone who's never read a single Dragonlance novel, and who only vaguely knows who Raistilin is. What differentiates Dragonlance from FR in theme and setting? What mechanics are unique to the setting? In short, what makes Dragonlance worth making an official 4th edition setting?
I ask this as someone who's never read a single Dragonlance novel, and who only vaguely knows who Raistilin is. What differentiates Dragonlance from FR in theme and setting? What mechanics are unique to the setting? In short, what makes Dragonlance worth making an official 4th edition setting?
I ask the same question as someone who has read a few of the books.
Honestly, I hope that Dragonlance isn't the 2010 setting-perhaps I'm wrong, and I don't want to step on the toes of Dragonlance fans but from what I've seen of it it looks like fairly straightforward high fantasy. Now don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Tolkien but after the awesomeness that was Eberron I'd like something a little bit more...unique than just another rendition the same old thing.
I ask this as someone who's never read a single Dragonlance novel, and who only vaguely knows who Raistilin is. What differentiates Dragonlance from FR in theme and setting? What mechanics are unique to the setting? In short, what makes Dragonlance worth making an official 4th edition setting?
My understanding is that it has to with polarizing, Good vs Evil, Metallic vs Chromatic, dragon-on-dragon warfare on a world-spanning scale. Or at least, by thinking of it this way, it maintains a unique identity in my brain. You'll have to ask someone familiar with the setting whether or not my description is even remotely accurate.
(The more I hear about DL, the more I wonder why it's even a campaign setting at all. It just doesn't seem big enough -- physically or conceptually -- to justify taking up as much space as, say, the Realms or Eberron.)
But, yeah, I'd rather see new settings.
I almost wish they'd release all the old crap within a few months of each other, and then do new stuff. At this rate, if we last 8 years, and we do the more popular old CS, we'll MAYBE get a single ****ing new setting. How does that not irritate anyone else?
There's also a little bit of interesting cultural stuff; like, the native-American-style tribesman mixed with European middle-aged stuff.
But, yeah, I'd rather see new settings.
I almost wish they'd release all the old crap within a few months of each other, and then do new stuff. At this rate, if we last 8 years, and we do the more popular old CS, we'll MAYBE get a single ****ing new setting. How does that not irritate anyone else?
There's no guarantee that a new setting would sell. With the old settings, WotC knows they have a fanbase and can possibly estimate how big said fanbase is. But coming out with something completely new is a gamble, and with the economy like it is, you don't want to gamble much. You want sure bets. I see no reason to be irritated, it's simply the way things are. There are far more important things in the world to be upset about than a game company's decision to print or not print new or old settings.
In any event, whether Dark Sun or Dragonlance, I'd already determined I wasn't going to buy either Campaign Setting, though I may get player's guides if I think there's something I can steal out of them. I dislike both settings.
WHY? Seriously dont you want to see something new done with it? Why must we get the same old material all over again? This is what I dont get. Why do people want to see old stuff rehashed rather than new material? Cant you just switch your old dragon lance material over to 4e if thats what you want? IF they fastforward the timeline and do something unique with it it might might be worth picking up, but if its war of the lance then it wont be.
Nope, because after seeing the new stuff after 10 years, I believe that Classic Dragonlance is the better era. Fighting the War of the Lance, with my PC (or the group I DM for) being the stars of the show, with them deciding the fate of Krynn, that would be great.
It would, IMO, be only worth picking up if using the classic era. That is what Dragonlance is. When I think about Dragonlance, I think about this era first. Not the Chaos War, not the War of Souls, not even Saga rules, it is the War of the Lance that comes to mind first for me. The new stuff can be made by the PCs in the world as far as I am concered.
The new stuff works fine for Forgotten Realms. Keeping it the "same" works Eberron. But Dragonlance has always thrived on its past, the characters and its stories, and its worth going back to them.
However...
It is inevitable that they will do something cataclysmic in order to make the setting 4thEd relevant. They HAVE to do it, otherwise all of the new races, power sources and other such material will be of no use. Not only that, but the creators of the setting and the 4thEd designers both know that it is high fantasy ala Forgotten Realms. Because they didn't polarize the two in 3rdEd, it completely flopped.
Something crazy new will be brought to the table, which will give it a totally different schtick than both Eberron and Forgotten Realms.
We may love it... We may hate it... But DIFFERENT it will be.
It's great that there are extra options; there's a large minority of people out there that love the Legacy era of Star Wars, for example. But if your setting's success and popularity is largley founded on a particular treatment and an original set of content then you have to do right by that content before you go on to detail possible past and future campaign settings.
As far as Dark Sunbeing a possibility instead of Dragonlance, there's a place in the Eberron Player's guide that mentions Thri-keen and Half-giants as being fairly easy to find in one area. Can't find the spot though.
Pg 152 in the shaded area under population.
1> No Drow, No underdark. Dark elves, in the dragonlance setting, are fallen or outcast elves, which is to say, if a high elf commits a crime of severe enough nature, he is thrown out and declaired a "Dark Elf".
2> Dragons are FAR more central to EVERYTHING. All meta plot revolves around dragons, as the gods themselves are Draconic in nature. Takhisis the goddess of evil is also the five headed full-chromatic dragon. Paladine the god of good is also the Platinum Dragon. All major plots or coups are, at some level, orchistrated by a dragon.
3> Draconians. Yes, now everything has Dragonborn, but Dragonlance Draconians had many different powers. Equating Dragonborn with Draconians is roughly the same as equating Gnomes with 2nd edition Pixies. Dragonborn don't explode in a blast of acid or turn instantly to stone trapping your sword when they die.
4> Different racial interrelations. The whole geopolitical structure of the setting is different.
5> The Mage Towers and the Orders. The fact that ALL arcane casters belong to the orders seperates it from other settings.
6> The Knights of Takhisis/Neraka, were the first order of chivilric, organized, anti-paladins in any D&D setting. They formed, and still form, a grand and dangerous enemy, in an evil force that is well organized, efficient, and not prone to infighting or back stabbing.
7> Lord Soth, arguably the coolest badguy ever. I think he's been redeemed now, but still. Death knight, fallen paladin, Dark Lord of one of the realms of Ravenloft, and escaped the Mists.
8> And, of coarse, races not native to Aber-Toril. Namely Kender, Gully Dwarves, and Irda. I admit this last bullet point will elicit as much negative sentiment as positive.
What distinguishes DragonLance from Forgotten Realms? Lets see.
1> No Drow, No underdark. Dark elves, in the dragonlance setting, are fallen or outcast elves, which is to say, if a high elf commits a crime of severe enough nature, he is thrown out and declaired a "Dark Elf".
2> Dragons are FAR more central to EVERYTHING. All meta plot revolves around dragons, as the gods themselves are Draconic in nature. Takhisis the goddess of evil is also the five headed full-chromatic dragon. Paladine the god of good is also the Platinum Dragon. All major plots or coups are, at some level, orchistrated by a dragon.
3> Draconians. Yes, now everything has Dragonborn, but Dragonlance Draconians had many different powers. Equating Dragonborn with Draconians is roughly the same as equating Gnomes with 2nd edition Pixies. Dragonborn don't explode in a blast of acid or turn instantly to stone trapping your sword when they die.
4> Different racial interrelations. The whole geopolitical structure of the setting is different.
5> The Mage Towers and the Orders. The fact that ALL arcane casters belong to the orders seperates it from other settings.
6> The Knights of Takhisis/Neraka, were the first order of chivilric, organized, anti-paladins in any D&D setting. They formed, and still form, a grand and dangerous enemy, in an evil force that is well organized, efficient, and not prone to infighting or back stabbing.
7> Lord Soth, arguably the coolest badguy ever. I think he's been redeemed now, but still. Death knight, fallen paladin, Dark Lord of one of the realms of Ravenloft, and escaped the Mists.
8> And, of coarse, races not native to Aber-Toril. Namely Kender, Gully Dwarves, and Irda. I admit this last bullet point will elicit as much negative sentiment as positive.
Mostly true though the Knights of Takhisis/Neraka had a LOT of in-fighting especially if you read the newer novesl that covers more of what Kitiara was doing during the War of the Lance as well as fill in some of the gaps of what the companions did during/between the first trilogy.
Also not ALL casters were part of the towers. There were renegades and they could get powerful. They were hunted down by the Order though as they were considered dangerous to the balance of magic imposed by the 3 gods of magic (which basically was DL's version of limiting magic like Mystra's restrictions on it in FR).
While I liked the first trilogy I didn't really enjoy it as a campaign setting. When they added Taladas it became more interesting even though Taladas didn't really get any attention in the novels. I think Krynn could make an interesting campaign setting as long as they don't go back to the War of the Lance and cover more than just Ansalon, as well as opening up the cosmology. Just because they didn't mention the Shadowfell, Elemental Chaos, Feywild, etc. in the novels doesn't mean they didn't exist, only that they weren't reached/known by those on Ansalon.
I've never understood this "moving the setting on" rubbish. If you pick up a Lord of the Rings roleplaying game, you expect the majority of the content to be centered around the War of the Ring; you don't expect to find yourself in the middle of events that happen three generations later. If you buy into the Babylon 5 game, you're probably looking to tell stories during the period of time covered by the TV show.
It's great that there are extra options; there's a large minority of people out there that love the Legacy era of Star Wars, for example. But if your setting's success and popularity is largley founded on a particular treatment and an original set of content then you have to do right by that content before you go on to detail possible past and future campaign settings.
The problem with that is that most of the time, the characters who are involved with the plot in question are still doing that, making the PCs peripheral at best. While Frodo and company are trotting around doing the big-important-plot of throwing the ring into the volcano ... what are your PCs doing? Keeping bears from entering villages. Whee.
If you re-write the story to allow for the PCs to replace the mains, good luck keeping the metagame knowledge out of it, and heaven forbid if you don't have a substitute in every role. No Gandalf? No 'you shall not pass' and today's adventurer becomes tomorrow's Balrog droppings.
Posted elsewhere, but worth repeating...
Looks like Dragonlance is a lock for the 2010 setting.
I had my money on Dark Sun as well, but it's not a total shocker. Dragonlance does have some solid support and a novel line that still sells well.
And where is your proof? No one gets to say something like this unless there qualified proof. All we have at this point is conjecture and it's spotty conjecture at best.
. Everything in Krynn already exists in Faerun, and in more interesting form.The merging of Planescape and Spelljammer is a good idea, that setting would actually be unique. By far better, you have dozens of potential new races and power sources.
After that Al-Qadim is much better than Dark Sun, which has plenty of silly ideas, in Zakhara you could have elemental, horror, and desert stuff plus pirates etc.
The problem with that is that most of the time, the characters who are involved with the plot in question are still doing that, making the PCs peripheral at best. While Frodo and company are trotting around doing the big-important-plot of throwing the ring into the volcano ... what are your PCs doing? Keeping bears from entering villages. Whee.
If you re-write the story to allow for the PCs to replace the mains, good luck keeping the metagame knowledge out of it, and heaven forbid if you don't have a substitute in every role. No Gandalf? No 'you shall not pass' and today's adventurer becomes tomorrow's Balrog droppings.
In 3.5, MWP did a wonderful job of releasing an entire War of the Lance Campaign Setting book, showing you how to run a campaign during that era, with your own characters, apart from the famous Companions.
It's a big world, and the Dark Queen had many machinations at work the entire time. Not to mention the other gods getting restless.
There is definitely room for a 4e campaign to be run in the WotL era, without ever even hearing the name Raistlin. Personally, I've said it before and I'll repeat it here, I would love to see the material come out in one of the following ways:
1) Do the two guides like the FR ones, in the "modern" era. Even if that's more of a fast forward than we're already at in terms of the novel line. From there, either put out campaign supplements in Dragon and Dungeon magazines for other eras, or allow Margaret Weis Publishing and the DL Nexus to wholly support the setting in 4e, as they so ably did with 3.5.
2) Just give us two big books with details on every era. This is pretty unrealistic I would think; not to mention it would have to skimp on a lot of fluff (which is Dragonlance's greatest strength.)
3) The most unlikely option (though probably the one most supported by Dragonlance fans) would be to just give back the license to produce materials to Margaret Weis Productions and allow the DL Nexus to be the official web home of Krynn. Then everyone would be happy. MWP would hold onto the setting, making the majority of the internet's fanbase ecstatic. Non-DL fans would get a different setting from Wizards next year (whatever that might be.) And Wizards gets income off two settings in one year.
In any case, back on topic. I personally think that the best thing they could do if they do decide to make DragonLance the new setting is to convert the entire original War of the Lance modual series into a free adventure path (kind of like the Scales of War) to get people back into the world. Beyond that I deperately hope that if they do release it as the next setting that they include Taladas and the other areas of Krynn beyond Ansolon.
Don't get me wrong, Ansolon was cool for the War of the Lance however it always felt more like it was all so molded by the books that there wasn't much to do there beyond play the part of the Heroes of the Lance and to be honest I really lost interest after the Chronicles, Leagends, and Tales series of books as it seemed the whole world then got rebooted into a different setting.
Personally I adored the Time of the Dragon boxed set for all the incredible potential that Taladas presented and personally think that it would be a far better campaign setting than most of the others I've seen suggested lately.
As for what separates DragonLance from other settings, I really guess that it depends on what era you are talking about, in some eras divine magic doesn't exist or is completely unique, in some eras magic works in completely different ways than in other eras or in other settings. It has unique races and fluff from lots of books. Granted, I'm probably not the one to ask for specifics as it has been so long since I've had the time to read any of them but I do remember a few things.
Personally I still really would like to see Dark Sun come out as a full 4th edition setting however if DragonLance does come out I really hope that they make it interesting and offer enough for everyone to get something out of it. This is why I think they should release the converted/updated War of the Lance moduals as an Adventure Path since you can't shoehorn them all into one modual and it would give those of us who had fond memories of the original setting something to enjoy even if they have to deal with the other eras in the offically sold books. Still my ideal would be if they atleast spend some of the books' space on Taladas, as I have said, I still think that that would make a fantastic world in itself.
In 3.5, MWP did a wonderful job of releasing an entire War of the Lance Campaign Setting book, showing you how to run a campaign during that era, with your own characters, apart from the famous Companions.
I enjoyed it, but did find it to be a very straight update using the same ages of dragons. There were so many TPKs waiting to happen in that book...
1) Do the two guides like the FR ones, in the "modern" era. Even if that's more of a fast forward than we're already at in terms of the novel line. From there, either put out campaign supplements in Dragon and Dungeon magazines for other eras, or allow Margaret Weis Publishing and the DL Nexus to wholly support the setting in 4e, as they so ably did with 3.5.
We haven't seen any 3PP take over official lines yet. ArtHaus had Ravenloft out months after the release of 3e and Dragonlance was right after 3.5; we haven't seen any yet, so it looks like WotC is keeping their products to themselves
While the idea of offering alternate period's versions of the nations in Dragon is a good idea, I don't see it working. They promised regular updates on the Realms and we've seen three, maybe four, updates and only one for a place of real importance. Likewise, we've seen a single Dark Sun update and two new Ravenloft domains.
If they decide to do online updates of different lands I'm sure we can expect them to finish sometime in 2014...
2) Just give us two big books with details on every era. This is pretty unrealistic I would think; not to mention it would have to skimp on a lot of fluff (which is Dragonlance's greatest strength.)
I imagine they'll do what they did for the Realms: give a modern update and trust that true fans can simply pull the fluff from older books.
The idea of a book with both eras is appealing, but given the short descriptions lands got in the FRCG I can't see that working.
3) The most unlikely option (though probably the one most supported by Dragonlance fans) would be to just give back the license to produce materials to Margaret Weis Productions and allow the DL Nexus to be the official web home of Krynn. Then everyone would be happy. MWP would hold onto the setting, making the majority of the internet's fanbase ecstatic. Non-DL fans would get a different setting from Wizards next year (whatever that might be.) And Wizards gets income off two settings in one year.
MWP did some of the best fluff I've seen and did an excellent job of remaining true to the past, the novels, and fixing problems with continuity. But their rules were average at best. I shudder at what they'd do with the 4e and its 110% balance.
And where is your proof? No one gets to say something like this unless there qualified proof. All we have at this point is conjecture and it's spotty conjecture at best.
Proof:
* The new Dragonlance-centric mini, the 5th Dragonlance mini in total. Compared to Dark Sun's total of.... 0.
* The contest to take the biggest fan to GenCon
* The creators of the setting having a heavy presence at GenCon
* Right after the 25th anniversary of the setting
Is all this a sure, 100% guaranteed thing? Heck no.
I wouldn't be totally shocked if it was Dark Sun either.
Neither setting work well with the 4e; both are more rigid in their allowable races and classes with fluff that doesn't match the core books. Both have different planar setups and don't do epic well.
Of course, that's wholly contingent on Wizards being willing to share not only the license (which as you've pointed out, so far, they haven't) but the underlying math as well.
Who knows? Besides the fact that the very belief that DL could be the setting next year (if ever) is nothing more than speculation, so we might be just spinning wheels here.
I can't wait for GenCon. When the heck is it anyway? (I've never been.)
That being said I'm not entirely sure how they could do it. The uniqueness of the races of DL would seemingly have to be scrapped for the watered down 4e races. Not to mention the adding of dreadful races like Orcs, Drow, and Tieflings.
Also there is the timeline issue, would hate for them to make it set during the War of the Lance, it was lame with 2e and it would be lame now. Better to do a jump forward, let the legends be legends. Oh and hopefully they can restore the proper pantheon.
Either way, Dragonlance or Dark Sun I'm a happy camper, certainly my two favorite settings, in that order.
I'm hoping that they wait to make an all new campaign setting until the year before 5e, so that it can completely and soundly encompass all things 4e within it without any patchwork.
Until then I'm betting it's Dark Sun for 2010, Dragonlance for 2011, and Ravenloft in 2012. After that it might be Greyhawk, Rokugan/Kara-Tur, Mystara, Planescape, or Spelljammer.
No matter what they do, I hope that each race keeps its unique flavor, including all the subraces of elves and dwarves. Also no Spellplague plot devices, please. And please try to keep the flavor as close to their original respective campaign settings.
For the record, I prefer pre-Greyhawk Wars Greyhawk, pre-Prism Pentad Dark Sun, pre-Grand Conjunction Ravenloft, pre-Second Cataclysm Dragonlance, pre-Faction War Planescape, pre-Wrath of the Immortals Mystara, and 1987 grey box Forgotten Realms.
As far as Dark Sunbeing a possibility instead of Dragonlance, there's a place in the Eberron Player's guide that mentions Thri-keen and Half-giants as being fairly easy to find in one area. Can't find the spot though.
Why is it that this comment has been pretty much completely ignored. I'd say it is the first(and perhaps strongest) piece of evidence in favor of Dark Sun so far. I can hardly say it is conclusive, but it is at least enough to give me some hope.I expected to see something next like, "Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our Kender."
In my opinion, DL started to go under with the whole 5th age crap. Margaret should have stopped there.
IF any of the classic "settings" should be brought back, I vote for Ravenloft.
As far as Dark Sunbeing a possibility instead of Dragonlance, there's a place in the Eberron Player's guide that mentions Thri-keen and Half-giants as being fairly easy to find in one area. Can't find the spot though.
Agreed. There is still a chance that the 2010 setting could be Dark Sun, but I'm not sure that a small blurb in the corner of the Eberron Player's Guide can compare to all the clues that the next setting will instead be Dragonlance.
Proof:
* The new Dragonlance-centric mini, the 5th Dragonlance mini in total. Compared to Dark Sun's total of.... 0.
* The contest to take the biggest fan to GenCon
* The creators of the setting having a heavy presence at GenCon
* Right after the 25th anniversary of the setting
Given all that I think the blurb in the EPG is just a WotC laying some groundwork for future supplements. They know they'll get around to those races eventually, if not in Dark Sun then in a future PHB or Dragon magazine.
I will admit surprise at half-giants being mentioned though. Prior to this I was over 90% certain that the goliath race would be used for the mechanics of the half-giant race in any 4E update of Dark Sun.
Agreed. There is still a chance that the 2010 setting could be Dark Sun, but I'm not sure that a small blurb in the corner of the Eberron Player's Guide can compare to all the clues that the next setting will instead be Dragonlance.
Given all that I think the blurb in the EPG is just a WotC laying some groundwork for future supplements. They know they'll get around to those races eventually, if not in Dark Sun then in a future PHB or Dragon magazine.
I will admit surprise at half-giants being mentioned though. Prior to this I was over 90% certain that the goliath race would be used for the mechanics of the half-giant race in any 4E update of Dark Sun.
I consider three of those pieces of evidence to be the same thing(Dragonlance is having its 25th anniversery so they are giving a panel to the creators and having a nice contest to celebrate). Even that is circumstantial evidence(mind you very large circumstantial evidence). Mentioning two of the most prominent races of Dark Sun in a book for another setting, where they have no previously established presence, is highly suspicious. I'd say that it confirms that they are going to do Dark Sun. The question is just a matter of when. I can't say that we've had anything that I would consider to be comparable for Dragonlance(no I do not count a single mini for a race I've never heard of as being comparable). Besides there is still one subtle clue for Dark Sun that I noticed, which I am hoping is not my imagination.:D
I consider three of those pieces of evidence to be the same thing(Dragonlance is having its 25th anniversery so they are giving a panel to the creators and having a nice contest to celebrate). Even that is circumstantial evidence(mind you very large circumstantial evidence). Mentioning two of the most prominent races of Dark Sun in a book for another setting, where they have no previously established presence, is highly suspicious. I'd say that it confirms that they are going to do Dark Sun. The question is just a matter of when. I can't say that we've had anything that I would consider to be comparable for Dragonlance(no I do not count a single mini for a race I've never heard of as being comparable). Besides there is still one subtle clue for Dark Sun that I noticed, which I am hoping is not my imagination.:D
Thri-Kreen and Half-Giants are not, nor have they ever been, Dark Sun exclusive. They came out long before Dark Sun was created and were featured in both Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk(if I remember right) before they were in Dark Sun. If the book had mentioned the Mul, sure, that is a Dark Sun race that was appearing. If anything, that is a BAD sign for Dark Sun, since it means portions of the setting could have been eaten by Eberron. Besides, Dragonlance has been featured in a lot more books than Dark Sun, especially by name. And even if that meant we were going to see Dark Sun eventually, it certainly doesn't mean 2010. It could mean that they plan to do it some time during the lifecycle of 4e.
Thri-Kreen and Half-Giants are not, nor have they ever been, Dark Sun exclusive. They came out long before Dark Sun was created and were featured in both Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk(if I remember right) before they were in Dark Sun.
Mentioning thri-kreen and half-giants together is an obvious nod to Dark Sun since no where but in DS do they go hand-in-hand.
Besides, Dragonlance has been featured in a lot more books than Dark Sun, especially by name. And even if that meant we were going to see Dark Sun eventually, it certainly doesn't mean 2010. It could mean that they plan to do it some time during the lifecycle of 4e.
Very true. The mass of DL evidence still seems to be the greatest.
Mentioning thri-kreen and half-giants together is an obvious nod to Dark Sun since no where but in DS do they go hand-in-hand.
Still, unless they say Mul, it isn't a Dark Sun hint.
Very true. The mass of DL evidence still seems to be the greatest.
Which is good, because I would rather they produced Dark Sun in 2011, that way they can slap an embossed image on it announcing it is Dark Sun's 20th Anniversary edition, guaranteed to help push sales.
Still, unless they say Mul, it isn't a Dark Sun hint.
No, it really is the biggest Dark Sun hint we've seen yet. Having a place where it says "this is where thri-kreen and half giants fit into eberron" in a printed book is huge since they simply aren't juxtaposed in FR, GH or any other setting.
Which is good, because I would rather they produced Dark Sun in 2011, that way they can slap an embossed image on it announcing it is Dark Sun's 20th Anniversary edition, guaranteed to help push sales.
I find this argument quite compelling.
No, it really is the biggest Dark Sun hint we've seen yet. Having a place where it says "this is where thri-kreen and half giants fit into eberron" in a printed book is huge since they simply aren't juxtaposed in FR, GH or any other setting.
Technically speaking thri-kreen and half-giants already had a place in Eberron all the way back in 3E, not a very prominant place, but they were there never the less. They were after all prominent races in the Expanded Psionics Handbook and Ererron was very psionics friendly, plus one of Eberron's mantras was "if it exists in D&D then there is a place for it in Eberron".
Furthermore, the mentioning of these races in the EPG would actually seem most comparable to the mentioning of the deva in the FRPG. As such, perhaps this should be taken of as more of a precursor to what races will appear in the PHB3 rather than a clue as to the next setting.
Furthermore, the mentioning of these races in the EPG would actually seem most comparable to the mentioning of the deva in the FRPG. As such, perhaps this should be taken of as more of a precursor to what races will appear in the PHB3 rather than a clue as to the next setting.
Certainly possible I suppose. However there is a difference between the two situations. The Deva appeared in the supporting cast section of FRPG alongside the other four races from PHB2. Half-giants and Thri-kreen both appear in a city write-up, without any real description. Of course even if they are destined for the PHB3 instead of a theoretical DSPG, that could still be evidence for Dark Sun as a campaign setting as Shifters, an Eberron race, were in the PHB before Eberron.(and yes I am fully aware this can be used for Dragonlance as well thanks to the Minotaurs)
(and yes I am fully aware this can be used for Dragonlance as well thanks to the Minotaurs)
That would be Minotaurs on the COVER of PHB3, which is a big sign for DL. Even though we knew Eberron was coming out, PHB2 had Shifters on the cover, along with an unrelated race. Entirely coincidental (since the Dragonborn on the cover of PHB1 isn't a hint toward the FRPG), but I like to throw that out there. If PHB3 had a friggin' Thri-Kreen on the cover, I would be fully behind the theory that Dark Sun was the next setting coming out.
I am thinking that one race on the cover of the PHBs is a feature of the setting coming out.
With only a three book quota (one of those being an adventure), I think that Planescape has more than enough fluff'n'crunch to meet the prereq's for a 4E CS.
The Campaign Guide would obviously tackle Sigil. There were two stand-alone books in 2E (good ones, mind you) dedicated to the city alone, not to mention what was included in the original boxed set. It would also flesh out all of the Factions, belief systems and related goodness that made the Planescape setting so unique. A chapter for the Lady of Pain, a chapter on how to run the setting, a few words on Dabus, etc. and you have yourself a fully fleshed out book.
The Player's Guide would introduce the Bariaur race, a class that just won't fit anywhere else, a few faction-related Paragon Paths, some sexy new weapons, feats, rituals... voila!
The associated adventure would obviously be a planes-spanning jaunt through 4E's new cosmology.
Eh, let me have my fanciful daydreams! :D
I guess the only issue would be the same darn need to fast-forward past the damaging sludge they threw all over the setting with the Faction War, yaddayadda... how'd all of our beloved settings get so beat up over the years?[/indent]
[indent]The Player's Guide would introduce the Bariaur race, a class that just won't fit anywhere else, a few faction-related Paragon Paths, some sexy new weapons, feats, rituals... voila!
I played a Bariaur in 2e and again in 3e, they are a really neat race (goat centaur=WIN). But don't count on them appearing in a Planescape PG, since WotC keeps saying time and again, Planescape is core now, it doesn't need a PG/CS. Hopefully the bariaur will be in PHB3, along with the Githyanki/zerai.
[indent]
I played a Bariaur in 2e and again in 3e, they are a really neat race (goat centaur=WIN). But don't count on them appearing in a Planescape PG, since WotC keeps saying time and again, Planescape is core now, it doesn't need a PG/CS. Hopefully the bariaur will be in PHB3, along with the Githyanki/zerai.
Yeah, the whole "Planescape is core" thing just isn't going to do the setting itself any justice. Yes, Sigil has a write-up and is accessible to all (as it should be), but the intellectual beauty that went into the design will never be given its due. There's no way they'll find a way of making the Lady of Pain or the Factions pertinent to anyone's campaign without fully fleshing them out; something that doesn't seem to be slated for anytime in the near future.
The Manual of the Planes should definitely become a series, with one being devoted to Sigil and her many gems, if they aren't going to do a CS proper.
Like I said... they may be daydreams, but they make me happy.
[/indent]Aw, it bums me out when Planescape gets so easily offed as not having enough weight to deserve proper setting treatment.
The main problem with updating Plainscape would be that it was more theme than setting. In most standard settings extraplanar travel was difficult and/or reserved for high level characters while in Plainscape hopping between plains was common place and a viable activity regardless of level.
Much of what made Planescape interesting and unique has been subsumed into the core foundation of D&D. Heroic tier plane hopping is still a bit limited, but it's rather standard fare at paragon tier and higher.
The other thing that made Planescape semi-unique was the ability to travel to other settings. While cool, this is certainly something that should wait until 4E has enough settings to make such travel interesting. Furthermore, this too is actually implied within the default 4E cosmology. Manual of the Plains mentions that if one were to travel far enough through the infinite expanse of either the astral see or elemental chaos that one might eventually reach the equivalent plain in a different setting, however, the distances involved in such a journey make such travel impractical at best.
I'm happy with the integration of many aspects of the Planescape setting into the core foundation of D&D (even Sigil itself is now a core concept). The mention of vast empty distances between the outer plains of different settings leaves open the world hopping aspects, but implies something of the concept more similar to Spelljammer (a setting I would hope to see revived after 4E has about a half-dozen other settings available).
[size=3]Yeah, the whole "Planescape is core" thing just isn't going to do the setting itself any justice. Yes, Sigil has a write-up and is accessible to all (as it should be), but the intellectual beauty that went into the design will never be given its due. There's no way they'll find a way of making the Lady of Pain or the Factions pertinent to anyone's campaign without fully fleshing them out; something that doesn't seem to be slated for anytime in the near future.
Sigil is set to get expanded coverage in DMG2. As for factions, seems more like something to cover in the DDi magazines (I think one of them might already have been).
Dragonlance. Hm.
This 'Dark Sun' place caught my eye with the Dragon magazine trap article. Deserts and environmental hazards sounds much more fun to run than - 'oh you leave the woodland and enter the town of Generica - complete with naive militia, corrupt council and 20 firmly established personalities.'
I'd really like a setting which was similar to the concept behind Hellboy.
Fourth edition's greater inclusion of Aberrant themes and Great Tree planar structure lend well to a setting where the Fey live on a parallel earth (you wouldn't realise when passing into their realm however) as a dying community (Irish Folklore Themed), "Evil Magi" (Rasputin) work with "Banished Evil Empire" (Nazis) to summon "Horrible Beings" (Lovecraft stuff), "Witches" (of England) are in a power struggle with "Forgotten Gods" (Baba Yaga, etc.) to control/kill the "Harbinger of Doom" (Hellboy), and the Party is a small team of Private Investigators or Psi-Ops who have to clean up the crossfire without the populace finding out (B.P.R.D.).
I'd really like that to be a setting. I guess I'll just have to make it myself :P
Thri-Kreen and Half-Giants are not, nor have they ever been, Dark Sun exclusive. They came out long before Dark Sun was created and were featured in both Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk(if I remember right) before they were in Dark Sun. If the book had mentioned the Mul, sure, that is a Dark Sun race that was appearing.
??? Thri-kreen, yes. I remember them in FR before Dark Sun, and they were introduced in 1982 on the second set of Monster Cards. But half-giant? I've never seen half-giants anywhere save Dark Sun until after that setting appeared on the scene.
However...Dark Sun made thri-kreen into a PC race, and introduced half-giants. Before then, kreen were monsters, plain and simple. When thri-kreen and half-giants are mentioned, especially TOGETHER in the same breath, I would wager very good money indeed that Dark Sun is the image conjured in the minds of most D&D players remotely familiar with the game and that setting. By a very large margin, to boot.
Mentioning the mul is on par with mentioning the half-giant. To MOST folks familiar with D&D, so is the thri-kreen. The key here is thinking about the demographics of who this information is intended for. Hint: It isn't for the die-hard forum goers. As others have said, this is actually one of the most convincing pieces of evidence for Dark Sun coming sooner rather than later.
Minotaurs, on the other hand? Yes, Dragonlance had one specific style of minotaur. They are, however, a long-standing mythological and D&D tradition that have existed for literally millennia before D&D was a vague, unrealized concept in the minds of a handful of nifty folks. Their inclusion doesn't conjure a specific setting in the same manner as kreen and half-giants due to this ages-old lore that most people have grown up with since childhood, whether familiar with D&D or no. Thus, it hasn't nearly the same weight of imagery as kreen and half-giants do in terms of bringing to mind a specific setting.
If anything, that is a BAD sign for Dark Sun, since it means portions of the setting could have been eaten by Eberron.
Ummm, no. One of Eberron's core themes is it that is SPECIFICALLY eats EVERYTHING from EVERY setting. It simply does so in an Eberron-esque manner, such as changing drow to scorpion-related jungle elves with half-scorpion hybrids instead of half-spider hybrids. Thus, including two very key races that made Dark Sun unique as a setting is indicative of their mechanical inclusion to the ruleset sooner, rather than later.
Much like the addition of goliaths, gnomes, half-orcs and devas to the FRPG. On the other hand, where are the irda, or tinker gnomes (extremely different from Feywild gnomes), or sea elves, or kender? Even ONE of these would be a much better sign for Dragonlance, as they are much more unique to that setting, and in the case of the tinker gnome and sea elf, likely to be very different from the core versions of those two races, both mechanically and thematically.
Besides, Dragonlance has been featured in a lot more books than Dark Sun, especially by name.
This point is actually a strike against Dragonlance. Remember, WotC said the 2010 setting was going to surprise many people. To folks on the die-hard gamer boards Dark Sun wouldn't be much of a surprise. Nor would Dragonlance, for that matter. However, to the mainstream bulk of D&D players, who do not visit these, the RPG.net, or ENWorld forums, Dragonlance or Greyhawk would, hands down, be the two unsurprising and expected setting. It isn't even a contest in that regard. Considering blurbs like the one mentioning that the 2010 setting will be a surprise are specifically marketed to the mainstream of their clientele, and not the die-hards, that is a huge strike against both Greyhawk and Dragonlance.
I am thinking that one race on the cover of the PHBs is a feature of the setting coming out.
Dragonborn might be Draconians with a feat for each different type.
And if they're mentioning Half-giants, I doubt Goliaths are the Half-Giants we thought they were going to be.
On the other hand, where are the irda, or tinker gnomes (extremely different from Feywild gnomes), or sea elves, or kender?
This. I've heard statements like this one to many times now (sorry to pick on your post Tectuktitlay). People keep mentioning these races as being some how special and unique to Dragonlance, but they aren't.
People rant on about how tinker gnomes and gully dwarves are somehow different from their standard cousins in generic D&D, well news flash, most of that is just culture. Faerun managed to give us a way to distingue moon elves, sun elves, and gold dwarfs without adding any new races. Heck, Eberron has dinosaur riding halfling savages and death worshiping elves who preserve their ancestors as undead overlords, yet both races still use the same base stats as their generic cousins.
As for kendar, they were specifically developed to help steer the Dragonlance setting away from Tolkienesk style fantasy, but again the differences are more cultural than anything else as they still fill the same basic role of small-folk. Furthermore, much as folks on these boards (and this thread in particular) like to think otherwise, they were really popular. So popular in fact that the modern D&D halfing more closely resembles a Dragonlance kendar than a Tolkien hobbit (notably +2 thievery and +5 save vs. fear, sounds like kendar to me).
You keep mentioning the Thri-Kreen, Half-giant blurb meaning DS will be sooner than later and I agree. 2011 is sooner than later when you consider 1 setting a year and figure 4E will have at least a 6-8 year run.
This. I've heard statements like this one to many times now (sorry to pick on your post Tectuktitlay). People keep mentioning these races as being some how special and unique to Dragonlance, but they aren't.
It's ok. My point wasn't that the races are completely unique to the setting. They are, however, defining. Some of them also do go beyond simple reflavoring of existing races.
Kender, admittedly, could easily be reflavored halflings. The latter even has fear resistance built into it. The klepto skillz could just be a racial feat. I will not dispute that kender are already covered adequately.
However, tinker gnomes would NOT have illusion powers inherent to them, nor would they have the Feywild keyword. They go beyond simple reflavoring. They'd likewise have stats making them better (or is it worse? :D) artificers.
Sea elves, likewise, need new mechanics to accommodate their abilities. You can't simply reflavor an elf and call it a sea elf. They absolutely must have water breathing, ala watersoul genasi, and so on. While not 100% unique to DL, conceptually, they are a core race of that setting, and thus are precisely the kind of race to be added to the Eberron Player's Guide. Unlike a reflavored halfling/kender, or yet another set of land-bound elven feats to distinguish the different breeds.
The fact that two very much core Dark Sun races got the Deva/Goliath treatment, and zero core Dragonlance races got said treatment, is indeed actual evidence of those two races making a mechanical appearance soon. ALL of the FRPG races given that treatment are now in-game, and it took less than one year. The EPG just came out, and it points to the mentioned races coming out in less than one year. Guaranteed? No. More likely than not? Yes.
Between the contest and 2010 being DL's 25th anniversary my guess it that it will be the 2010 setting with DS being 2011 on its 20th anniversary.
You keep mentioning the Thri-Kreen, Half-giant blurb meaning DS will be sooner than later and I agree. 2011 is sooner than later when you consider 1 setting a year and figure 4E will have at least a 6-8 year run.
Except the current trend we've seen would indicate that at least ONE Dragonlance-centric race would be included. Not two races core to an entirely different setting. Now, granted it is a limited pool of examples we've been provided so far. But a list of future races in the EPG is pretty interesting not only for what is present, but for what is NOT present.
Sigil is set to get expanded coverage in DMG2.
Yet another reason for me not to pick up DMG2. I really have no (or negative) interest in Planescape in any fashion. That entire setting had too much of the "OMG LOL N00BS UR BE PWND" vibe infusing every morsel of its being, and there are too many Planescape Avengers out there who will jack you up for not liking the "one true campaign setting, and everything your favorite setting has said about its cosmology is a dirty stinking lie". I know Dragonlance's and Dark Sun's independent cosmologies both fell to the slavering horde of the Great Wheel, so ya'all know whereof I speak.
Id love to see a spell jammer or plane scape setting, those sound interesting even though I never played in them. They seem to have more truly unique elements than DL. At least good unique elements. I dont consider the orders of sorcerey good since they were based on something I hate and despise ie alignment. I hate how everything relates to dragons its like what mortals do doesnt matter, unless your a friggin kender. Which brings me to small races. If I were playing in it id play a homicidal maniac who killed every gully dwarf,gnome and kender he saw because those races are so bad. I honestly dont see a way they can make it interesting enough for me to be interested in it.
*SNIP*]
You are so going on my list. I lurve you.
While it gets old reading people's unending hate rants about X, Y and Z, whats even more tiresome is seeing that specific comic strip once again on these forums.
Perhaps you can find another one germane to the conversation?
Perhaps you can find another one germane to the conversation?
I figure that with the amount of complaining on the internet, there has to be at least one other appropriate strip commenting on the phenomenon. ;)
I figure that with the amount of complaining on the internet, there has to be at least one other appropriate strip commenting on the phenomenon. ;)
But are there any BETTER ones?
Id love to see a spell jammer or plane scape setting, those sound interesting even though I never played in them. They seem to have more truly unique elements than DL. At least good unique elements. I dont consider the orders of sorcerey good since they were based on something I hate and despise ie alignment. I hate how everything relates to dragons its like what mortals do doesnt matter, unless your a friggin kender. Which brings me to small races. If I were playing in it id play a homicidal maniac who killed every gully dwarf,gnome and kender he saw because those races are so bad. I honestly dont see a way they can make it interesting enough for me to be interested in it.
Regarding Wilden:
Personally the more unique the races they come up with are the better. I like the races presented so far especially the new take on halflings and gnomes. So yes Im hoping the hobby moves as far from tolkien as is humanly possible while still being a fantasy setting. (for some reason Ive never really liked Tolkien cant put my finger on why).
On a side note this race fits perfectly in my world in several locations. It fits so well it may as well have been custom designed for my world.
1 phb a year is not that much. The powers books expand on whats there. Frankly the more pc options the better. And most normal critters would be so low level that they wouldnt be worth statting out. Or just reflavour some of the other ones.
So which is it?
Are more options better?
Are more options not better?
Or are more options only better when they suit your current argument?
Regarding Wilden:
So which is it?
Are more options better?
Are more options not better?
Or are more options only better when they suit your current argument?
DL would not add good options, in DL I expect to see more stupid alignment rules especially for wizards due to the towers of sorcery. To me dl was all about limiting what players could do, rather than expanding on what players could do. Every other setting adds new things, but in DL the races are so stero typical to be uninteresting. I personally feel that Darksun, planescape or a new setting would add more to 4th eddition than dragon lance would. Each of the other settings would add new races, classes and options. DL has no races that could not be reskinned from existing races.
So which is it?
Are more options better?
Are more options not better?
Or are more options only better when they suit your current argument?
Look what he said again. He said he wanted "more unique races." Not kender, gully dwarves, ect...
More options are better when they actually bring something to the game instead of repainting something that already exists. Really, the ability to say "my dwarf is smelly and dumb" is an option that already exists and Dragonlance wouldn't be enhancing the DnD suite of options by giving you the official go-ahead to play dwarves that don't bathe.
If it's either of those, pass.
PC options in the world of Krynn:
Knight of Solamnia, Neraka, Legion of Steel.
Draconians (Dragonborn) that blow up in an acid burst or turn to stone when they die.
Mystics that don't rely on the gods for any of their divine magic.
Wizards that have a structure and are dependent on the cycles of the moons, as well as non-conforming wizards/sorcerers who don't adhere to the principles of the Towers of Sorcery.
Kender (which regardless of anything said here are not necessarily halflings.)
Irda, who have no equivalent in any other D&D setting.
Intelligent ogre race that now have a greater place in the world. (Which setting allows you to play ogres?)
Sea elves.
Those are just some options/new races I was able to think of right off the top of my head, without even bothering to look further into it.
There are people who don't like Dragonlance as a setting. That's cool with me. But acting like it isn't a rich setting with just as many options as any other possible setting is disingenuous.
"Frankly the more pc options the better." -williamhm75
PC options in the world of Krynn:
Knight of Solamnia, Neraka, Legion of Steel.
Draconians (Dragonborn) that blow up in an acid burst or turn to stone when they die.
Mystics that don't rely on the gods for any of their divine magic.
Wizards that have a structure and are dependent on the cycles of the moons, as well as non-conforming wizards/sorcerers who don't adhere to the principles of the Towers of Sorcery.
Kender (which regardless of anything said here are not necessarily halflings.)
Irda, who have no equivalent in any other D&D setting.
Intelligent ogre race that now have a greater place in the world. (Which setting allows you to play ogres?)
Sea elves.
Those are just some options/new races I was able to think of right off the top of my head, without even bothering to look further into it.
There are people who don't like Dragonlance as a setting. That's cool with me. But acting like it isn't a rich setting with just as many options as any other possible setting is disingenuous.
mystics=shamans. Irda could be reflavoured devas easily enough. Ive already said why I hate the towers of sorcery concept due to it being based on alignment. Knights of solomnia just look like various paladin orders or orginizations of fighters dont need seperate classes for them.
Sea elves I doubt we would see these as a seperate race.
Drakonians are just dragon born.
Sorry no still not seeing anything as interesting as what a new setting could bring or what planescape, or Darksun could bring. Dragonlance's history to me is crap. Its a standard fantasy world that is smaller and less interesting than forgotten realms. With gods that interfere and effect the setting way too much, yes I know tha can be applied to Forgotten realms as well but of all the settings published so far Ebaron is my favorite. I just want something new and unique. Darksun, spell jammer, and plane scape are unique and would bring new things to the table. DL not so much. Especially if they do the towers of sorcery being based on alignment. No decent dm I have played with has ever used alignment for anything. Kender are more trouble than they are worth.
"Frankly the more pc options the better." -williamhm75
PC options in the world of Krynn:
Knight of Solamnia, Neraka, Legion of Steel.
Draconians (Dragonborn) that blow up in an acid burst or turn to stone when they die.
Mystics that don't rely on the gods for any of their divine magic.
Wizards that have a structure and are dependent on the cycles of the moons, as well as non-conforming wizards/sorcerers who don't adhere to the principles of the Towers of Sorcery.
Kender (which regardless of anything said here are not necessarily halflings.)
Irda, who have no equivalent in any other D&D setting.
Intelligent ogre race that now have a greater place in the world. (Which setting allows you to play ogres?)
Sea elves.
Those are just some options/new races I was able to think of right off the top of my head, without even bothering to look further into it.
There are people who don't like Dragonlance as a setting. That's cool with me. But acting like it isn't a rich setting with just as many options as any other possible setting is disingenuous.
.....Wow that just made me less interested in Dragonlance then I already was. To cover each individual point:
-I admit I admit next to nothing about these, but Knights of Solamnia just make me think of Baldur's Gate 2(they were in a quest) so I think I'll skip this point
-Dragonborns with a fluff change that would never get passed on to PCs
-You mean like the wizard, bard, artificer, shaman, druid, barbarian, etc
-Cosmic Sorcerer followed by.....ever mage outside of Dragonlance?
-You are right they aren't haflings, they are annoying haflings
-I dunno these guys don't really excite me....then again they don't make me hate them by their very existence like the kender.....I guess that qualifies as neutral?
-Eberron
-I don't see the draw of sea elves....and FR
To me, Eberron = ultrasuckdom. Trains in D&D? It's bad enough I have to ride them every day to work. Warforged? No thanks, I like to keep my cyborgs in Star Wars.
I have no desire, from what I've seen said, to play Dark Sun either. Planescape is so-so. Sigil will be in DMG2, so what else beyond MotP stuff is really necessary?
Dragonlance fans can list reason after reason why the setting appeals to them, but I see no supporting evidence for other competing settings. So sell me on something else. Tell me what makes the setting you want so worthwhile. I'm willing to listen.
No decent dm I have played with has ever used alignment for anything.
I suppose the game has adapted as time has passed, and the de-emphasis of it in 4E reflects the almost optional use of alignment.
However, alignment can be used effectively, especially when role-playing. It may be a "limit," but at the same time it is a challenge to be the type of character you describe. If you don't want to use them, I suppose that is fine, but I have always equated them to helping define your character inasmuch as roles are defined in a play or movie. Trying to stay within the alignment isn't a restriction as much as a challenge you place on yourself to play that type of character. If you don't like it, switch alignments or make a new PC.
In previous editions, there were mechanics to force you into following alignment. In 4E, I think it is a useful roleplaying too for yourself, and, ultimately, the DM.
Okay, sell me on a different setting then.
To me, Eberron = ultrasuckdom. Trains in D&D? It's bad enough I have to ride them every day to work. Warforged? No thanks, I like to keep my cyborgs in Star Wars.
I have no desire, from what I've seen said, to play Dark Sun either. Planescape is so-so. Sigil will be in DMG2, so what else beyond MotP stuff is really necessary?
Dragonlance fans can list reason after reason why the setting appeals to them, but I see no supporting evidence for other competing settings. So sell me on something else. Tell me what makes the setting you want so worthwhile. I'm willing to listen.
For Ebaron its the whole renassance feel to it. I love trains in dnd its like they actually thought about how magic would effect the world. I like the new take on elven culture. And even how they have goblins having an entire kingdom. Its the fact that the world feels really fantastic, and right and wrong are more ambigious. The good guys/bad guys are less distinct and discernable. I also like how the planes intereact with Ebaron. To me there is just more mystery in Ebaron then there is in DL. More moral quandrums, and by far less interfernece from retarded dieties. What you do as a peson matters, your choices actually matter rather than in Dragonlance where I get the feeling whatever the players do is completley irelevant.
As for a new setting Id like to see something completley steam punk with guns and everything, or a water world type setting with lots of islands, and exploration. A world where the characters can be great explorers as well as heroes. I dont get that feeling from DL at all.
I suppose the game has adapted as time has passed, and the de-emphasis of it in 4E reflects the almost optional use of alignment.
However, alignment can be used effectively, especially when role-playing. It may be a "limit," but at the same time it is a challenge to be the type of character you describe. If you don't want to use them, I suppose that is fine, but I have always equated them to helping define your character inasmuch as roles are defined in a play or movie. Trying to stay within the alignment isn't a restriction as much as a challenge you place on yourself to play that type of character. If you don't like it, switch alignments or make a new PC.
In previous editions, there were mechanics to force you into following alignment. In 4E, I think it is a useful roleplaying too for yourself, and, ultimately, the DM.
Yeah I always hated those rules let me play my character how he would act without regard to alignment. Our dm spent a long time removing every alignment based spell and changing alignment based effects in 3e. When I played a game with a new dm that had those effects I hated it.
To me DL is too black and white there isnt any mystery involved you know who the good guys and bad guys are automatically. Its far too simplistic in its world view towards good and evil.
Dragonlance fans can list reason after reason why the setting appeals to them, but I see no supporting evidence for other competing settings. So sell me on something else. Tell me what makes the setting you want so worthwhile. I'm willing to listen.
They sure can but if it looks like the list you posted it seems mostly redundant anyway.
You don't see other "evidence" because you don't want to and don't care, you want your setting to be the one. Just like everyone else does and why they won't listen or see any "evidence" to the contrary.
The setting's job is to convince people it's interesting. Certainly no forum goers will have the ability to stir up as much interest in a setting as a set of well written guides could do.
In any event dragonlance seems very generic high-fantasy to me and that doesn't interest me. There is a generic setting already (FR) and two high fantasy settings already (FR & Ebberron) so a change of pace would be nice. A grittier setting would be what I want to see, something swords & sorcery style. Dark Sun fits the bill sort of and is at least a change of pace. Ideally it would be something new, but I don't see that happening yet,
DL would not add good options, in DL I expect to see more stupid alignment rules especially for wizards due to the towers of sorcery. To me dl was all about limiting what players could do, rather than expanding on what players could do. Every other setting adds new things, but in DL the races are so stero typical to be uninteresting. I personally feel that Darksun, planescape or a new setting would add more to 4th eddition than dragon lance would. Each of the other settings would add new races, classes and options. DL has no races that could not be reskinned from existing races.
Um.... wrong.
I hate saying that but it's true.
Dragonlance didn't set out to limit PCs with bad options by adding strange alignment rules, weapon restrictions and the like. Those things were already in AD&D 1st Edition, Dragonlance just explained the arbitrary quirkiness and made it part of the setting instead of letting it remain Gygax's arbitrary quirkiness.
For example, instead of neutral and the other alignments being strange and confusing elements neutrality and balance were a vital and important part of the setting. And instead of being some inconsequential part of your character you forgot about after creation, your moral beliefs influenced where you stood in the world.
It will still be the Wizbro 4e team writing the books with their standard design tenants. Alignment is a great THEME for Dragonlance. Like heroic adventure is for Eberron.
What does Dragonlance add to the world? Quite abit. But much of what made it special and original been stolen by Core 4e. Like kender and draconians.
It took the assumed elements of a classic D&D world (mage guild, dragons, paladin order, clerical orders, ruins) and gave them all a new and interesting twist and a solid reason for being.
Even the things that seem stereotypical now (a half-elf torn between two worlds and hated in both) were new and interesting when Dragonlance started.
Is the world for everyone? Not really.
I find Dark Sun basically interesting but limiting as hell. I could never set a campaign then and would find even a short adventure limiting. And Greyhawk is just so bland and cliche it makes my brain hurt...
But if WotC wanted to please everyone with their campaign publication books they'd never release any.
As for reskinning races, you could probably make that comment about Dark Sun as well. Half-giants = goliaths, mul = half-orc. Excluding the thri-kreen, but they could easily at that psionic insect race from the 3.5 Psionic Handbook to the PHB3 and reskin that.
And there's no real classes that are different in Dark Sun.
There are no organizations or groups to fill a Player's Guide.
But that doesn't mean they're going to, and that doesn't mean half-giants can't have a different and interesting place in the world alongside goliaths, half-orcs, and dragonborn.
For Ebaron its the whole renassance feel to it. I love trains in dnd its like they actually thought about how magic would effect the world. I like the new take on elven culture. And even how they have goblins having an entire kingdom. Its the fact that the world feels really fantastic, and right and wrong are more ambigious. The good guys/bad guys are less distinct and discernable. I also like how the planes intereact with Ebaron. To me there is just more mystery in Ebaron then there is in DL. More moral quandrums, and by far less interfernece from retarded dieties. What you do as a peson matters, your choices actually matter rather than in Dragonlance where I get the feeling whatever the players do is completley irelevant.
As for a new setting Id like to see something completley steam punk with guns and everything, or a water world type setting with lots of islands, and exploration. A world where the characters can be great explorers as well as heroes. I dont get that feeling from DL at all.
DL doesn't feel fantastic? I mean, you admit it's high-fantasy.
The Knights of Neraka are not "evil" in the sense of "enslave, kill, destroy." They're simply conquerors. The moral ambiguity exists in Dragonlance if you look even cursory at the setting.
I think you overstate your own opinion that the deities in DL interfere with the entire setting. What characters do and decide is the entire point of Dragonlance.
If I ever see guns make it into core D&D I'll quit the game altogether. To me, the concept of steam punk is silly. A water world setting would be quite uninteresting as well. How long can you go on fighting the same sea creatures? Anything else it could possibly contain would be the same as any other fantasy world, just underwater.
If you don't get the feeling that characters can be great explorers in Dragonlance, you probably haven't had a DM that knew enough about the entire world. There are at least 3 continents on Krynn, all of them are vastly different (to the point that even the same deities have completely different names and have hatched completely different plots on different continents.)
They sure can but if it looks like the list you posted it seems mostly redundant anyway.
You don't see other "evidence" because you don't want to and don't care, you want your setting to be the one. Just like everyone else does and why they won't listen or see any "evidence" to the contrary.
The setting's job is to convince people it's interesting. Certainly no forum goers will have the ability to stir up as much interest in a setting as a set of well written guides could do.
In any event dragonlance seems very generic high-fantasy to me and that doesn't interest me. There is a generic setting already (FR) and two high fantasy settings already (FR & Ebberron) so a change of pace would be nice. A grittier setting would be what I want to see, something swords & sorcery style. Dark Sun fits the bill sort of and is at least a change of pace. Ideally it would be something new, but I don't see that happening yet,
So again, sell me on Dark Sun. Tell me what it contains that makes it a great setting. I'm not ignoring anything. Unlike many on these forums, I go into conversations with a completely open mind.
so on and so on and scoooby dooby doo
couldnt tell any much on darksun
no gods
warped magic
psychics
cannibal halflings
more or less wastleland
dragonlance
gods
two types of arcane magic
a goodknight faction
a nuetral knight faction
an evil knight faction
not a wasteland.
well I have to go to class now so
MWP did some of the best fluff I've seen and did an excellent job of remaining true to the past, the novels, and fixing problems with continuity. But their rules were average at best. I shudder at what they'd do with the 4e and its 110% balance.
Oh see now you've gone and made me tear up.
As for Dragonlance being the setting in 2010? All of the evidence so far is indicative of the fact that 2009 is the 25th anniversary of the setting. I don't think it's at all indicative of WotC putting it out as the campaign setting for 2010. But hey, you never know.
Cheers,
Cam
DL doesn't feel fantastic? I mean, you admit it's high-fantasy.
The Knights of Neraka are not "evil" in the sense of "enslave, kill, destroy." They're simply conquerors. The moral ambiguity exists in Dragonlance if you look even cursory at the setting.
ooh a group of evil knights bent on conquest that hasnt been done before.
I think you overstate your own opinion that the deities in DL interfere with the entire setting. What characters do and decide is the entire point of Dragonlance.
Uh no the gods are responsible for everything. Every evil plot is one of tahkissis or some other evil god.
If I ever see guns make it into core D&D I'll quit the game altogether. To me, the concept of steam punk is silly. A water world setting would be quite uninteresting as well. How long can you go on fighting the same sea creatures? Anything else it could possibly contain would be the same as any other fantasy world, just underwater.
A world with lots of islands to explore? Where most of the world isnt known with pirates and other groups vying for control of major resources and trade routes sounds interesting to me at least. As for fire arms I think it would be cool guns against magic. I just love steam punk though.
If you don't get the feeling that characters can be great explorers in Dragonlance, you probably haven't had a DM that knew enough about the entire world. There are at least 3 continents on Krynn, all of them are vastly different (to the point that even the same deities have completely different names and have hatched completely different plots on different continents.)
There is only one continent thats really explained and examined though and none of the books mention travel between them which is in my opinion idiotic.
So again, sell me on Dark Sun. Tell me what it contains that makes it a great setting. I'm not ignoring anything. Unlike many on these forums, I go into conversations with a completely open mind.
A dark and grim setting. A world thats been almost destroyed but has a slim hope of recovery. A setting without lots of high level npcs.
A world without gods. Where cities are few and far between and even the so called civlized cities have dangers for the adventurers. To me it has a much different feel to it. A more alien and darker feel. One where the characters are central to whats hapening. I dont get that feel from DL. In DL I always have the feeling that it doesnt matter what the characters do, only what the gods and dragons do. With Darksun its a setting where the characters struggle just to survive.
As for Dark Sun, a PoL setting without gods and without high-level characters is completely unappealing to me. I like epic storylines. (I'm not a big fan of the PoL thing either, but whatever.)
If Dark Sun is the setting, Wizards will simply get as much revenue from me as they will from Eberron. No biggie. I've got enough material in Forgotten Realms for now. I'm glad there will be others who are happy with the decision. I just hope they stop clogging the magazines with material that is irrelevant to people uninterested in the coming setting.
As for guns and steampunk in D&D, no way, no how, no thanks. Different islands is an interesting concept I could work with though; if each island was a completely different "setting" than the others. Something along the lines of 10 or so islands, all the size of Australia, where one island was a prehistoric realm of dinosaurs, one a haven for demons or devils, one a metropolitan core-race series of kingdoms, one an elven paradise, etc. That would have potential. I'm not too keen on pirates though. Once in a while would be okay, but not the whole setting.
Actually, if I hadn't already come up with the design for my coming campaign I'd probably use that as a jump-off point.
So again, sell me on Dark Sun. Tell me what it contains that makes it a great setting. I'm not ignoring anything. Unlike many on these forums, I go into conversations with a completely open mind.
I'm not selling anything, see the part where I said a good setting sells itself. If the setting doesn't sell itself to you than it's not for you. DL sold itself to you and that's great, but it doesn't appeal to me so I want something else. All I said is that I would prefer DS to DL I'm not a hardcore DS fanboy or anything but of all the possibilities other than a new setting(which would be awesome, but seems unlikely) it appeals to me the most.
Something along the lines of 10 or so islands, all the size of Australia...
Do you realize how big Australia is? lol That would be the most massive campaign setting evar.
As for Dark Sun, one of the best things I found about it was the tendancy for the PC's to be the only likely source of good or freedom or whatever they decide to stand for in a dying, mostly desert world where even where there are cities, the cities are run by the evil Dragon Kings and other such evil super powerfull tyrants.
God, I Hope Not.
Most of that list is just fluff, not real PC options. The only thing there that really adds something to the game as a whole is the Irda.
And sea elves (which, sorry to others, but you can't just reskin an elf or eladrin and call them a sea elf...hello, water breathing? It is a more significant difference than drow from elves, IMHO). However...umm...so not unique to DL, just most common in DL. Ergo, they can be added pre or post-DL extremely easily.
Ok, I'm confused Jester, if I remember correctly the Thi-kreen were in the 3.5 Expanded Psionics Handbook so why would they need to be reskinned once they are updated to 4th edition?
As for Dark Sun, one of the best things I found about it was the tendancy for the PC's to be the only likely source of good or freedom or whatever they decide to stand for in a dying, mostly desert world where even where there are cities, the cities are run by the evil Dragon Kings and other such evil super powerfull tyrants.
Exactly what I liked about it. What the pcs did mattered to the fate of the world. The pcs are often the only adventurers which is an idea that apeals to me a lot.
And sea elves (which, sorry to others, but you can't just reskin an elf or eladrin and call them a sea elf...hello, water breathing? It is a more significant difference than drow from elves, IMHO). However...umm...so not unique to DL, just most common in DL. Ergo, they can be added pre or post-DL extremely easily.
I can't image WotC ever making sea elf PCs. First, they said they didnt want to have the baskin robbins 31 flavors of elves and we already have 3. Second, being a waterbreathing ocean-bound race makes them incredibly niche, especially in a system that isn't really designed to handle 3D underwater adventures or fully underwater campaigns. With genasi its really only one optional aspect of a race which isn't usually water-bound but with sea elves its an aspect of the entire race.
If WoTC ever makes a aquatic-based race I hope they go for something more unique and not just a "sea-elf". There is dozens, hundreds of different intelligent and humanoid aquatic beings from folklore and mythology they could use as well as just using their own imagination and making something up. Not to mention with mythological ones they can turn it on its head too to make it even more unique.
Selkies. Besides I really dont want to see more variations of elves. 3 elven races is more than enough.
Do you realize how big Australia is? lol That would be the most massive campaign setting evar.
I'm aware of the size of Australia. That's why there would be in the neighborhood of 10 of them. That would be enough to cover a pretty good area of a planet the size of Earth, with good distance between them so that you'd have very homogenous demographics on each continent.
Ok, I'm confused Jester, if I remember correctly the Thi-kreen were in the 3.5 Expanded Psionics Handbook so why would they need to be reskinned once they are updated to 4th edition?
As for Dark Sun, one of the best things I found about it was the tendancy for the PC's to be the only likely source of good or freedom or whatever they decide to stand for in a dying, mostly desert world where even where there are cities, the cities are run by the evil Dragon Kings and other such evil super powerfull tyrants.
So Dragons control large portions of the plot in Dark Sun? Or are Dragon Kings other races? (I honestly don't know.)
Ignoring everything except the Topic Title:
God, I Hope Not.
There's a "God, I Hope Not" for everything, you know.
Cheers,
Cam
I'm aware of the size of Australia. That's why there would be in the neighborhood of 10 of them. That would be enough to cover a pretty good area of a planet the size of Earth, with good distance between them so that you'd have very homogenous demographics on each continent.
So Dragons control large portions of the plot in Dark Sun? Or are Dragon Kings other races? (I honestly don't know.)
Dragon kings are sorcerer/psions who steal power from the land to become more powerful and take the shape of dragons. Later on in Darksun most of the dragon kings are dead. Except for a few, and they are very cruel rulers.
mystics=shamans.
No. Mystics are Divine. They have absolutely nothing to do with Primal spirits. At all.
Irda could be reflavoured devas easily enough.
Wow, just ... wow. Now I know how Doctorhook felt about the Deva = Kalashtar arguments. That is almost as ludicrous as thax's Dragonborn = Half-orc craziness. Hell, that's like saying Eladrin are just reflavored Orcs!
Sorry no still not seeing anything as interesting as what a new setting could bring or what planescape, or Darksun could bring. Dragonlance's history to me is crap. Its a standard fantasy world that is smaller and less interesting than forgotten realms. With gods that interfere and effect the setting way too much, yes I know tha can be applied to Forgotten realms as well but of all the settings published so far Ebaron is my favorite. I just want something new and unique. Darksun, spell jammer, and plane scape are unique and would bring new things to the table. DL not so much. Especially if they do the towers of sorcery being based on alignment. No decent dm I have played with has ever used alignment for anything. Kender are more trouble than they are worth.
We get it. You hate Dragonlance. You can't go one post without reminding us of that fact. Repeatedly. In each post. You're a broken record asking for an ulcer to develop. It ain't healthy.
There's a "God, I Hope Not" for everything, you know.
Cheers,
Cam
That maybe so Cam but im sorry im with the earlier post on this one. I started playing D&D with Dragonlance waaayyy back in history e.g. early 80s and although it was fun at the time i really do think there are better settings that could be brought back first.
Most of that list is just fluff, not real PC options. The only thing there that really adds something to the game as a whole is the Irda.
Which is about the only reason I would get the DLPG. Irda are just that awesome.
I'm aware of the size of Australia. That's why there would be in the neighborhood of 10 of them. That would be enough to cover a pretty good area of a planet the size of Earth, with good distance between them so that you'd have very homogenous demographics on each continent.
That would still be larger than any other setting. Islands more along the lines of Cuba, Haiti, the Hawaiian islands, Sicily, Cyprus, etc. would be better.
So Dragons control large portions of the plot in Dark Sun? Or are Dragon Kings other races? (I honestly don't know.)
They're former humans that carried out rituals that are a mix of magic and psionics to permanently change into dragons so they could rule the world, though the process is slow - only one ever made it to the full dragon form after several thousand years, the rest look anywhere from a human with scales to sorta Dragonborn-like.
Okay, as inspired by the thread about the "Stupidest Looking Monster", and dedicated in a jesting manner at those of you who complain that the current run of artwork isn't done by Rembrandt but looks more like Picasso on crack, or those who don't like that WotC recycles old artwork from previous editions, i.e., 3x, be glad they're only going back one and a half editions.
Here are some illustrations from the 1974 Gygax-Arneson set. Can you identify them?
*Snip*
Anyway, I wasn't saying Wizards should do it, I was saying I'd give it a whirl if I weren't already committed to my current design.
As for the Dragon Kings, cool. That's exactly the type of information I was looking for when I was asking people to "sell me" on Dark Sun. I don't know if I'd find those entities appealing, but it is something that distinguishes DS from another setting.
Which is about the only reason I would get the DLPG. Irda are just that awesome.
Of all the current 4e races, only the Changeling even remotely resembles the Irda, and that is only because they both can shapeshift into humanoids. Otherwise no other race even comes close. Irda would almost have to be in the DLPG. If they do a setting reboot to the War of the Lance, there would be a lot of them (having not been practically wiped out in the Chaos War).
It wouldn't surprise me too much if this is the setting announced in 2010.
But I am hoping for Dark Sun.
*snip*
The fail in this post is palpable.
That would still be larger than any other setting. Islands more along the lines of Cuba, Haiti, the Hawaiian islands, Sicily, Cyprus, etc. would be better.
10 islands the size of Haiti would be a really small setting.
Australia times 10 isn't that huge compared to other settings.
Taking Eberron as an example... Khorvaire alone is nearly 5000 miles long on its West-East axis and around 2500 miles long on North-South axis.
If I'm conservative while accounting for corners and rough edges, I still get a total area of 9 to 10 millions square miles for Khorvaire. Australia being a little under 3 millions, Khorvaire alone has over 3 Australias in it. Now add Argonessen, Sarlona, Xen'Drik, the Frostfell... I'm pretty sure it'll amount to more than 30 millions square miles (10 Australias) or at least, damn close.
Plus, that's only "ground level", underground terrain is unaccounted for.
All arcane magic in Dark Sun was powered by life forces, Preservers tended to try to spread out the power drain over the largest possible area so as not to kill anything and also tried to restrict their taking to plant life.
Defilers tended to take life energy from whatever was closest to them physically and tended to drain things dry although again it was easiest to take from plants and defilers were all about shortcuts to power without worrying about the consequences.
Dragon Kings were the ultimate defilers and pretty much concidered everything in their cities to be theirs to be used however they felt like using them so the idea of committing large scale mass slaughters to punctuate their transformation stages in the rituals followed by lulls to let the population replenish and for them to prepare for the next stage was completely in their character.
Clerical magic on the other hand was most comonly granted by the Dragon Kings to their Templars who were specifically their clerics/beaurocrates (can't remember how to spell that). They essentially were the structure that the Dragon Kings used to run the day to day affairs of their tyrranies and they granted them priestly powers to help them (although pretty much everyone in Dark Sun also had one kind of psionic ability or another as well).
The other clerics in Dark Sun were devotees of the individual elements and I think there were also some Druids that were devoted to the preservation of certain sites on the world.
Anyways, I hope that this helps and if anyone sees any errors in my descriptions here please correct me as it has been a long time since I have read the books and am doing this completely by my sometimes faulty memory.
Also it was the only setting where psionics played a major role. In a lot of places psionics replaced magic due to the high cost magic had.
But Psionics are nothing like they used to be in 1st/2nd or 3rd edition. It is just another power source now.
But Psionics are nothing like they used to be in 1st/2nd or 3rd edition. It is just another power source now.
Really? Can you share your insider info that proves they are different in 4e? I'd like to see how they are just another power source.
Really? Can you share your insider info that proves they are different in 4e? I'd like to see how they are just another power source.
Look at the preview for the monk. There are no special rules for psionics, just the normal sets of powers and abilities that every calss has. I.e. just another power source.
In short, there is nothing to indicate that they are treating psionics any differently than any other power source.
What does it matter to anything if psionics is different or "just another power source?" What exactly is the point being made?
I think the problem with psionics in previous games WAS that they were treated differently from everything else. They were a tacked on system that the 'normal' rules weren't really designed to accomodate. By making them 'just another power source', that makes them more palatable to those DMs who never allowed them in the past. In theory anyway.
A world with lots of islands to explore? Where most of the world isnt known with pirates and other groups vying for control of major resources and trade routes sounds interesting to me at least. As for fire arms I think it would be cool guns against magic.
That is the Red Steel setting.
Of all the current 4e races, only the Changeling even remotely resembles the Irda, and that is only because they both can shapeshift into humanoids. Otherwise no other race even comes close. Irda would almost have to be in the DLPG. If they do a setting reboot to the War of the Lance, there would be a lot of them (having not been practically wiped out in the Chaos War).
You know, it probably seems a small thing to most people, but one of the biggest problems I had with the Chaos War & later was the seemingly arbitrary wiping out of the Irda. When DL gets a 4e update, I definitely hope it gets rebooted/retconned/whatever's necessary so that that event never happened.
Really? Can you share your insider info that proves they are different in 4e? I'd like to see how they are just another power source.
The monk is now a Psionic class. The preview of the monk is available to D+D Insiders.
However, board policy prevents me from sharing an entire PDF of Insider info, so why don't you just ask questions, and people will answer.
Look at the preview for the monk. There are no special rules for psionics, just the normal sets of powers and abilities that every calss has. I.e. just another power source.
In short, there is nothing to indicate that they are treating psionics any differently than any other power source.
I never said they should be treated differently. Im just saying darksun was the first setting to really incorparate them I personally love psionics and cant wait to see the new psionic classes now that they use the same power system everyone else does. In fact other than Ebaron darksun is the only setting to really incorporate them at a base level. Its just anothe unique aspect of Dark sun along with canabalistic halflings horse trading, raiding elves and all the other grim gritty stuff.
Oh darksun also had no metal.
I think the problem with psionics in previous games WAS that they were treated differently from everything else. They were a tacked on system that the 'normal' rules weren't really designed to accomodate. By making them 'just another power source', that makes them more palatable to those DMs who never allowed them in the past. In theory anyway.
I understand that, i just dont understand the point being made within the context of this thread. Someone said something about psionics being more pervasive in DS than magic and then someone else brought up psionics being "just another power source" as if it was some kind of counter-argument. The actual point being made was unclear.
That is the Red Steel setting.
Not familiar with that one at all in fact i have never even heard of it. Not saying it doesnt exist or trying to ridicule you. I just have never heard of it.
Exactly. They are no longer so obscenely overpowered that they were banned in anything I ever ran.
Maybe that was the reason I hated DS so damned much. Doesn't matter, I still won't buy it.
While he's right, Psionics will just be another power source, I have to say - what are you on about? Psionics were far from over powered, especially in 3e. In 3e/3.5e, Psionics were nowhere near as overpowered as regular magic. At all.
Not familiar with that one at all in fact i have never even heard of it. Not saying it doesnt exist or trying to ridicule you. I just have never heard of it.
Red Steel was a Mystara sub-setting, kinda loosely French/Spanish swashbuckling & imperialism with magic mutants.
Not familiar with that one at all in fact i have never even heard of it. Not saying it doesnt exist or trying to ridicule you. I just have never heard of it.
It's available for free on the old edition's download page. It's basically Pirates of the Spanish Main meet D&D.
It's available for free on the old edition's download page. It's basically Pirates of the Spanish Main meet D&D.
Now thats a setting id like to see for 4e especially if they add black powder weapons to it in small amounts at least to spice it up. A few cannons never hurt anything.
I never said they should be treated differently. Im just saying darksun was the first setting to really incorparate them I personally love psionics and cant wait to see the new psionic classes now that they use the same power system everyone else does. In fact other than Ebaron darksun is the only setting to really incorporate them at a base level. Its just anothe unique aspect of Dark sun along with canabalistic halflings horse trading, raiding elves and all the other grim gritty stuff.
Oh darksun also had no metal.
All of which makes Dark Sun unique but is also a giant, GIANT hurdle. You need to re-learn EVERYTHING about each and every race.
This would be doubly true for the many races in PHB 1-3 not previously in Dark Sun (dragonborn, minotaurs, wilden, shifters, warforged, genasi, goliaths, deva, etc). Players will have to buy the books (probably something WotC really wants) and have their DM sit down and explain. They can't just rely on the PHB descriptions because halflings are feral cannibals, elves are tall sprinters, etc.
Dark Sun reads like someone sat down and tried to think of something different for each and every element of D&D.
Like a big ol' checklist.
Limited magic? Check. Wasteland? Check. Variations on the races (elves out of forests, dwarves out of mountains, halflings out of Shire)? Check.
It's like D&D for people who hate everything about D&D except the rules.
There's also the problem with clerics and the entire divine power source. It's easy enough to change with elemental Channel Divinity feats, but that overlaps with the elemental power source.
Alot of the basic assumptions of 4e don't mesh well with Dark Sun. Like primordials & gods, planar travel at epic levels, regular magic items, plate and other metal armours, etc.
When they actually do the setting something will have to give and change, and you can bet it won't be the setting.
What has this to do with Dragonlance? Pretty much nothing. This thread has devolved into a big dispute over preference. We might as well be arguing about the best iced cream flavour; no one is going to budge on their opinion. Strictly a matter of taste, preference, and opinion.
Oh, and Dragonlance = vanilla bean (pretty much vanilla with a tiny tweak) while Dark Sun is, I dunno, Ben & Jerry Chunky Monkey.
All of which makes Dark Sun unique but is also a giant, GIANT hurdle. You need to re-learn EVERYTHING about each and every race.
This would be doubly true for the many races in PHB 1-3 not previously in Dark Sun (dragonborn, minotaurs, wilden, shifters, warforged, genasi, goliaths, deva, etc). Players will have to buy the books (probably something WotC really wants) and have their DM sit down and explain. They can't just rely on the PHB descriptions because halflings are feral cannibals, elves are tall sprinters, etc.
Eberron puts a fairly big twist on both halfings and elves. The gnomes of Eberron were reasonably typical back in 3.5, but that makes them rather different than the default 4E fluff. Even the dwarves of Eberron have their own twist (they still live in the mountains but the more renown as bankers than miners).
People are pretty good at adapting to the races having different cultures in different settings (for some folks those difference are even the key reason t seek out new settings). Each player's guide will has thus far has pointed out the key difference, and this trend will likely continue in future player's guides.
It's like D&D for people who hate everything about D&D except the rules.
Wow. I think you've totally pegged exactly why i love Dark Sun.
You know, it probably seems a small thing to most people, but one of the biggest problems I had with the Chaos War & later was the seemingly arbitrary wiping out of the Irda. When DL gets a 4e update, I definitely hope it gets rebooted/retconned/whatever's necessary so that that event never happened.
I always found the Irda the least interesting of the Dragonlance races. I mean, they're essentially wandering solitary ciphers with awesome magical talent, with all the beauty of elves and none of the frailty. There weren't supposed to be very many of them to begin with, and fans just seemed to glom to them so that eventually every other DL party has an Irda in it.
In my unofficial 4E conversion of Irda, though, I pretty much made them a lot like changelings, so there's that.
Cheers,
Cam
Eberron puts a fairly big twist on both halfings and elves. The gnomes of Eberron were reasonably typical back in 3.5, but that makes them rather different than the default 4E fluff. Even the dwarves of Eberron have their own twist (they still live in the mountains but the more renown as bankers than miners).
People are pretty good at adapting to the races having different cultures in different settings (for some folks those difference are even the key reason t seek out new settings). Each player's guide will has thus far has pointed out the key difference, and this trend will likely continue in future player's guides.
The Eberron Halflings seem much closer to 4e halflings at least (compared to older edition ho---halflings).
The elves have been given some flavor but they're still forest dwellers just with a semi-primitive flavor of ancestor worship. Dwarves still value money and precious metals, just in a different way.
In many ways the Eberron changes were minor cultural shifts rather than drastic changes (both culturally and physiologically) like Dark Sun did. I have nothing against Dark Sun and I think they could make it fit 4e though it won't be quite the same Dark Sun as previously. Of course none of the campaign settings have been quite the same as previous editions anyway.
The elves have been given some flavor but they're still forest dwellers just with a semi-primitive flavor of ancestor worship. Dwarves still value money and precious metals, just in a different way.
I admitted that the dwarves were rather sameish. The elves of Eberron, however, really aren't forest dwellers. Their cultures are also radically different from the elves of any other setting I'm familiar with (though semi-genric elves can probably be fund living in the Eldeen Reaches). To one unfamiliar with the setting certainly they'd be hard to even identify as elves, given there rather distinctive look.
The Eberron Halflings seem much closer to 4e halflings at least (compared to older edition ho---halflings).
Sorry, I don't really see the connection between the simple, yet mildly adventurous, riverfolk of the PHB and the dinosaur riding near-savages of the Talenta plains.
My love for Krynn is based on the first nine novels published in that world, and it's solidified by my time playing games such as Death Knights of Krynn and Dark Queen of Krynn. I can't think of the Forgotten Realms without thinking of the Time of Troubles trilogy or the Salvatore novels, and I've had some really epic good times with games like Eye of the Beholder or Baldur's Gate.
Dark Sun had a couple of pretty decent computer games, but I never warmed to the Prism Pentad. Likewise, any love I have for Planescape is almost entirely founded on the excellence of Torment.
If there are already some first class Eberron books out there, point me at them. And let's get someone developing a really good Eberron CRPG.
If there are already some first class Eberron books out there, point me at them. And let's get someone developing a really good Eberron CRPG.
A simple search for "eberron novels" over on Amazon.com should provide a sizable list of such. I can't really recommend any (I'm not much for novels personally), but each should have a few reviews. If you looking for direct recommendations from fellow RPGers the Eberron message boards would be a good place to ask.
As for video games. Two of the major D&D related games released during 3.5 were set in Eberron. One was an MMO and the other a RTS, unfortunately the setting details were mostly window dressing and neither really captured the spirit of the world of Eberron. A nice Neverwinter Nights style RPG set in Eberron is something I'd still love to see.
As for video games. Two of the major D&D related games released during 3.5 were set in Eberron. One was an MMO and the other a RTS, unfortunately the setting details were mostly window dressing and neither really captured the spirit of the world of Eberron. A nice Neverwinter Nights style RPG set in Eberron is something I'd still love to see.
DDO was set in Eberron? How did I totally miss that information? I assumed the setting was as generic as everything else about that product. Whatever the RTS is that you're talking about, I appear to be entirely unaware of it.
So I guess let me amend that to some good computer games. Forgotten Realms had Hillsfar but I don't think anyone bought into the setting on the basis of that game.
Whatever the RTS is that you're talking about, I appear to be entirely unaware of it.
Dungeons & Dragons: Dragonshard
I don't have any proof, but I'm sure of it.
What about a Crossover? Like Norrath? That's not WoW-like in the slightest.
now for DS, Denning created the setting, if you're familiar with his fiction, that says it all
if it's Dragonlance, wotc will show they are incapable of creating new brands, really creative, I'm sick of such lame recycling
now for DS, Denning created the setting, if you're familiar with his fiction, that says it all
It makes more fiscal sense to release settings that still have large fan followings before stepping into something totally brand new.
And Darksun would not be considered a new brand and would be a recycled setting as well.
I admitted that the dwarves were rather sameish. The elves of Eberron, however, really aren't forest dwellers. Their cultures are also radically different from the elves of any other setting I'm familiar with (though semi-genric elves can probably be fund living in the Eldeen Reaches). To one unfamiliar with the setting certainly they'd be hard to even identify as elves, given there rather distinctive look.
Sorry, I don't really see the connection between the simple, yet mildly adventurous, riverfolk of the PHB and the dinosaur riding near-savages of the Talenta plains.
Don't recall that picture in the EPG. My knowledge of Eberron is strictly what's in the EPG and they make it sound like the elves are still mostly forest dwelling and that the halflings are nomadic people like in the 4e PHB just more plains oriented than river/bayou setting. Their build and mannerisms though seem much the same.
is a miniature representation of this
The second image is of Ariakas, the Dragon Emperor.
Good call. It does look like the Paladin mini matches closely to the image of Ariakis. Though wasn't Ariakis a magic-user? (Not that it really makes a difference in terms of what they call the minis.)
Maybe we will finally get a Kitiara mini in one of the PHH sets?! All the Companions would be nice too.
Heh, I didn't even think about it when I saw the minis preview this morning.
Good call. It does look like the Paladin mini matches closely to the image of Ariakis. Though wasn't Ariakis a magic-user? (Not that it really makes a difference in terms of what they call the minis.)
Maybe we will finally get a Kitiara mini in one of the PHH sets?! All the Companions would be nice too.
There is a never-ending debate on what exactly Ariakas was. In the modules, which came first, he was a priest of Takhisis. In the novels, because we already had a priest Dragon Highlord, Verminaard, Ariakas was made into the much cooler incarnation of a warrior-wizard.
I think what I need for Eberron is a good set of novels and a really awesome Eberron-based computer game to sell me on it.
A good set of novels? Well, there are three (unconnected) trilogies that make good use of the setting:
- The Dreaming Dark trilogy is about some Last War vets caught in the web(s) of conspiracy while trying to find a place in post-war Eberron. Stars a human fighter, warforged ranger, halfling rogue (mark of healing), and a Cannith human artificer (mark of making).
- The Dragon Below trilogy is about a handful of disparate individuals drawn together to fight off an otherworldly menace. Stars a shifter fighter, human wizard/fighter, and a kalashtar wilder/elocater (with some awesome additions in the later books).
- The Heirs of Ash trilogy is about a group of adventurers on a small but advanced airship (the Mourning Dawn), zipping around Khorvaire in an attempt to piece together and secure a deadly weapon before their enemy does. Stars a human rogue, human artificer, warforged monk, and a human paladin (there's more to the crew, of course).
Still waiting for the awesome Eberron-based computer game.
Don't recall that picture in the EPG. My knowledge of Eberron is strictly what's in the EPG and they make it sound like the elves are still mostly forest dwelling and that the halflings are nomadic people like in the 4e PHB just more plains oriented than river/bayou setting. Their build and mannerisms though seem much the same.
Yeah, you might want to read more on Eberron elves online or in 3e books before coming to any conclusions. Aerenal is dominated by jungle, true, but their inhabitants are thought to be a bunch of crazy necromancers. Elves from Valenar are the scariest bunch of hoodlums in Khorvaire, IMO, taking glee and personal honor in sneaking into the camps of those they perceive as being able combatants and slaying them in their sleep. (They signed that annoying peace treaty just because everyone else was doing it. As it was such a ludicrous idea in the first place, they totally ignore it.) Khorvarian elves are very urban, with both dragonmarked houses being known for their performance arts (and quite possibly other, much shadier things).
There is a never-ending debate on what exactly Ariakas was. In the modules, which came first, he was a priest of Takhisis. In the novels, because we already had a priest Dragon Highlord, Verminaard, Ariakas was made into the much cooler incarnation of a warrior-wizard.
There's no debate any longer after we settled it in 3.5. Ariakas was a prototype Thorn Knight, gaining arcane power directly from his covenant with Takhisis. In 4E terms, he'd be a warlock/paladin hybrid or multiclass. His pact is with Takhisis, much as the Thorn Knights in the Chaos War's pacts were also with her.
Cheers,
Cam
There's no debate any longer after we settled it in 3.5. Ariakas was a prototype Thorn Knight, gaining arcane power directly from his covenant with Takhisis. In 4E terms, he'd be a warlock/paladin hybrid or multiclass. His pact is with Takhisis, much as the Thorn Knights in the Chaos War's pacts were also with her.
Cheers,
Cam
Was this in the WotL source book? Sadly I haven't read through a few of the 3.5 source books, mostly because I never played any 3.5. I have them though. One day I'll get to them, if only for the fluff to apply in 4e (unless we get DL4e, which would be awesome, and even then it might still be valid to look through.)
With Dragon Lance I only ever thought the first three books were any good. To my mind a setting should change the core premise of the races at least as much as Ebaron does, otherwise what does it add? I like settings that are different from each other in terms of races and such. I dont want every race to act the same in every setting that would get boring quickly.
Okay, seriously, we all get it. You don't like Dragonlance.
If you don't want to see what DL offers apart from other settings, that's your business; repeating it isn't making your point any clearer.
Was this in the WotL source book? Sadly I haven't read through a few of the 3.5 source books, mostly because I never played any 3.5. I have them though.
Yes, in the War of the Lance sourcebook. His stats also appear in Dragons of Spring and Dragons of Winter, parts II and III of the 3.5 revised Classics Adventures trilogy, along with the other Highlords.
Cheers,
Cam
Okay, seriously, we all get it. You don't like Dragonlance.
If you don't want to see what DL offers apart from other settings, that's your business; repeating it isn't making your point any clearer.
Im wiling to listen but so far no ones mentioned anything good that makes it unique. The unique things in it exist in other setting, or only exist to limit players. Im really trying to understand why people like it, but it seems to boil down to nostalgia.
Im wiling to listen but so far no ones mentioned anything good that makes it unique. The unique things in it exist in other setting, or only exist to limit players. Im really trying to understand why people like it, but it seems to boil down to nostalgia.
Where else do darconians exist that were not added from Dragonlace?
Kender may be based on halflings and yet are different. Where else do they exist?
Where else can one find three gods of magic?
Whaty about the Irda? The original beautiful and highly intelligent ogres who fell from grace to become the ogres we know. The originals were still out there though. Where else has them?
Have you ever read The Legend of Huma? It is excellently written as a literary work with remarkable foreshadowing and symbolism.
Many of the old stories are awesome for roleplaying settings.
Where else do darconians exist that were not added from Dragonlace?
Kender may be based on halflings and yet are different. Where else do they exist?
Where else can one find three gods of magic?
Whaty about the Irda? The original beautiful and highly intelligent ogres who fell from grace to become the ogres we know. The originals were still out there though. Where else has them?
Have you ever read The Legend of Huma? It is excellently written as a literary work with remarkable foreshadowing and symbolism.
Many of the old stories are awesome for roleplaying settings.
Kender are a point against dragon lance. Prior to 4e id give you draconians now we have dragon born. Irda seem kinda interesting, as to gods of magic would be interesting if it were not based on alignment which I hate. Havent read legend of Huma I read the first three then dragons of summer flame and was too confused to go on. I tried though and just found the dragon overlords and the moving of the world too ridiculous to even bother continuing. The good gods were just too stupid and the evil gods too powerful. The characters seemed mostly frivolous in the conflict between the gods.
With Dragon Lance I only ever thought the first three books were any good. To my mind a setting should change the core premise of the races at least as much as Ebaron does, otherwise what does it add? I like settings that are different from each other in terms of races and such. I dont want every race to act the same in every setting that would get boring quickly.
Not every setting can, or should, try and turn preconceived notions entirely upside down. The fairly generic presentations as seen in the PHB are such for a reason, they're established tropes that people are both familiar and comfortable with. Change things around too much and you risk alienating potential fans because the setting is too different for them to comprehend in a single session.
[INDENT]Taking Eberron as an example, sure the elves of Aerenal, Valenar and the city dwelling elves of the five nations are all new twists on what an elf can be, but for those that appreciate and desire a more traditional elf there are regions such as the Eldeen Reaches.[/INDENT]
Further more, change around the assumed place of each race too often between settings and it will start to seem like arbitrary change for change's sake alone. In fact, this thread has helped me realize that my previous notion of alternating old and new settings each year was mildly ill-conceived. I still feel that the something-old follwed by something-new pattern is right, but what should be old and what should be new was wrong. Now I feel a better model would be to alternate between settings that are "classic" and settings that are "different". Dragonlance and Greyhawk are classic fantasy at its best so they make ideal choices 2010, and 2012. Settings like Dark Sun, that take an unconventional approach are also important to the health and longevity of D&D and so should fill the intervening years. Assuming an eight year run for 4E, my current vision would be something as follows.
[INDENT]2008: Forgotten Realms
2009: Eberron
2010: Dragonlance -or- Greyhawk
2011: Dark Sun
2012: Greyhawk -or- Dragonlance
2013: ---???---
2014: ---???---
2015: Spelljammer[/INDENT]
*I'd like to see one of those unspoken for years be Rich Burlew's still unpublished setting (which year would be determined by its classic/different factor). For the other setting some kind of interactive community built setting might be interesting, sort of a You Craft the Creature event, but on an even grander scale.
As has been repeatedly said, Spelljammer, along with Ravenloft and Planescape, are not going to get full campaign write-ups. It's just not going to happen. I hope that they each get at least a Manual of the Planes style book for each eventually, but that's the best we can hope for. WotC has been very clear on this point.
Most likely true, but I find that something like Spelljammer would make a great final setting for 4E. It would serve to unify the other diverse settings, and would keep new content light during the waining period leading up to a new edition.
Kender are a point against dragon lance. Prior to 4e id give you draconians now we have dragon born. Irda seem kinda interesting, as to gods of magic would be interesting if it were not based on alignment which I hate. Havent read legend of Huma I read the first three then dragons of summer flame and was too confused to go on. I tried though and just found the dragon overlords and the moving of the world too ridiculous to even bother continuing. The good gods were just too stupid and the evil gods too powerful. The characters seemed mostly frivolous in the conflict between the gods.
I tend to agree with kender being a point against Dragonlance. I'm a lifelong fan of Tasselhoff Burrfoot, but I'd be pleasantly shocked to see someone play a kender at a table in a way that was fun for the rest of us instead of grating.
I don't know much about Irda as they didn't come up much in the 2 dozen dragonlance books I own and have read, only a few off mentions. I've seen their 3.5 stats but they didn't really get my attention.
For my there's a few things I like about DL as a setting, which are not necessarily compatible with 4e:
1) Dragon mounts. Dragon mounts and aerial combat are a cool enough central theme that they get a good bit of love in the 3.5 DL book. A campaign that incorporated these well could be pretty cool. Of course in 4e you'd need to make some kind of non-solo dragons to be able to have both mount and PC effective in the same combat..
well..
probably?
You could certainly come up with encounters with dragon-on-dragon combat intersperced with PC vs PC-appropriate-threat combat in the same scene for a hectic 3d skirmish of crazy doom. I never got a chance to try this stuff in 3.5 either so I'm not sure how well it balanced there either.
2) War as a key setting feature. Other settings have major wars in their past backgrounds. The DL setting book for 3.5 talked about using war as the setting of your campaign. If you've ever played Red Hand of Doom you can see how awesome this can be to play. It'd be interesting to see if the RPGA does something like this on a full campaign scale some day. I think this actually is highly compatible with 4e, as PCs even at level one are supposed to be a cut above.
3) Draconians. The 3.5 draconians were mechanically awesome. I would have loved to play a 3.5 campaign with an all draconian party, especially if the higher class ones in the monster section were allowed. But a few major key ways in which dragonborn don't fit the bill:
Breath weapons; breath weapons weren't in any of the novels I saw, and were only available with a feat in game. They were rather explicitly rare for draconians, as opposed to universal for draconians.
Wings; wings were universal for draconians (except Auraks, who were 8th level sorcs out of the shell so who needs wings?) but very few could fly. Basically they all could glide, which is less universally useful but has its applications.
Death throes; your body self destructs upon death. This was pretty key to their lore even if it could be a pain to have as a PC trait.
Diversity; each of the five major breeds of draconians had unique traits and advantages, to the extent that they ranged from ECL 2 or 3 to 12 before levels. For some of the breeds their racial powers varied by gender as well. Presumably if we get a 4e PC writeup it will be similar to 3.5 in only openly allowing Baaz and Kapak will be open. I'd say Kapak would get a mediocre poison attack power with some kind of save ends effect. Maybe minor action, melee, str/con/dex + 2 vs fort, daze (save ends) at best. Females maybe an encounter power, touch, target can spend a HS. (Either standard or minor, depending how they want to balance it.) Baaz are harder in that the 3.5 version had gliding and little else without feats except natural weapons (they weren't good and weren't expected to be used seriously) and the 2 dragon HD (d12, all good saves, full BAB and 6+int/level skill points.. probably the only racial HD in 3.5 that were anywhere close to on par with class levels) and I think they had stat bumps as well. Baaz were kinda vanilla by design, they're the mass produced grunts of the draconian army. (But feat support also gave them DR, flight, and breath weapons.)
In an edition were martial oriented characters are actually on par with casters, they could probably be done to do them justice. I could in a pinch see using Dragonborn and replacing their breath weapon with gliding as a quick patch version of Baaz.
Bozaks might be able to be worked in somehow, Sivaks are right out as PCs. Reskinning an arcane Dragonborn as an Aurak could kind of work, but wouldn't have the distinctive feel that a 3.5 Aurak would.
Im wiling to listen but so far no ones mentioned anything good that makes it unique. The unique things in it exist in other setting, or only exist to limit players. Im really trying to understand why people like it, but it seems to boil down to nostalgia.
If people like something and are willing to buy it, that's all the reason WotC needs. Welcome to Capitalism, comrade!
I tend to agree with kender being a point against Dragonlance. I'm a lifelong fan of Tasselhoff Burrfoot, but I'd be pleasantly shocked to see someone play a kender at a table in a way that was fun for the rest of us instead of grating.
I don't know much about Irda as they didn't come up much in the 2 dozen dragonlance books I own and have read, only a few off mentions. I've seen their 3.5 stats but they didn't really get my attention.
For my there's a few things I like about DL as a setting, which are not necessarily compatible with 4e:
1) Dragon mounts. Dragon mounts and aerial combat are a cool enough central theme that they get a good bit of love in the 3.5 DL book. A campaign that incorporated these well could be pretty cool. Of course in 4e you'd need to make some kind of non-solo dragons to be able to have both mount and PC effective in the same combat..
well..
probably?
You could certainly come up with encounters with dragon-on-dragon combat intersperced with PC vs PC-appropriate-threat combat in the same scene for a hectic 3d skirmish of crazy doom. I never got a chance to try this stuff in 3.5 either so I'm not sure how well it balanced there either.
2) War as a key setting feature. Other settings have major wars in their past backgrounds. The DL setting book for 3.5 talked about using war as the setting of your campaign. If you've ever played Red Hand of Doom you can see how awesome this can be to play. It'd be interesting to see if the RPGA does something like this on a full campaign scale some day. I think this actually is highly compatible with 4e, as PCs even at level one are supposed to be a cut above.
3) Draconians. The 3.5 draconians were mechanically awesome. I would have loved to play a 3.5 campaign with an all draconian party, especially if the higher class ones in the monster section were allowed. But a few major key ways in which dragonborn don't fit the bill:
Breath weapons; breath weapons weren't in any of the novels I saw, and were only available with a feat in game. They were rather explicitly rare for draconians, as opposed to universal for draconians.
Wings; wings were universal for draconians (except Auraks, who were 8th level sorcs out of the shell so who needs wings?) but very few could fly. Basically they all could glide, which is less universally useful but has its applications.
Death throes; your body self destructs upon death. This was pretty key to their lore even if it could be a pain to have as a PC trait.
Diversity; each of the five major breeds of draconians had unique traits and advantages, to the extent that they ranged from ECL 2 or 3 to 12 before levels. For some of the breeds their racial powers varied by gender as well. Presumably if we get a 4e PC writeup it will be similar to 3.5 in only openly allowing Baaz and Kapak will be open. I'd say Kapak would get a mediocre poison attack power with some kind of save ends effect. Maybe minor action, melee, str/con/dex + 2 vs fort, daze (save ends) at best. Females maybe an encounter power, touch, target can spend a HS. (Either standard or minor, depending how they want to balance it.) Baaz are harder in that the 3.5 version had gliding and little else without feats except natural weapons (they weren't good and weren't expected to be used seriously) and the 2 dragon HD (d12, all good saves, full BAB and 6+int/level skill points.. probably the only racial HD in 3.5 that were anywhere close to on par with class levels) and I think they had stat bumps as well. Baaz were kinda vanilla by design, they're the mass produced grunts of the draconian army. (But feat support also gave them DR, flight, and breath weapons.)
In an edition were martial oriented characters are actually on par with casters, they could probably be done to do them justice. I could in a pinch see using Dragonborn and replacing their breath weapon with gliding as a quick patch version of Baaz.
Bozaks might be able to be worked in somehow, Sivaks are right out as PCs. Reskinning an arcane Dragonborn as an Aurak could kind of work, but wouldn't have the distinctive feel that a 3.5 Aurak would.
Sounds like Draconians were complicated. I can still see doing them as dragonborn with different racial feats to distinguish type of draconian much the way FR did with elves.
Sounds like Draconians were complicated. I can still see doing them as dragonborn with different racial feats to distinguish type of draconian much the way FR did with elves.
I wouldn't be surprised, though I'm not sure what I would bother with in DL if they did that. Draconians were my favorite part of Dragonlance personally. If they just do draconians as "Use Dragonborn stats, but everyone hates you. Your wings do nothing and you no longer turn to stone or explode when killed, and for some reason you have a breath weapon. Here's some feats you can take." I won't really get anything out of it. Except maybe some feats. I already play a family of 9 dragonborn (well one's adopted, but still) in LFR, so I'm not sure I'll be interested in playing even more dragonborn in DL if the opportunity came up.
They do kind of occupy the same design space though, so to speak, which reduces the odds of a real draconian writeup.
yes I to can see the dragonborn getting a draconian power for use in DL.
I never cared to much for the kenders either.
great for pickpoketing, and distractions. but thats about it.
oh and before I forget.
yes RAvenloft, planescape and spelljammer wont get separate splat books. They will likely be in mostly one book with other parts in others.
such as for the moment MOP.
They do kind of occupy the same design space though, so to speak, which reduces the odds of a real draconian writeup.
"Real" Draconians are monsters. Many of their special abilities just aren't appropriate for a PC race (notably the deaththroes ). Dragonborn are the playable equivlinet. The best way to handle draconians in 4E are...
[INDENT]A) Revision, new eddition = new rules. What came before is irrlevent.
B) Fast forwarded say a 1000 years (but no spellplague-like event please) than the difrences between draconians and dragonborn could be written off as being the difrence between those created through the coruption ritual (monsters) and those that are the result of generations of breeding (players).[/INDENT]
Personally I prefer option B as it also allows for all the other elements that distinguish a 4E setting from those of previous editions to be integrated slowly over the course of the intervening years, rather than just dumped into it. It also allows for the simultaneous retention and deemphasis of the backlog of historical details from previews editions and novels by turning them into the stuff of myths and legend.
Dragonborn stats, with nonfuntional wings. a heroic tier feat lats them use them to reduce falling damage, and to control their decent. Scion of Arkhosia is a default PP.
Other race features can be racial feats.
Kapak Poison touch- requires poison-type breath: you may use either your dragonsbreath or (awesome poison melee power) in a combat.
ect.
Maybe we will finally get a Kitiara mini in one of the PHH sets?! All the Companions would be nice too.
There's a bearded archer with a green cloak in an earlier set...
Blood War...#16...Free League Ranger...totally Tanis.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/mg/bw
As far as Dark Sunbeing a possibility instead of Dragonlance, there's a place in the Eberron Player's guide that mentions Thri-keen and Half-giants as being fairly easy to find in one area. Can't find the spot though.
Half-Giants?! But why? I was really hoping that Goliaths had killed them and taken their stuff.
Draconians:
Dragonborn stats, with nonfuntional wings. a heroic tier feat lats them use them to reduce falling damage, and to control their decent. Scion of Arkhosia is a default PP.
Other race features can be racial feats.
Kapak Poison touch- requires poison-type breath: you may use either your dragonsbreath or (awesome poison melee power) in a combat.
ect.
What I had in mind for Draconians is to have them start as Dragonborn, then take a feat tree similar to the Weapon Specialization feats to become Draconians. It isn't perfect, but that is how I would do the 5th Age second generation Draconians. Or we could have a similar sort of race like the Shifter and have five separate versions, then have each race gain more abilities through said feat tree, which would be better for 4th Age Draconians.
Half-Giants?! But why? I was really hoping that Goliaths had killed them and taken their stuff.
Because Goliaths are completely unrelated to Giants and the fluff between the two is completely different besides being really tall. Geez they have almost in common as Deva and Kalashtar. Who the heck would think that Goliaths and Half-Giants are the same?
:PWhat I had in mind for Draconians is to have them start as Dragonborn, then take a feat tree similar to the Weapon Specialization feats to become Draconians. It isn't perfect, but that is how I would do the 5th Age second generation Draconians. Or we could have a similar sort of race like the Shifter and have five separate versions, then have each race gain more abilities through said feat tree, which would be better for 4th Age Draconians.
That prevents them from taking a paragon path and multi classing though. I say just do a few racial feats equivelent to what they did for elves in forgotten realms.
Because Goliaths are completely unrelated to Giants and the fluff between the two is completely different besides being really tall. Geez they have almost in common as Deva and Kalashtar. Who the heck would think that Goliaths and Half-Giants are the same?
So you would imply that a half-giant would not have +2 strength, +2 con? what stat line would you prefer. Morover, the half-giant paragon path, would it too not grant reach, as the Goliath paragon path does?
Fluff is easilly changed- but when two options are that mechanically similar, it's probably best to merge them.
That prevents them from taking a paragon path and multi classing though. I say just do a few racial feats equivelent to what they did for elves in forgotten realms.
It just prevents them from multiclassing, which is a fair trade-off for the more powerful Draconian abilities. Paragon Paths that cause them to become even more dragon-like would be cool, though.
It just prevents them from multiclassing, which is a fair trade-off for the more powerful Draconian abilities. Paragon Paths that cause them to become even more dragon-like would be cool, though.
i thought the weapon multi class feats also had pp asscoiated with them? if its only multi class I can see it.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/mi/20090618a
Generic Paladin.
Soooo, about that "Ariakis" mini ....
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/mi/20090618a
Generic Paladin.
Yeah, we knew that already. They have done that before with the Free League Ranger, which was a Tanis miniature.
Because I, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, don't want yet ANOTHER Arcane class!
Though a draconic pact for Warlock would work for DL's Tiamat expy.
You mean War Machine. Ironman had a distinctive paint job.
But Iron Man also has like, a bazillion different suits. So maybe this specific paint job is "Cleric Iron Man"?
Because I, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, don't want yet ANOTHER Arcane class!
Then you'd rather have what? ANOTHER Martial class? or ANOTHER Divine class? or ANOTHER Primal class? Just because more classes fall under Arcane than any other doesn't mean we should avoid material that might be best presented under the Arcane power source.
And who says we HAVE to have a new class? A slew of paragon paths, backgrounds, and related feats to theme any/all classes to the setting would be more useful than a single class, would it not?
So... what new class would come out in a DLPG?
Because I, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, don't want yet ANOTHER Arcane class!
Though a draconic pact for Warlock would work for DL's Tiamat expy.
The only class I would find acceptible is a Martial Controller, perhaps a grenadier of some sort, based on the Solamnics' use of gunpowder and cannons (it would also would work well for Gnomes). Otherwise, I would like to see a multiclass only class like the Spellscarred for the Wizard of High Sorcery, as well as for the Draconian (so they can have all of their abilities, though maybe not the Death Throe). A Dragon Pact would step on the toes of athe Dragon Sorcerer.
It would probably be either a Primal class like Elemental Cleric, or some form of Elemental source class. There would probably also be some kind of "Wilder" style Psionic multi-class only class, like the Spell Scar "class."
That uh, would make more sense for Darksun, not Dragonlance...
That uh, would make more sense for Darksun, not Dragonlance...
Yeah, I misread the acronym.
Frankly, I can't think of any class that would be unique to DL that can't be done with a background (mariner, tinker), or a PP (knights, the Order). Maybe the mystic, but I bet that's going to be one of the divine classes in PHB3, though arguably you could just use Invoker.
And really, the knights are just current classes with a PP:
Crown - Fighter or Ranger
Sword - Paladin
Rose - Cleric, maybe Paladin|Cleric
Lily - Fighter or Ranger, maybe Paladin
Skull - Cleric or Invoker
Thorn - Warlock, maybe Sorcerer or Wizard
Which to me is the major strike against Dragonlance, there really isn't a class in it thats unique...'course I could have said that about FR too, and viola: Swordmage. So they may surprise me yet. (Oh and swordmage has my vote for being Thorn after a slight reconning of them to make them more warriorish.)
The pact element of warlock makes a lot more sense to the Thorn Knight's nature than just being able to use a sword as an implement. They made a pact with Takhisis in order to gain their power, were widely known as masters of divination and misdirection, and not all of them wore armor.
Cheers,
Cam
I love the metallic Draconians.
EDIT: Stupid link doesn't work!
More evidence that the Draconians will be seen in the upcoming Draconomicon 2? Possibly.
More evidence that Dragonlance is the 2010 setting? Not really.
More evidence that WotC is celebrating the anniversary? Yes.
More evidence that the Draconians will be seen in the upcoming Draconomicon 2? Possibly.
More evidence that Dragonlance is the 2010 setting? Not really.
But a mention of the Thri-Kreen and Half-Giant in the Eberron PG is a dead giveaway for Dark Sun in 2010. I swear, some people... :P
And before anyone comes back with "But where else have you ever heard of those two together so much?", I would like to know of ANYWHERE where you have heard of Draconians other than Dragonlance.
But a mention of the Thri-Kreen and Half-Giant in the Eberron PG is a dead giveaway for Dark Sun in 2010. I swear, some people... :P
And before anyone comes back with "But where else have you ever heard of those two together so much?", I would like to know of ANYWHERE where you have heard of Draconians other than Dragonlance.
I don't recall saying that the EPG mention was evidence either.
I don't recall saying that the EPG mention was evidence either.
Never said you did, others have, I was just making a pre-emptive strike. Thus far, no one has produce a lick of evidence for Dark Sun, other than a mini with a obsidian weapon, a mention of the defiler in a Penny Arcade D&D April Fool's article, the short-lived rerelease of the Dark Sun Prism Pentad (no other novels are planned for release, as well as no new novels planned). Psionics in PHB3 isn't a guarantee either, Dark Sun doesn't have a monopoly on Psionics (if it did, they probably wouldn't release EITHER DS or Psionics).
And then we have the "a" and $.
While i added the minis to my original post, i personally dont think minis are as strong as evidence as actual book references. 3E saw a few draconian minis, for example, and WotC didn't put out any Dragonlance material themselves for the entire edition. Meanwhile, there has a been a precedence this edition for races mentioned in a campaign book to be released in the following year. IMO, book citations > minis.
Except that WotC DID release a Dragonlance Campaign Setting in 3.5. It was the first CS to be released for the edition. The two draconian minis in Dragoneye even make reference to said book. And the Thri-Kreen and Half-Giant haven't been listed in a races section of the book, they were in a region section, like other monsters. Notice though, no Thri-Kreen or Half-giant minis yet, but we have at least two Dragonlance miniatures. I want to say we had Genasi minis before FR came out. It is entirely possible that we might see the metallic Draconians (there are chromatic ones too) in Draconomicon II (likely with more Dragonlance references like we saw in Draconomicon I), just like it is entirely possible we will see the Thri-Kreen and Half-Giant in MM3, but not in the PHB3.
I was under the impression that it was someone else, not WotC that put out Dragonlance in 3E. Who was it?
You aren't the first person to get mixed up on this. (Please don't take that as me being condescending, I am not intending to be)
The Dragonlance Campaign Setting was published by Wizards of the Coast, it is the only 3.5e Dragonlance product that was. Everything else was Officially Licensed Wizards of the Coast Products produced and published by Margaret Weis's company, Sovereign Press and later Margaret Weis Productions. I own ALL of the 3.5e Dragonlance stuff.
Only stuff from the first book ever appeared in official WotC products, namely the Baaz and Kapak draconians (which were both featured as races and monsters in the book), and Raistlin Majere (with the Wizard of High Sorcery PrC in its original form, which is why he is a Transmuter according to the mini, since the PrC originally required specialization in certain schools, but was later changed in the SP product, Towers of High Sorcery). The mini for Lord Soth was more like a regular 3.5e Death Knight rather than a Dragonlance version(no class levels, just hit dice, but he did have the DL death knight template, not the regular one), if I recall correctly.
For some reason, people have this idea that because SP/MWP's products were not published and distributed by WotC that they don't count. Given that all of our products passed by WotC for approval and were conducted under a strict license, it's as much a part of the continuity of the setting (and indeed helped to define it) as anything that came before it.
Cheers,
Cam
Sovereign Press (later Margaret Weis Productions) actually wrote the 3.5 DL Campaign Setting, which was developed by James Wyatt and WotC. I contributed to that and to every other DL product released after it for 3.5, which were published under an official license from Wizards.
For some reason, people have this idea that because SP/MWP's products were not published and distributed by WotC that they don't count. Given that all of our products passed by WotC for approval and were conducted under a strict license, it's as much a part of the continuity of the setting (and indeed helped to define it) as anything that came before it.
Cheers,
Cam
Personally i loved the 3.5 Dragonlance, that and conan (it is more a d20 setting) were the only settings I would play 3rd rules with. I hope that WOTC are smart enough to get help (i.e. you) with keeping the setting at the level it was at in 3rd ed (It is the only setting i feel 3rd ed was an improvement over 2nd ed.
Actually, I think both DL and DS is wrong. I think its Spell Jammer. Look at all the spell jammer material clandestinely mucking about in the source books. Also look at the SRD and how everything that has to do with Spell Jammer (neogi, mind flayers, beholders, etc) are completely absent...so noone can even think about making a spell jammer like setting. THey even set up the Astral Plane to be more Spell Jammer-esque. I think we will be seeing Giant Space Hamsters pretty soon here.
I think the absence of those creatures from the SRD is more of an intellectual property protection move than anything else. However, if we are going to accept that it was to point to a setting, I think it would fall more in line with a Far Realm one than just Spelljammer.
Actually, I think both DL and DS is wrong. I think its Spell Jammer. Look at all the spell jammer material clandestinely mucking about in the source books. Also look at the SRD and how everything that has to do with Spell Jammer (neogi, mind flayers, beholders, etc) are completely absent...so noone can even think about making a spell jammer like setting. THey even set up the Astral Plane to be more Spell Jammer-esque. I think we will be seeing Giant Space Hamsters pretty soon here.
Umm beholders, mind flayers, and (I would assume) neogi were never apart of the 3.X SRD and we never got a Spell Jammer setting. The reason is that unlike Dragons, Elves, and countless other fantasy creatures, those three(well beholders and mind flayers at least) are WotC intellectual property. All that aside, how the heck are Beholders related to Spell Jammers? It was originally released as part of Greyhawk. Mind Flayers also predate Spell Jammers.
Spell Jammers falls into the same category as Ravenloft. It has simply been absorbed and assimilated into the default PoL setting.
You aren't the first person to get mixed up on this. (Please don't take that as me being condescending, I am not intending to be)
The Dragonlance Campaign Setting was published by Wizards of the Coast, it is the only 3.5e Dragonlance product that was. Everything else was Officially Licensed Wizards of the Coast Products produced and published by Margaret Weis's company, Sovereign Press and later Margaret Weis Productions. I own ALL of the 3.5e Dragonlance stuff.
Ok, i see. I just remember seeing Sovereign Press on all the 3E stuff.
If that means anything.
Actually, I think both DL and DS is wrong. I think its Spell Jammer. Look at all the spell jammer material clandestinely mucking about in the source books. Also look at the SRD and how everything that has to do with Spell Jammer (neogi, mind flayers, beholders, etc) are completely absent...so noone can even think about making a spell jammer like setting. THey even set up the Astral Plane to be more Spell Jammer-esque. I think we will be seeing Giant Space Hamsters pretty soon here.
Id be happy with spell jammer. Would certainly be unique enough.
Umm beholders, mind flayers, and (I would assume) neogi were never apart of the 3.X SRD and we never got a Spell Jammer setting. The reason is that unlike Dragons, Elves, and countless other fantasy creatures, those three(well beholders and mind flayers at least) are WotC intellectual property. All that aside, how the heck are Beholders related to Spell Jammers? It was originally released as part of Greyhawk. Mind Flayers also predate Spell Jammers.
Spell Jammers falls into the same category as Ravenloft. It has simply been absorbed and assimilated into the default PoL setting.
My post was "tongue in cheek". God I hope it isn't Spelljammer. That would be ridiculous.
SJ cannot happen until there are enough campaign settings to make it worth while. Unless that happens where could you go?
Agreed. Personally I feel that Spelljamer could be a great setting and I'd like to see it updated sometime this edition, but not until there are at least a half-dozen other settings.
My post was "tongue in cheek". God I hope it isn't Spelljammer. That would be ridiculous.
If you are going to make a tongue in cheek post then don't make it believable.....I mean sure it is sad that it is is believable that someone could think those were clues, but this is the internet and you would do well to remember the depths of stupidity present here.:P
SJ cannot happen until there are enough campaign settings to make it worth while. Unless that happens where could you go?
Well, they could just make a setting specifically for Spelljammer, like the Astromundi Cluster in 2e, and the Spider Moon in 3e. Frankly I'd prefer that. I always enjoyed the moons and outer planet settings more than the ability to go from Solamnia to Shadowdale. The ability to go from one CS to another is better off being a bonus than the main feature IMO.
Well, they could just make a setting specifically for Spelljammer, like the Astromundi Cluster in 2e, and the Spider Moon in 3e. Frankly I'd prefer that. I always enjoyed the moons and outer planet settings more than the ability to go from Solamnia to Shadowdale. The ability to go from one CS to another is better off being a bonus than the main feature IMO.
Wholeheartedly agreed.
If the bulk of Spelljammer is going to be "You can play any CS!", then it's a waste of a published product.
I mean, I could make up stuff for doing that in 4e on my own, or pick up some old Spelljammer stuff for the fluff. That's not something that really deserves upgrading to 4e all by it's own right.
Well, they could just make a setting specifically for Spelljammer, like the Astromundi Cluster in 2e, and the Spider Moon in 3e. Frankly I'd prefer that. I always enjoyed the moons and outer planet settings more than the ability to go from Solamnia to Shadowdale. The ability to go from one CS to another is better off being a bonus than the main feature IMO.
Well naturally. The setting would need it's own locations so as to stand on it's own no matter when it might be released. The ability to travel to other world probablaby shouldn't be the focus of the setting, however, as it was also a prominent element of the setting the more other settings have been published the better.
Then you'd rather have what? ANOTHER Martial class? or ANOTHER Divine class? or ANOTHER Primal class? Just because more classes fall under Arcane than any other doesn't mean we should avoid material that might be best presented under the Arcane power source.
And who says we HAVE to have a new class? A slew of paragon paths, backgrounds, and related feats to theme any/all classes to the setting would be more useful than a single class, would it not?
Because I'm tired of the 'Arcane can do whatever it wants because its MAGIC!!' attitude that makes Arcane a ill-defined catch-all power source while every other one has limits and its schtick. I'm tired of every CS having an arcane class. I want some variety.
And please...no new class? You know just as well as me and the marketing team that a CSPG without a new class wouldn't sell well.
As far as Spelljammer now that we have Neogi and they are abberant it's shaping up that in 4e the Far Realm IS the phlogiston of the Spelljammer setting. In 4e though instead of travelling to different 'crystal spheres' we're travelling between different cosmologies. I mean is it really that hard to think that a 'plane' consisting of liquid 'heat' isn't the home to things like Neogi, Beholders, Illithids, and other creatures and that if it were to 'leak' into the mortal world it wouldn't warp and scar everything it touched.
As for if DL is next. I don't mind as long as whatever is next it adds interesting new options to 4th Edition the way that the FRPG and EPG did.
You know they never have said it'd be a previously published by TSR/WotC campaign setting we'd see. Just that it'd be a familiar setting. Who knows we could get Twilight the Campaign Setting *ducks for cover*.
I'm saying Slayers 4e with bonus rules to travel to the four worlds of the Lord of Nightmare including the Lost Universe!
with a Psionic Warrior of Justice class :D PACIFIST CRUSH!!
I'm saying Slayers 4e with bonus rules to travel to the four worlds of the Lord of Nightmare including the Lost Universe!
with a Psionic Warrior of Justice class :D PACIFIST CRUSH!!
I love the Slayers series so Id be very happy to see this, even if it is incredibly unlikely. Id buy it just to see how they do Dragon Slave, Giga slave and Ragna Blade spells. I mean come on spells that if botched could destroy the world? YES please.
I love the Slayers series so Id be very happy to see this, even if it is incredibly unlikely. Id buy it just to see how they do Dragon Slave, Giga slave and Ragna Blade spells. I mean come on spells that if botched could destroy the world? YES please.
The licencing nightmare alone. Sorry William but the odds of that happening are so high you could reach orbit.
The licencing nightmare alone. Sorry William but the odds of that happening are so high you could reach orbit.
Oh I know its not going to happen, just saying it would be funny to see. Even if the odds of it happening are slim to none. Still it would be a unique world, with a very different world view and cosmonology. Despite how ridiculous the series can get they really did create a very rich history, and cosmonology for the setting.
Dragon Slave and Ragna Blade don't have the potential to destroy the world like the Giga Slave though. Dragon Slave would be a Paragon level power for Sorcerer (I think a STR or even a new CON Sorcerer would be the best fit for Lina if you ask me), Ragna Blade either late Paragon or early Epic (with the ability to nullify resistance and inflict full damage on insubstiantial foes) and finally I'd see Giga Slave as either a plot device or as the final ability of an Epic Destiny related to the Lord of Nightmare.
But yeah, never gonna happen...unless GoOrder is still around??
I don't think the liscencing would be that crazy considering Guardian of Order managed to get it for their Slayers D20 product.
Dragon Slave and Ragna Blade don't have the potential to destroy the world like the Giga Slave though. Dragon Slave would be a Paragon level power for Sorcerer (I think a STR or even a new CON Sorcerer would be the best fit for Lina if you ask me), Ragna Blade either late Paragon or early Epic (with the ability to nullify resistance and inflict full damage on insubstiantial foes) and finally I'd see Giga Slave as either a plot device or as the final ability of an Epic Destiny related to the Lord of Nightmare.
But yeah, never gonna happen...unless GoOrder is still around??
Actually Ragna blade is tied to lord of nightmare same way giga slave is, and does have that world destroying potential. I could see Lina being a warlock what with calling on power of demon lords and such. Zelgadis is harder to pin down hes not a 4e shaman at all.
Just thought I would note I believe you meant Dominaria... And while I'm by far no expert on the planescape setting, from what I've seen on these forums it looks like M:TG and it are pretty well already compatible.
No he probably meant Dominia. Dominia the entire planar multiverse MTG is set in. Dominaria is just a single plane dialga.
Zelgatus is a mixed Battle/Laser cleric. Or perhaps Paladin|Invoker.
Since he is shown repeatedly blowing up temples I highly doubt this. Id probably reflavour him as a swordmage/wiz multi class actually.
My god, I wondered where all the DL hatred had come from, but now that I see the kind of crap you guys are into...
Seriously, how about keeping this a Dragonlance thread? Especially those of you who have crapped all over this thread with "Dragonlancesux!!!!!", I would appreciate it if we didn't have to be subject to oops!I blew up the world super power cheese.
My god, I wondered where all the DL hatred had come from, but now that I see the kind of crap you guys are into...
Oh come on... How else are they gonna get their blow up the world every week fix?
For me Dragonlance had good and bad parts, the Knightly Orders and the Wizard Towers were good, the close interaction with dragons was good, Kender, Gully Dwarves and Tinker Gnomes were bad.
Bel
Seriously, how about keeping this a Dragonlance thread? Especially those of you who have crapped all over this thread with "Dragonlancesux!!!!!", I would appreciate it if we didn't have to be subject to oops!I blew up the world super power cheese.
My god, I wondered where all the DL hatred had come from, but now that I see the kind of crap you guys are into...
Slayers is a funny light hearted anime with a lot going for it. Id say its cosmonology is far more interesting then DLs where the good gods get fooled by evil every bloody time. Takhisis moves the world and we cant find it oh please give me a break. DL fans have no room to talk when it comes to cheese. Dragons from Space. How lame can you get, or time travel. Im sorry no any setting that has to resort to time travel to fix something epic fail. I didnt like it in X-men and I really hated it in DL.
I love the Slayers series so Id be very happy to see this, even if it is incredibly unlikely. Id buy it just to see how they do Dragon Slave, Giga slave and Ragna Blade spells. I mean come on spells that if botched could destroy the world? YES please.
Man, I must be the only person in the world that hates the Slayers series. I kept hearing form people how great it was and how funny it was... I was bored out of my skull watching it. I never even made it through the first season.
Now Rune Soldier, that was a other story...
Man, I must be the only person in the world that hates the Slayers series. I kept hearing form people how great it was and how funny it was... I was bored out of my skull watching it. I never even made it through the first season.
Now Rune Soldier, that was a other story...
Rune soldiers is funny as well, never did watch the last disc. Slayers gets better as it goes on. Id say the second and third season were the best. Valgav makes one of the most compelling, and even sympathetic villians ever, though Aeon from Crono Crusade has to be the most menacing villian i have seen in anime, movies or books.
Im sorry no any setting that has to resort to time travel to fix something epic fail. I didnt like it in X-men and I really hated it in DL.
I think there are plenty of other threads you can post in that discuss topics you actually have an interest in, so thanks for playing, and I hope you find some joy somewhere else.
Cheers,
Cam
How lame can you get, or time travel. Im sorry no any setting that has to resort to time travel to fix something epic fail. I didnt like it in X-men and I really hated it in DL.
Wow ..... Raistlin is the Phoenix Force!
And time travel rocks. Decades of Doctor Who, Quantum Leap, Chronos, Rip Hunter, Booster Gold, etc. prove it! :D
I think there are plenty of other threads you can post in that discuss topics you actually have an interest in, so thanks for playing, and I hope you find some joy somewhere else.
Cheers,
Cam
Hear, hear!
@Williamhm75: You may not like Dragonlance, but at least you can refrain from bashing a campaign setting that many others do like.
Sir Geoffrey Lancefield (aka Barococo)
Actually Ragna blade is tied to lord of nightmare same way giga slave is, and does have that world destroying potential. I could see Lina being a warlock what with calling on power of demon lords and such. Zelgadis is harder to pin down hes not a 4e shaman at all.
Zelgatus is a mixed Battle/Laser cleric. Or perhaps Paladin|Invoker.
The Giga Slave IS the Lord of Nightmare "My Word is My Power" whereas the Ragna Blade is more similar to the Dragon Slave in that it calls on the power of the Lord of Nightmare but does not bring her to the world. That's why Lina can use it without fear of it undoing the world.
I can't believe I didn't think of WARLOCK! Dark Magic in Slayer is so Infernal Pact -ish (though I'd see it as a CHA/CON mixed pact myself).
Zelgadis and any Shamanistic magic is harsh... I'd say Psionic might be closer to the mark. White Magic is a subset of Shamanistic Magic and calls the power of a person's Astral Body, not the power of the God (Holy Magic is lost within the confine of the Mazoku Barrier).
Slayers is a funny light hearted anime with a lot going for it. Id say its cosmonology is far more interesting then DLs where the good gods get fooled by evil every bloody time. Takhisis moves the world and we cant find it oh please give me a break. DL fans have no room to talk when it comes to cheese. Dragons from Space. How lame can you get, or time travel. Im sorry no any setting that has to resort to time travel to fix something epic fail. I didnt like it in X-men and I really hated it in DL.
For someone who has no understanding of the setting, you surely have some strong opinions on it.
Why is its cosmology more interesting than Dragonlance's? (Actually, you don't have to answer that because I honestly don't care.)
Anyway, the good gods don't get "fooled" by evil all the time. Most of the time, the reason evil gets to put its plans into motion is because the goods of good tend to let people define their own paths. (OMG, the gods don't control everything the PCs do?! :eek
As for Takhisis stealing the world, she didn't just take it from the good gods, she took it from all of the gods. How? They were all busy fighting Father Chaos.
As for "Dragons from Space" they found the world when it was moved. They didn't come from "space" they came from another world. What are you complaining about here anyway? You're one of the people that wants Spelljammer, aren't you? Space Hamsters? Seriously?
Now stop clogging up a thread about Dragonlance with completely different subject matter. Especially when you have completely baseless opinions on the actual topic.
Wow ..... Raistlin is the Phoenix Force!
And time travel rocks. Decades of Doctor Who, Quantum Leap, Chronos, Rip Hunter, Booster Gold, etc. prove it! :D
Never really liked quantum leap and have no idea what those others are other than doctor who but never saw it. Time travel can be okay in a sci fi setting, but not a fantasy one.
For someone who has no understanding of the setting, you surely have some strong opinions on it.
Why is its cosmology more interesting than Dragonlance's? (Actually, you don't have to answer that because I honestly don't care.)
Anyway, the good gods don't get "fooled" by evil all the time. Most of the time, the reason evil gets to put its plans into motion is because the goods of good tend to let people define their own paths. (OMG, the gods don't control everything the PCs do?! :eek
As for Takhisis stealing the world, she didn't just take it from the good gods, she took it from all of the gods. How? They were all busy fighting Father Chaos.
As for "Dragons from Space" they found the world when it was moved. They didn't come from "space" they came from another world. What are you complaining about here anyway? You're one of the people that wants Spelljammer, aren't you? Space Hamsters? Seriously?
Now stop clogging up a thread about Dragonlance with completely different subject matter. Especially when you have completely baseless opinions on the actual topic.
I find it more compelling because even the good gods in slayers can make mistakes. Even the goodly priests can be selfish and evil. DL is far too black and white, and sorry no the whole stealing the world thing was lame. There are far too many meta plots in DL that the pcs have no hope of ever effecting. One dragon should not have been able to destroy the homeland of the elves, same with an army of minatours. In DL it seems good always gets screwed. But you still automatically know who the good guys and bad guys are.
Never really liked quantum leap and have no idea what those others are other than doctor who but never saw it. Time travel can be okay in a sci fi setting, but not a fantasy one.
So let me get this straight, people whine over and over again about how Dragonlance is just a generic fantasy setting like Forgotten Realms, but as soon as elements that separate it it from the others come up, they don't belong in a fantasy setting? Are you kidding me?
So let me get this straight, people whine over and over again about how Dragonlance is just a generic fantasy setting like Forgotten Realms, but as soon as elements that separate it it from the others come up, they don't belong in a fantasy setting? Are you kidding me?
It is exactly like those the races act the same if not in a stupider fashion, and time travel isnt something the pcs can do its a plot device used in the books. Which is kinda my point there are so many meta plots happening in the books that there is nothing left for the pcs to do. Everything has been done by someone else.
I find it more compelling because even the good gods in slayers can make mistakes.
Perhaps you haven't heard the story of how Majere hid the godling Mina away in a plot devised by multiple gods, which later came back to bite them?
While not a "good" god Reorx made the foolish mistake of capturing Ionthas in the Greygem, which really came back to bite the pantheon pretty hard.
Even the goodly priests can be selfish and evil. DL is far too black and white, and sorry no the whole stealing the world thing was lame.
Perhaps you haven't heard of the Kingpriest?
BTW: "Lame"ness is subject to personal opinion. I surely think some things in this very thread are lame. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. What people aren't entitled to is to continually spam a thread with the same opinion, that everyone understands already, utilizing "evidence" that contains absolutely no factual material.
There are far too many meta plots in DL that the pcs have no hope of ever effecting.
I'm not sure you've ever read a single Dragonlance book, including the Chronicles. I'm also not sure you've ever played a game of DL either.
The entire setting is based on characters rising up from nothing to change the world. Practically every character is Luke Skywalker in Dragonlance.
One dragon should not have been able to destroy the homeland of the elves, same with an army of minatours.
Do you understand any of what happened with the Dragon Overlords? Here's a brief writeup, courtesy of the DL Nexus, regarding the Overlord Malystryx:
Malystryx (birth date unknown - d. 421 AC) was not born on the world of Krynn, but rather on the native dragon world, from which all the alien dragons came. On her own world, she was a small and relatively insignificant red dragon, who had to constantly fight for survival in the numerous clan wars that were waged daily. When Takhisis shifted the world of Krynn to it's new location in the universe near the dragon world, Malystryx was one of the first dragons to find her way through the ether on her own. Whilst a small dragon on her home world, she soon found that she dwarfed all other Krynnish dragons and coming across the ocean to the east of Ansalon, she made herself known in 384 AC.
Whilst Khellendros arrived in Krynn much earlier with the aid of Takhisis, Malystryx's crossing engineered a path that allowed the other alien dragons to follow her. A monstrously large dragon, Malystryx was over four hundred feet in length, and had a gargantuan wingspan that measured over five hundred feet. Blood-red scales covered her completely, and she bore large imposing horns on her head. In 384 AC, she first appeared on Krynn to the distant east of Ansalon. Flying for a week at a time, she took the course of a couple of months to reach Ansalon from across the ocean. When she did finally reach the shores of Ansalon, she appeared over Misty Isle, and shortly after she ravaged the Dairly Plains, claiming the area as part of her growing domain.
Growing ever stronger, in 387 AC, Malystryx continues to kill any dragons she encounters in eastern Ansalon. Learning how to create a dragon totem and harness arcane energies from it, Malystryx begins the transformation of the land in the Goodlund region into a series of fiery mountains and volcanic craters. The shores of the Bay of Balifor are changed into boiling waters, and in the center of this new realm rises a gigantic mountain, becoming Malys' permanent lair. Self-styling her as a Dragon Overlord, Malystryx claims the new land as her domain, referring to it as the Desolation.
She continues to plague the smaller Krynnish dragons, killing them and adding their skulls to her totem, and thereby increasing her power.
The Overlords were massive compared to the already big native dragons of Krynn. Add to their natural powers the consuming of the planet's lesser dragons, and you make for some pretty awesomely powerful drakes.
It's not very hard to see why any of the Overlords were able to do what they did.
As for the minotaur taking over the elves' land, they stole it when the elves ran. They basically moved in while no one was home.
In DL it seems good always gets screwed.
Except that the running theme in Dragonlance, much like Star Wars, is that good always triumphs in the end.
But you still automatically know who the good guys and bad guys are.
Really? Is Dalamar good or evil? How about Raistlin? Mina?
Are they all "evil" in terms of how we'd view it in our world? Or are they more like politicians, who take paths the average person won't to get to power?
Is drunkard Caramon useless, or a re-emerging hero?
Is Tasselhoff nothing but a troublemaker, or the reason why everything falls into place?
Is the broken Palin Majere good or bad?
Is Lady Chrysania a pure and blessed mother of Paladine's faith and just naive, or is she willing to allow herself to be duped by darkness due to love/obsession?
You can choose to see either Luke Skywalker or Darth Vader in every single Dragonlance character, but I assure you, there are more than a few Han Solos on Krynn.
You can choose to see either Luke Skywalker or Darth Vader in every single Dragonlance character, but I assure you, there are more than a few Han Solos on Krynn.
I wrote a whole novel about an amoral Han Solo-like character. Vanderjack, the mercenary protagonist of The Sellsword, sold his services to both sides during the War of the Lance, and by the time my novel comes around he's bitter, broke, and an addict (of sorts). Very few of my characters are all good or all evil, actually.
Cheers,
Cam
I wrote a whole novel about an amoral Han Solo-like character. Vanderjack, the mercenary protagonist of The Sellsword, sold his services to both sides during the War of the Lance, and by the time my novel comes around he's bitter, broke, and an addict (of sorts). Very few of my characters are all good or all evil, actually.
Cheers,
Cam
See I have no interest in running a character during war of the lance as what the heros of the lance do will outshine what i do no matter what i do. As to Alio Ive read the first three then dragons of summer flame which was confusing as heck and made no sense whatso ever. Good might win in the end but the world gets messed up in the process big time. Im sorry nation of elves with magic beats giant dragon. Or it should. The characters in the books effect the world, because of that there is little to nothing that the pcs can do that hasnt already been done. Mina might be a god but she is still EVIL I dont want to read books about mostly evil characters. I actually hated raslin he was more emo and annoying then even dritz.
The setting seems to be everyone gets screwed no matter what. Most of the heros of the lance wind up Dead thats not winning thats not even close to winning.
See I have no interest in running a character during war of the lance as what the heros of the lance do will outshine what i do no matter what i do. As to Alio Ive read the first three then dragons of summer flame which was confusing as heck and made no sense whatso ever. Good might win in the end but the world gets messed up in the process big time. Im sorry nation of elves with magic beats giant dragon. Or it should. The characters in the books effect the world, because of that there is little to nothing that the pcs can do that hasnt already been done. Mina might be a god but she is still EVIL I dont want to read books about mostly evil characters. I actually hated raslin he was more emo and annoying then even dritz.
The setting seems to be everyone gets screwed no matter what. Most of the heros of the lance wind up Dead thats not winning thats not even close to winning.
Except that the giant dragon was actually bigger than a football stadium, and possessed all the power of hundreds (possibly thousands) of dragons, and there were no gods available to grant the elves any magic at all.
Details, details, I know...
Mina was never evil. Never. If you had read the books, you'd understand that.
What the setting "seems" to be to you is fine. Again, your assumptions are based on completely false information, but you have a right to your dislike of the setting for whatever reason you choose. All anyone asks is two things from you:
1) That you stop repeating "information" that is blatantly false, especially once disproven.
2) That you stop clogging the thread with the repeated mantra that you don't like Dragonlance and by talking about things that are completely unrelated to anything possible for next year's setting.
We get it. You think DL is lame. You have every right to that, just as someone like me has a right to think Dark Sun or Spelljammer sound pretty lame. You won't see me repeating it over and over every chance I get though.
Spelljammer is incredibly awesome.
Damn right, you tell 'em, pilgrim!! ;)
Elves, beholder and illithid FLEETS, what's not to like?!
And anyone who doesn't like tinker gnomes and giant space hamsters has fogotten D&D is also about FUN, for goodness sake.
Voyager's 'Year of Hell' anyone? GAH!!!
Except that the giant dragon was actually bigger than a football stadium, and possessed all the power of hundreds (possibly thousands) of dragons, and there were no gods available to grant the elves any magic at all.
Details, details, I know...
Mina was never evil. Never. If you had read the books, you'd understand that.
What the setting "seems" to be to you is fine. Again, your assumptions are based on completely false information, but you have a right to your dislike of the setting for whatever reason you choose. All anyone asks is two things from you:
1) That you stop repeating "information" that is blatantly false, especially once disproven.
2) That you stop clogging the thread with the repeated mantra that you don't like Dragonlance and by talking about things that are completely unrelated to anything possible for next year's setting.
We get it. You think DL is lame. You have every right to that, just as someone like me has a right to think Dark Sun or Spelljammer sound pretty lame. You won't see me repeating it over and over every chance I get though.
My suggestion? Stop feeding him and add him to your ignore list. Although, through the defense and rebuttal of all of his griping, I've been reinvigorated on the DL setting. I was a little on the Dark Sun side of the fence for a while, but now I think it sounds like a definite win/win situation for 2010.
Which is actually a mark against Dragonlance, as you don't find all sorts of FR or Eberron stuff (like monsters specific to their settings) outside of their respective campaign stuff.
Which is also constantly mentioned as the reason Planescape, Ravenloft, and Spelljammer won't be getting setting releases.
Now, I do fully expect Dragonlance to come along as a full CS. But Draconians in the Draconomicon makes it less likely to be next.
Which is also constantly mentioned as the reason Planescape, Ravenloft, and Spelljammer won't be getting setting releases.
Now, I do fully expect Dragonlance to come along as a full CS. But Draconians in the Draconomicon makes it less likely to be next.
just for the sake of clearity ( i do agree this helps the DS theory...)
The 25th anniversary celebration of the Dragonlance campaign world is fast approaching. Next month, the final volume in Lost Chronicles Trilogy by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman, Dragons of the Hourglass Mage, explodes on the scene. We also have a bunch of other celebratory happenings going on such as contests and an event at GenCon, as well as the debut of 4th Edition D&D draconians—first in the Monster Manual: Legendary Evils miniatures set and then in Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons in November. My contribution to the celebration, at least for this month, is to provide the stats for the two draconian types appearing in the minis set. Hey DMs, spice up your next encounter by throwing some of these guys into the mix!
BTW, the total, utter lack of DS at all in ANY of the Ampersand articles at this point is the biggest mark against Dark Sun in 2010. Bill said he would be making hints toward the next setting over the next few Ampersand columns. We have basically only seen Dragonlance mentioned in Ampersand at this point, and nothing from its strongest competitor(IMO), Dark Sun.
Now, I do fully expect Dragonlance to come along as a full CS. But Draconians in the Draconomicon makes it less likely to be next.
I can see where your coming at this from CelticMutt, and a lot of people would turn this around and claim otherwise. But since WoTC has burned me out about the 'next setting' issue I'll just say this:
I wouldn't take this as a guide post. Most of the information we've gotten up to this point seemed to be directed mis-direction. Supplemental books like these seem open territory for all sorts of strange things.
BTW, the total, utter lack of DS at all in ANY of the Ampersand articles at this point is the biggest mark against Dark Sun in 2010. Bill said he would be making hints toward the next setting over the next few Ampersand columns. We have basically only seen Dragonlance mentioned in Ampersand at this point, and nothing from its strongest competitor(IMO), Dark Sun.
This is what im saying.
He told us he was going to give us hints in future articles. He then gives us zero Dark Sun hints and a giant page of stuff from Dragonlance! Still, people are trying to argue that this is a clue that its not Dragonlance?? lol
We are still well within the Mystery Zone of the next CS.
And while DL might have an article or two. It's not got actual Classes, and a Powersource that fit squarely within the realm of it's setting coming out in PHB III.
Psionic we -know- is in the PHB3, all we need is confirmation on the Thri Kreen (speaking of didn't we get a DDI article about them already?) and it's Good Night DL permenately.
I stand by DS being number 3. Psionics is coming PHB3, and they will release a setting that strongly correlates with it. It makes the most business sense as the two products will sell each other. Also DL is a High Fantasy, and they said that they'd stay well clear of that crappy lil genre since FR already does the job, at least until they have other Unique Settings and genres released.
If you notice, the first two settings follow this pattern. FR is filled with "traditional" stuff, and coincidentally enough in the PHB1 we got the "traditonal" classes. Eberron is filled with more draconic elements, and a more darker side of the Divine power (basically having their own form of inquisition) and we got the Avenger and the Sorcerer, in the PHBII.
PHBIII just happens to be oh so rife with Psionics.... what setting other than Eberron strongly uses Psionics.... Dark Sun.
all we need is confirmation on the Thri Kreen (speaking of didn't we get a DDI article about them already?)
No.
We did get an article on Dark Sun hazards, like a year ago. But the only place that I've seen the kreen mentioned is in the EPG.
I think you could also take DL, and depending on where you put it in the timeline make it just about any type of setting. People keep saying it is High Fantasy but there are plenty or eras that are more post-apocalyptic or you could set the timeline during one of the many wars that have ravaged that world to make it a wartime setting, either with or without a ton of magic.
That said I will probably give DL a pass when it comes out, just like I did with FR, neither of them are all that exciting to me personally.
Am I the only one though who thinks if they were planning on releasing DL they probably should have shot for this year what with it being the anniversary?
Anyways, what I really think is the most damning thing for Dragonlance is that the next setting is supposed to be one that we are not expecting and by we they mean the normal D&D fans, not us on the forum here who dissect everything. Now for your average everyday D&D fan Dragonlance likely would be flat out the most obvious setting of choice. Dark Sun on the other hand, now that's straight out of left field.
Bill says that his contribution to the celebration, at least for this month, is the stats for the Draconians. I wonder what it is that he will contribute for the party itself? Perhaps an announcement?
BTW, the total, utter lack of DS at all in ANY of the Ampersand articles at this point is the biggest mark against Dark Sun in 2010. Bill said he would be making hints toward the next setting over the next few Ampersand columns. We have basically only seen Dragonlance mentioned in Ampersand at this point, and nothing from its strongest competitor(IMO), Dark Sun.
Something to think about:
Overt and explicit mentions of a campaign setting don't, IMHO, count as hints. A hint needs to be subtle, and neither explicit or obvious.
Something to think about:
Overt and explicit mentions of a campaign setting don't, IMHO, count as hints. A hint needs to be subtle, and neither explicit or obvious.
If draconians everywhere aren't hints, where are the hints that it is DS or some other setting?
If draconians everywhere aren't hints, where are the hints that it is DS or some other setting?
Eberron was just released last month. Keep your pants on.
If Dragonlance is the 2010 setting, WotC better be AMAZINGLY creative with new material if they want to see a dime from anyone in my group. There doesn't seem to be any obvious choices for new races or classes that aren't custom tailored to the largely vanilla, lackluster setting, the only distinguishing features of which are tied to rules that don't exist any more.
Eberron was just released last month. Keep your pants on.
Er...how long are we supposed to wait for 'real' hints? It was only a couple of months ago that were were told to look at Bill's articles for clues. The new setting gets announced next month, meaning that we are only going to get 1 more ampersand before we know officially. If he isn't already putting clues in his articles as promised, then he never is.
There doesn't seem to be any obvious choices for new races or classes that aren't custom tailored to the largely vanilla, lackluster setting, the only distinguishing features of which are tied to rules that don't exist any more.
You mean like forgotten realms, that got the swordmage generated out of nowhere to fill the campaign's class slot?
Er...how long are we supposed to wait for 'real' hints? It was only a couple of months ago that were were told to look at Bill's articles for clues. The new setting gets announced next month, meaning that we are only going to get 1 more ampersand before we know officially. If he isn't already putting clues in his articles as promised, then he never is.
Then maybe it's in the next Ampersand, which would make sense.
You mean like forgotten realms, that got the swordmage generated out of nowhere to fill the campaign's class slot?
Yeah, like that, only they'll have to reach a lot farther, because there are a lot more classes now. Something as obvious as swords + magic = cool isn't really an option.
Besides, FR and DL are entirely different. I'm not really a fan of either one, but FR has always been a lot more flexible and adaptable than DL.
You mean like forgotten realms, that got the swordmage generated out of nowhere to fill the campaign's class slot?
You mean the Swordmage that's basically a reflavored Bladesinger, something connected to the FR elves for, well, close to two decades?
And the only races are a variant of the current halfling, a 'evil origin' variant of Dragonborn with too many abilities and those Irda thing that would apparantly just step on the Goliath's design space as the 'tall and big' race.
Good luck designers!
You mean the Swordmage that's basically a reflavored Bladesinger, something connected to the FR elves for, well, close to two decades?
Eh, the new bard is far more like the bladesinger of old, IMHO, while the swordmage is much more like the old eldritch knight.
From what I can tell the only classes that could be brought out of DL are: mage (ANOTHER Arcane class?!) linked to the defunct alignement system and dragon riding knight, something that is both too narrow and game breaking (companion dragon from level 1?!) to work in 4e.
There's also the mystic divine class that focuses on drawn upon ambient divine energy without tying itself to any specific deity or pantheon.
Noble could be an interesting choice for a new martial leader, on that is more of a mid/back-line commander, rather than the warlords front-line style.
Then again, who says there needs to be a new class? Maybe instead the DLPG would only feature new builds designed to tie existing classes more strongly into the setting's themes.
Irda thing that would apparantly just step on the Goliath's design space as the 'tall and big' race.
Right, because there can only be one race known for its size and power. I guess minotaurs and bugbears should just go home.
Seriously though, Irda have a distinctive theme that would keep them unique from goliaths. They a much more magically inclined race, to my understanding.
If draconians everywhere aren't hints, where are the hints that it is DS or some other setting?
It's the fact that draconians are explicitly mentioned with regard to Dragonlance itself, and Dragonlance itself is in turn mentioned explicitly. If they had JUST mentioned draconians in passing...well, that would be far more subtle.
In turn, had they mentioned defilers AND Dark Sun explicitly by name, or had mentioned psionics and Dark Sun by name, or had mentioned thri-kreen and Dark Sun by name in the same blurb, that too would be rather overt, and not much of a hint, so much as a smack with a hammer.
Plus, as has been pointed out repeatedly, the new campaign setting is supposed to be something unexpected to the majority of D&D players as a whole. Dragonlance is, hands down, the most well-known, MOST expected campaign setting you could possibly name in the entire D&D lineup (ETA: That has been made yet, that is; Forgotten Realms might be more well-known...but, well, FR is already in print).
From what I can tell the only classes that could be brought out of DL are:
Is your familiarity of Dragonlance more or less based on AD&D sources?
Dragonlance fans are capable of talking for pages and pages about the unique, interesting, story-centric, and flavorful elements of Krynn.
The trick WotC may need to master is presenting that to folks like you and the majority of the D&D audience whose only real understanding of Dragonlance is that it has Raistlin, knights, and annoying small races.
Cheers,
Cam
And the only races are a variant of the current halfling, a 'evil origin' variant of Dragonborn with too many abilities and those Irda thing that would apparantly just step on the Goliath's design space as the 'tall and big' race.
Good luck designers!
Clearly, you need a lesson in what half of these things are. 4e Halflings=Kender, there is no need for changing them. Draconians and Dragonborn aren't even remotely similar, other than the fact they are humanoid dragonlike beings. And Irda are the same height as humans, same build as elves, and are closer to Changelings in terms of abilities.
We could have sea elves (two types), centaur (in the same way the Drow ended up in the FRPG), Ursoi (humanoid bears), Thanoi (humanoid walruses), kyrie (humanoid birds), tarmak (though the Half-orc ultimately works well for these human offshoots), scion (basically the dwarf equivalent of eladrin in my book), wendle centaur (medium sized centaur with boney plates all over them), shadowpeople (humanoid bat...wolf...things), or half-ogres (pretty similar to the Goliath though, could just be reflavored).
From what I can tell the only classes that could be brought out of DL are: mage (ANOTHER Arcane class?!) linked to the defunct alignement system and dragon riding knight, something that is both too narrow and game breaking (companion dragon from level 1?!) to work in 4e.
And the only races are a variant of the current halfling, a 'evil origin' variant of Dragonborn with too many abilities and those Irda thing that would apparantly just step on the Goliath's design space as the 'tall and big' race.
Good luck designers!
Wow, all this time reading Dragonlance, including getting the novel focused on the history of the Irda when it first came out, and I never knew that the extremely intelligent (+Int), highly magical (+Int/Cha), considered one of the most beautiful yet evil races on Krynn, shapeshifting Irda, were merely another big strong race like the Goliath.
My god, my entire life has been a lie.
Oh wait ... they're nothing alike at all ....
If you wanted to compare them to another race dismissively, you should have said Changeling.
Even then there are enough differences to have both.We could have sea elves (two types), centaur (in the same way the Drow ended up in the FRPG), Ursoi (humanoid bears), Thanoi (humanoid walruses), kyrie (humanoid birds), tarmak (though the Half-orc ultimately works well for these human offshoots), scion (basically the dwarf equivalent of eladrin in my book), wendle centaur (medium sized centaur with boney plates all over them), shadowpeople (humanoid bat...wolf...things), or half-ogres (pretty similar to the Goliath though, could just be reflavored).
I'd love a playable Centaur. And while I understand that having being aquatic as your schtick can be limiting, I'd love sea elves or something similar too. Maybe it's because my vertigo bouts make it difficult for me to go out on the water (the whole wanting the unknown), but I have this massive fascination with islands/high seas adventures style games. Plus selkie sea elves are just cool.
I'd love a playable Centaur. And while I understand that having being aquatic as your schtick can be limiting, I'd love sea elves or something similar too. Maybe it's because my vertigo bouts make it difficult for me to go out on the water (the whole wanting the unknown), but I have this massive fascination with islands/high seas adventures style games. Plus selkie sea elves are just cool.
The sea elves schtick is that they shapeshift into animals. The Dargonesti, Deep Elves, shift into dolphins (Dark Dargonesti shapeshift into sharks), the Dimernesti, Shoal elves, shift into sea otters(which is frickin' awesome!) (Dark Dimernesti shapeshift into manta rays... not as awesome). But yeah, the whole aquatic thing is their other drawing force.
I would really love to have centaurs as a playable race. I know Cam would like the Ursoi, that much I am certain. I would seriously play an Ursoi mystic multiclassed into barbarian named Stephen. A cookie for anyone that gets the joke.
As for the Irda, the only thing you have wrong in your assessment is that the Irda are actually good. They are decendents of the original ogres (which looked like the Irda), which were wholely evil (which is why they became big and deformed, so they matched their hearts). You could be a Nzunta though, they are Irda that are still evil, but if I remember right their skin was black instead of blue.
I'd love a playable Centaur.
I'd love a good playable centaur. But I'd rather have nothing at all than an official version that was broken. And considering the difficulties involved (they need to be medium sized, speed-limited, reasonably able to climb ropes and ladders, able to wear foot-slot items somehow but not two sets, and compensated in some fashion for not being able to ride a mount) it's probably easier to put it in the "too hard" basket and focus on something that's less likely to need a bunch of special-case rules and exceptions to implement.
So far no one here convinced me it would be an interesting setting to play in...
Though now that actual unique races have been mentionned and expended upon I'm actually interested in the races.
How come no one told me about the bird people and bear people and sea elves that turn into otters before!? Now THOSE I would be interested in!
I asked about unique races a while back and all I got were Kender and Draconians! Kenders are like annoying versions of the current halflings and Draconians just step on the 'dragon-like' niche of the Dragonborn but with a whole different origin so neither really tickled my fancy.
There's also the mystic divine class that focuses on drawn upon ambient divine energy without tying itself to any specific deity or pantheon.
Noble could be an interesting choice for a new martial leader, on that is more of a mid/back-line commander, rather than the warlords front-line style.
Then again, who says there needs to be a new class? Maybe instead the DLPG would only feature new builds designed to tie existing classes more strongly into the setting's themes.
Reflavored Invoker and a Warlord (or reflavored Bard) build.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, without new player options in the form of a new class and new races a CSPG would just not sell as well.
It seems to me like any class people can think of are extremely tied to the fluff of the setting, making them hard to expend into free standing concepts with multiple builds.
Reflavored Invoker and a Warlord (or reflavored Bard) build.
*Shrug* The Avenger could have been a reflavoured Paladin and the Druid could have been a reflavoured Cleric. They weren't, and they got complete class writeups.
Just because something CAN be done as a refluffing doesn't mean it has to be. And from the perspective of Wizards, who wants to make money by releasing new books, it seems like a good bet to go with the other assumption - that if something CAN be done as a new class, it will be.
If there's some interesting new mechanics attached, I won't care a bit that the Knight seems similar to the Fighter and the Paladin, or that the Wanderer seems similar to the Rogue or Ranger.
I have to confess also that I'd never heard of "Swordmages" before the FRPHB came out. Possibly my fault for not reading any FR novels since 2nd Edition, but in my mind it's set a precedent for being surprised by totally new concepts from the 4E campaign books.
Undrave, can I also say - I get that Dragonlance is a long way from your preferred setting for 2010. That's fine. I'd be pretty unimpressed if we were getting Greyhawk. But the fact that you're personally not turned on by the idea of Dragonlance doesn't follow through to Dragonlance being crap, or not having sufficient material to fill out a setting guide. It clearly does, as decades of strongly selling novels go to show. It might be more constructive to argue why your preferred setting would be a better choice for 2010, rather than just knocking this one.
Reflavored Invoker and a Warlord (or reflavored Bard) build.
Sure that works, but by that argument we probably didn't need any of the classes in PH2 either. Reflavoring is great, but the ability to do so does not preclude the ability to create new mechanical alternative as well.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, without new player options in the form of a new class and new races a CSPG would just not sell.
I thouroughly disagree. Personaly I would have bought both the EPG and FRPG even if the only mechanical elements in them were the feats (well I might have skipped the FRPG, but only becuase I'm a DDi subscriber and thus have full Compendium access).
Its not that I want to knock the setting or think its crap... I just don't feel like its suited for the purpose. I just want something more...stimulating to play into.
As an aside I bought the EPG mostly for the Artificer and races, as I knew nothing of the setting before hand, but having read the book I now find myself interested in the setting as a whole and if my group wants to play in Eberron I'll grab the Campaign Setting Guide. I'm sure I'm the only one who proceeds in similar way, in fact all the newbies probably do so you need some 'hook' to sell a setting beyond the setting itself.
Honestly Dragonlance just seems more fun to READ about than to play INTO. I just don't see how it would make for a dynamic setting... unless they pull a huge cataclysm like in FR but even there from what I gather it happened already often in DL that the fans would be ****** off...
Its not that I want to knock the setting or think its crap... I just don't feel like its suited for the purpose. I just want something more...stimulating to play into.
I follow that. I guess that's how I feel about Greyhawk.
For me, Dragonlance is a lot like Star Wars. You've got different eras you can play in (the Time of Huma, the War of the Lance, the War of Souls, et cetera) that all have different flavour and assumptions, and as a fan you can pick and choose which one appeals to you, just like how Star Wars has the Old Republic, the Clone Wars, the Galactic Civil War, and the Legacy Era.
And then you can do it at various scales. You can pretend the heroes of the novels never existed, and put your own characters at the centre of the same events and see how it turns out differently. (The original DL series modules are great for this as they depart quite dramatically from the Chronicles novels). Or you can treat the big world-spanning events as exactly that, big world spanning events, and tell stories around them in exactly the same way as you would in a World War 2 game - the players don't need to personally defeat Hitler to have a dramatic and epic story attached to them.
Or you can ignore the history and use it as a worldmap, in the same way a lot of people do with Forgotten Realms. You can do your regular old dungeon-crawling in Krynn flavoured locations. Krynn's packed with great and memorable settings to explore, from the High Towers of Sorcery to the submerged city of Ishtar to any number of other challenging and lethal locales.
Or if that's not to your taste you can mix it up completely and make your own continents, eras, worlds, whatever, using the Dragonlance concepts. Draconians, Kender, civilized minotaurs, rideable dragons, and tinker gnomes are each individually awesome enough to form a big chunk of a homebrew campaign and it's worth getting excited about to see them supported in 4th Edition, let alone all the other concepts Dragonlance has to offer.
I'm sure I'm the only one who proceeds in similar way, in fact all the newbies probably do so you need some 'hook' to sell a setting beyond the setting itself.
By the way, I'm not sure how familiar you are with the Dragonlance art. This is the stuff that reminds me most of why I love the setting. (Click Spoiler tag.)
Its not that I want to knock the setting or think its crap... I just don't feel like its suited for the purpose. I just want something more...stimulating to play into.
Dragon Lance might just not be for you then, in which case you can save a few bucks by skipping it, while leaving it for others that are more interested.
As an aside I bought the EPG mostly for the Artificer and races, as I knew nothing of the setting before hand, but having read the book I now find myself interested in the setting as a whole and if my group wants to play in Eberron I'll grab the Campaign Setting Guide. I'm sure I'm the only one who proceeds in similar way, in fact all the newbies probably do so you need some 'hook' to sell a setting beyond the setting itself.
Alternatively, since you mention having embraced Eberron after purchasing the EPG, you might in theory find that the same could be true for the DLPG. Again, maybe not for you, but for others maybe it could be.
Also, were it not for the Dragon playtest, the notion of an artificer class appearing in the EPG prior to it's release could have been dismissed just as easily as you dismissed the notion that mystic or noble could be classes. I could easily have seen people saying that there was no need for an artificer in 4E because one could just reflavor a bard, wizard, or some multiclass combination of the two. If one chooses only to focus on the similarities between existent and potential classes there are probably very few avenues for any new classes, but if one instead chooses to emphasize what makes each class unique than the possibilities are nearly endless
As for bringing in the newbies, options for becoming a DRAGON RIDER would certainly do it (whether a standalone class, spellscared like pseudo-class, or just feats), and if any setting is likely to have such rules it's going to be Dragon Lance.
Though it might end up like the Gryphon rider paragon path too...
Man all this waiting is just obnoxious...when are they gonna announce the next setting anyway?
Man all this waiting is just obnoxious...when are they gonna announce the next setting anyway?
On this I agree, if only because it will finally shut everyone up (this thread is entirely too long
). Of course it won't be long after said announcement that the 2011 speculation threads will start. :sigh:I have trouble imagining what kind of powers a Dragon Rider pseudo-class could get. I can see a feat to ride dragons instead of the basic mounted combat but I think powers you could only use on your dragon would be too limited... then again they could be power that gain a bonus WHILE riding the dragon.
Though it might end up like the Gryphon rider paragon path too...
Man all this waiting is just obnoxious...when are they gonna announce the next setting anyway?
I would like to see something in the DLPG like an Archer Warlord build or a Martial controller that uses ranged weapons (what the archer ranger should have been), we need more weapon-based ranged classes.
A Dragon Rider class much on the vein of the beast master ranger would be cool, heck, allow them to ride all sorts of beasts (behir, bulettes, griffons, pegasi, you name it). Have them pick a favored animal at the beginning of the class and build off of that.
Agreed on the waiting being obnoxious. They are going to announce the 2010 setting at Gencon. Bill implied he will have more stuff in store for the 25th DL celebration there, I think an announcement like a new PG/CG/Adventure would be a good gift.
On this I agree, if only because it will finally shut everyone up (this thread is entirely too long
2011 will be Narnia, with fauns and mice as playable races. I thought we settled this already?
Incidentally, the way to build a dedicated dragon riding class (not necessarily agreeing that it's needed) is this: dual-use powers. They do one thing when you're mounted, and a different thing when you're not. Some are better mounted, some are better grounded, but no dragon rider will end up disadvantaged while not backed up by their mount.
It's still vastly problematic giving any class a reliable flying power when their buddies are all landbound. Better off just creating regular old Knights of Solamnia / Knights of Takhisis and making flyable dragon mounts available to all classes.
On this I agree, if only because it will finally shut everyone up (this thread is entirely too long
There doesn't need to be speculation. If Dragonlance isn't 2010, it should be 2011. If Dark Sun isn't 2010, it should be 2011. Simple as that.
2011 will be Narnia, with fauns and mice as playable races. I thought we settled this already?
I'd buy it. I'd dig playing swashbuckling mouse.
There doesn't need to be speculation. If Dragonlance isn't 2010, it should be 2011. If Dark Sun isn't 2010, it should be 2011. Simple as that.
That would certainly be my hope. Though the possibility of Greyhawk or something entirely new and unheard of should not be discounted either.
So huh...when IS GenCon then?
That would certainly be my hope. Though the possibility of Greyhawk or something entirely new and unheard of should not be discounted either.
I would like to think that WotC would be using the 2010 and 2011 years of working on existing campaign settings to have a clandestine team of designers working on a new campaign setting. I never really got that into Greyhawk (which is sad, since I had a lot of fun reading the Gazetteer), but I am sure its fanbase would enjoy seeing it come back out.
At GenCon eh?
So huh...when IS GenCon then?
August 13-16th. By then everyone's frustration will have reached critical mass in waiting for the announcement when WotC pulls a fast one on us all and says they have no plans to release a PG/CS/Adventure in 2010, wiping the city of Indianapolis off the map.
Man all this waiting is just obnoxious...when are they gonna announce the next setting anyway?
Yeah. I don't even know that I care anymore whether it's DS or DL next, as long as one is 2010 and the other 2011. As Doris Day sang, "Que sera sera."
2011 will be Narnia, with fauns and mice as playable races. I thought we settled this already?
Mouse swashbucklers FTW.
Personally I'd love an 'age of discovery' setting where the PCs explore a new continent filled with native tribes for far off empires and as they rise in tier establish their own domain and start exploring other planes entirely... with the right flavoring and a new Primal class (or something not Arcane) and a few ideas grabbed from Spelljammer it could be awesome!
Include an Island Nations area and I'm there.
Personally I'd love an 'age of discovery' setting where the PCs explore a new continent filled with native tribes for far off empires and as they rise in tier establish their own domain and start exploring other planes entirely... with the right flavoring and a new Primal class (or something not Arcane) and a few ideas grabbed from Spelljammer it could be awesome!
I always wanted to make a setting where the players go to a place where there aren't any other intelligent creatures (that they know of), and have the place littered with ruins of monuments long grown over with moss and plant life. Make the players feel like somthing really wrong happened here a long time ago.
But then Xen'drik came along and ruined eveything for me!
There doesn't need to be speculation. If Dragonlance isn't 2010, it should be 2011. If Dark Sun isn't 2010, it should be 2011. Simple as that.
I disagree no matter what 2010 is 2011 had best be a new freaking setting.
I disagree no matter what 2010 is 2011 had best be a new freaking setting.
If 2010 is Dragonlance or Greyhawk, then 2011 might just be something entirely new. If however 2010 is Darksun, I wouldn't count on getting something new in 2011 as we will be long over due for some classic high fantasy.
Personally I'm not expecting anything completely new until 2013.
I disagree no matter what 2010 is 2011 had best be a new freaking setting.
No.
GregT_314, you make me pine for the old 80's & 90's artwork. Hey WotC, bring back Easley, Caldwell, and Brom!
This. Oh dear God, this.
I'd rather not go back to that garbage.
The artwork in the 3e DL CS was terrible too.
GregT_314, you make me pine for the old 80's & 90's artwork. Hey WotC, bring back Easley, Caldwell, and Brom!
Totally agree!!
sorry the new main artist is good but I don't like his work :/ Not my style.
Alas keith Parkinson passed away
I have Easley's necormancer painting over my PC as I type this!
On art, and if it's a setting we don't expect....
"Arrr! Mutant-ninja-pirate-giant-spacehamsters-of-Ill-Omen off thew larboard! LOAD LANGRAGE AND SPHAM!! Fire at will, Mr Sprocket!!" :D
ie do an old setting followed by a brand new setting the next year that way everyone gets what they want eventually.
I used to be of that mind set. Now I'm more of the mindset that I think WotC should alternate between classic/alternative themed settings rather than old/new settings. As such my current ideal release schedule would be something as followers (assuming an 8 year run)
[INDENT]2008: Forgotten Realms
2009: Eberron
2010: Dragon Lance
2011: Dark Sun
2012: Greyhawk
2013: *something new w/ alternative theme*
2014: *something new w/ classic theme*
2015: Spelljammer[/INDENT]
[INDENT]2008: Forgotten Realms
2009: Eberron
2010: Dragon Lance
2011: Dark Sun
2012: Greyhawk
2013: *something new w/ alternative theme*
2014: *something new w/ classic theme*
2015: Spelljammer[/INDENT]
So....
Am I the only one who would find it depressing if it took half a decade for 4th edition to get its own setting, something new and actually designed around 4th-ed mechanics?
Now, I'm not the wisest lorekeeper of Dragonlance. I've only read the first trilogy, so there is plenty I don't know about it...but for the core of that setting, and for everything in the 3.5 player's guide, I could pull out stats from the various books for almost everything.
And that's the problem I see.
You can already run a Dragonlance game. Draconians will be in the 'nomicon 2 and dragonborn take the role of any draconian heroes, halfings are kender, gnomes are gnomes, and all the classes already exist. Sea elves are too niche, pretty much reliant upon an aquatic campaign, and not to be rude, but walrusfolk aren't exactly what comes to mind when I think iconic Dragonlance, ignorant as I may be.
Likewise, if you import all the fluff of Greyhawk, you can already play the game. Because so much of the campaign setting is mirrored in core DnD, nothing new comes to mind that Greyhawk would require(now, again, I am not an expert, feel free to contradict me on this). Meanwhile, most of the normal races aren't distinct from standard fantasy: elves are prettier-and-nicer-and-better-than-you, dwarves are drinkin', swearin', fightin' bearded battleragers, halflings are short, and no one likes goblins.
Eberron needed artificers and dragon marks, kalashter and changelings. Forgotten realms reincarnated the bladesinger, scarred spells into monstrosities, birthed the genasi and gave the drow center stage with the dark pact. Between the Elemental clerics(ties with an upcoming power source can be helpful) and nifty races like the thri-kreen and mul, Dark Sun has enough crunch and a unique twist to justify its place as a setting.
Now, this is not to say Dragonlance is a poor setting. I'll admit to having quite a bit of fun reading the novels(well, after slogging through the first, which was a bit droll. Once the war started and actual character development started up, they were quite nifty) But what, at present, does a DM require mechanically to run a game using all the previous lore that he doesn't currently(or soon in the future with the Draconomicon 2) possess?
I'm skeptical of Dragonlance for the same reason I regard Greyhawk with a resounding "Meh". I don't see it breaking new ground or adding anything to the overall game. Reading about the possible stats for walrus men and another priest-refluffed divine class sounds to me like fishing for mechanics to justify a player's guide, rather than having major and iconic pieces of the setting that need fleshing out.
Old ground is great, but sometimes a chef needs to try new recipes, or an architect needs to experiment with a new style. Rather than recycling the old, I would like to see the new restaurant of 4th edition develop its own special dish, something we've never tasted before.
I used to be of that mind set. Now I'm more of the mindset that I think WotC should alternate between classic/alternative themed settings rather than old/new settings. As such my current ideal release schedule would be something as followers (assuming an 8 year run)
[INDENT]2008: Forgotten Realms
2009: Eberron
2010: Dragon Lance
2011: Dark Sun
2012: Greyhawk
2013: *something new w/ alternative theme*
2014: *something new w/ classic theme*
2015: Spelljammer[/INDENT]
Yeah Id rather see Darksun 2010 new setting 2011 Dragon Lance 20112 New setting 2013 grey hawk 2014 new setting 2015 and doubt they will do spell jammer. I see no reason why anyone should be disapointed with a schedule like that.
So....
Am I the only one who would find it depressing if it took half a decade for 4th edition to get its own setting, something new and actually designed around 4th-ed mechanics?
Now, I'm not the wisest lorekeeper of Dragonlance. I've only read the first trilogy, so there is plenty I don't know about it...but for the core of that setting, and for everything in the 3.5 player's guide, I could pull out stats from the various books for almost everything.
And that's the problem I see.
You can already run a Dragonlance game. Draconians will be in the 'nomicon 2 and dragonborn take the role of any draconian heroes, halfings are kender, gnomes are gnomes, and all the classes already exist. Sea elves are too niche, pretty much reliant upon an aquatic campaign, and not to be rude, but walrusfolk aren't exactly what comes to mind when I think iconic Dragonlance, ignorant as I may be.
Likewise, if you import all the fluff of Greyhawk, you can already play the game. Because so much of the campaign setting is mirrored in core DnD, nothing new comes to mind that Greyhawk would require(now, again, I am not an expert, feel free to contradict me on this). Meanwhile, most of the normal races aren't distinct from standard fantasy: elves are prettier-and-nicer-and-better-than-you, dwarves are drinkin', swearin', fightin' bearded battleragers, halflings are short, and no one likes goblins.
Eberron needed artificers and dragon marks, kalashter and changelings. Forgotten realms reincarnated the bladesinger, scarred spells into monstrosities, birthed the genasi and gave the drow center stage with the dark pact. Between the Elemental clerics(ties with an upcoming power source can be helpful) and nifty races like the thri-kreen and mul, Dark Sun has enough crunch and a unique twist to justify its place as a setting.
+1. I was actually mulling over a post saying much the same thing. Though I won't saddle you with the next bit.
Now, this is not to say Dragonlance is a poor setting. I'll admit to having quite a bit of fun reading the novels(well, after slogging through the first, which was a bit droll. Once the war started and actual character development started up, they were quite nifty) But what, at present, does a DM require mechanically to run a game using all the previous lore that he doesn't currently(or soon in the future with the Draconomicon 2) possess?
I'll say it, then. Dragonlance is a poor setting. Its sole distinguishing characteristic is the integration of game rules of old editions into the setting, and far too much of the setting is geared toward setting up a single adventure, and anyone who might've been interested already knows how that one goes. Everything that happens afterward is still focused on it.
Dragonlance love is pure nostalgia.
[INDENT]2008: Forgotten Realms
2009: Eberron
2010: Dragon Lance
2011: Dark Sun
2012: New Setting (a sea based one with few large continents)
2013: Combined PG/CS/Adventure for Planescape/Ravenloft/Spelljammer
2014: New Setting (renaissance era with firearms, etc)
2015: Mystara (and all of its offshoots)[/indent]
So....
Am I the only one who would find it depressing if it took half a decade for 4th edition to get its own setting, something new and actually designed around 4th-ed mechanics?
Now, I'm not the wisest lorekeeper of Dragonlance. I've only read the first trilogy, so there is plenty I don't know about it...but for the core of that setting, and for everything in the 3.5 player's guide, I could pull out stats from the various books for almost everything.
And that's the problem I see.
You can already run a Dragonlance game. Draconians will be in the 'nomicon 2 and dragonborn take the role of any draconian heroes, halfings are kender, gnomes are gnomes, and all the classes already exist. Sea elves are too niche, pretty much reliant upon an aquatic campaign, and not to be rude, but walrusfolk aren't exactly what comes to mind when I think iconic Dragonlance, ignorant as I may be.
Likewise, if you import all the fluff of Greyhawk, you can already play the game. Because so much of the campaign setting is mirrored in core DnD, nothing new comes to mind that Greyhawk would require(now, again, I am not an expert, feel free to contradict me on this). Meanwhile, most of the normal races aren't distinct from standard fantasy: elves are prettier-and-nicer-and-better-than-you, dwarves are drinkin', swearin', fightin' bearded battleragers, halflings are short, and no one likes goblins.
Eberron needed artificers and dragon marks, kalashter and changelings. Forgotten realms reincarnated the bladesinger, scarred spells into monstrosities, birthed the genasi and gave the drow center stage with the dark pact. Between the Elemental clerics(ties with an upcoming power source can be helpful) and nifty races like the thri-kreen and mul, Dark Sun has enough crunch and a unique twist to justify its place as a setting.
Now, this is not to say Dragonlance is a poor setting. I'll admit to having quite a bit of fun reading the novels(well, after slogging through the first, which was a bit droll. Once the war started and actual character development started up, they were quite nifty) But what, at present, does a DM require mechanically to run a game using all the previous lore that he doesn't currently(or soon in the future with the Draconomicon 2) possess?
I'm skeptical of Dragonlance for the same reason I regard Greyhawk with a resounding "Meh". I don't see it breaking new ground or adding anything to the overall game. Reading about the possible stats for walrus men and another priest-refluffed divine class sounds to me like fishing for mechanics to justify a player's guide, rather than having major and iconic pieces of the setting that need fleshing out.
Old ground is great, but sometimes a chef needs to try new recipes, or an architect needs to experiment with a new style. Rather than recycling the old, I would like to see the new restaurant of 4th edition develop its own special dish, something we've never tasted before.
Seconded!!
[INDENT]2008: Forgotten Realms
2009: Eberron
2010: Dragon Lance
2011: Dark Sun
2012: New Setting (a sea based one with few large continents)
2013: Combined PG/CS/Adventure for Planescape/Ravenloft/Spelljammer
2014: New Setting (renaissance era with firearms, etc)
2015: Mystara (and all of its offshoots)[/indent]
Nice list. Though I should like to clarify that I paced Spelljammer at the end of my list because one of the prime elements of the setting was the ability to travel between other settings. As such I feel that we need at least a half-dozen other settings to travel between before Spelljammer can truly live up to its full potential. Also, to quote Yahtzee, "Once you've gone into space everything else feels like a step backwards.", as such it might be best saved untill near the end of 4E.
Also, I didn't specifically call out Planescape or Ravenloft because those two setting seem to have been rather thoroughly integrated into the new core of generic non-setting D&D.
Personally I love 99% of the new art work. The only piece ive seen that I did not like was the warforged in the ebaron book. My prefrence would be for dark sun followed by something completley new. Followed by an old setting then something new ie do an old setting followed by a brand new setting the next year that way everyone gets what they want eventually.
I like a lot of the new art, with some exceptions. First of all, Wayne England draws the ugliest faces, and shouldn't be allowed to continue doing so; even the faces of ugly creatures don't look right when he draws them!
Dragonlance love is pure nostalgia.
Only in so much as playing D&D of any stripe is pure nostalgia for those days before WoW.
Cheers,
Cam
Only in so much as playing D&D of any stripe is pure nostalgia for those days before WoW.
Cheers,
Cam
I never played DnD before 4e and never played WoW, your words make no sense to me.
Only in so much as playing D&D of any stripe is pure nostalgia for those days before WoW.
You mean... you sit with a group of people in the same room and play? So it's a LAN party? No? Oh... you mean you mean you write down your characters... from... books? And you talk to each other? Over ventrilo? No? Face-to-face? Wow... that's weird. No computers? And you roll dice? How quaint...
:D
Only in so much as playing D&D of any stripe is pure nostalgia for those days before WoW.
Cheers,
Cam
Yeah, no. I opt out of raids to play D&D because it provides an experience WoW doesn't. I'm sure I don't need to explain this to anyone here. They're just not the same thing.
On the other hand, Dragonlance provides very little in the way of a unique experience that can't be used as an example of "What Not To Do." Kender are nothing but an excuse for PCs to misbehave badly. Tinker gnomes are impossible to implement in a satisfying way. The alignment-based delineation of wizards suffers from the same problems alignment always did, only moreso, because it's so definite. But mostly, it's the fact that the setting was created in order for one single specific adventure to take place. And that was pretty good, if you happen to like that sort of thing, but when everything in the setting, before, during and after focuses on a single event, using it to tell your own story is nearly impossible. The material itself focuses you on either retelling or participating in the same old story.
There was only one new full setting during the span of 3e. If there are any new settings for 4e, I bet there will also only be one.
Which would suck big time.
I'd also like to see a truely steampunk and/or SpellJammer setting.
I'd really like to see Both the 2nd and 3rd place in the contest Eberron won get published.
I'd also like to see a truely steampunk and/or SpellJammer setting.
+1 for the steam punk idea
Which would suck big time.
Meh...based on Points of Light and the setting design philosophy of 4E, i have about zero faith that WotC would put out an interesting original setting. They've expressly stated that they are sticking with standard fantasy in the preview books and their new tenet is that everything has to be kitchen sink.
We''ll never see a steampunk or scifi-fusion setting out of WotC. Hell, id be surprised if we even got guns out of them.
Yeah, no. I opt out of raids to play D&D because it provides an experience WoW doesn't. I'm sure I don't need to explain this to anyone here. They're just not the same thing.
Yes, I know. Hence my subtle use of irony.
On the other hand, Dragonlance provides very little in the way of a unique experience that can't be used as an example of "What Not To Do." Kender are nothing but an excuse for PCs to misbehave badly. Tinker gnomes are impossible to implement in a satisfying way.
I'm pretty sure I took care of this in the other thread. You think that, whereas my experience writing and running Dragonlance over the years says different.
And that was pretty good, if you happen to like that sort of thing, but when everything in the setting, before, during and after focuses on a single event, using it to tell your own story is nearly impossible. The material itself focuses you on either retelling or participating in the same old story.
We published a complete, 1st thru 20th level campaign adventure trilogy that proved that you didn't need to rehash the War of the Lance to have a successful campaign. While I agree that treatments in the past have attempted to somehow capture this lightning once again using the original story, I don't agree that Dragonlance is a one-story world.
In other words, I'm sorry to hear your own experiences with Dragonlance have lead you to believe that it's full of frustrating little races and tiresome retreads, but I am very glad to know that hundreds of player groups had the opposite experience under our watch. Whether it happens again in 4E is obviously up for debate.
Cheers,
Cam
White Robes = Lawful Good and Good
Red Robes = Unaligned
Black Robes = Evil and Chaotic Evil
Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil might even have trouble fitting in since they are so extreme and would likely be renegades rather than members of the Order. Also depending on where they set DL and what changes they make it's possible there's no more official Orders and any who go by the robe standard do so out of a sense of tradition.
Clerics pretty much can already choose not to worship a single diety, it's just not explicity spelled out. Eberron showed examples of channel divinity feats for worshipping philosphies and groups of dieties together and Divine Power and the Domains could add more. This might invalidate any need for the Mystic as a class.
I still think DL could make a decent addition as a campaign setting but I suspect the PG is likely to be more about PPs and new builds than it will be classes. As for races that could be trickier since many races in DL are either atagonist roles (thanoi, draconians) or subtypes of existing races (kender, tinker gnome, sea elves). The irda are among the more unique but do step on the changelings toes a bit, and if the setting is at the War of Souls or later the Irda are supposedly extinct (but hey they were supposedly extinct prior to the Cataclysm too).
I never played DnD before 4e and never played WoW, your words make no sense to me.
Then you've got lots of great things to look forward to, don't you?
Cheers,
Cam
Actually as odd as it sounds the schools of Wizardy would still work in 4e.
White Robes = Lawful Good and Good
Red Robes = Unaligned
Black Robes = Evil and Chaotic Evil
Indeed. Though while the alignment ties were an important part of old school Dragon Lance, an update to the setting could probably loosen the restriction making the schools into mere factions. Those factions might have strong alignment tendencies but not actual requirements. It could be a lot like the rules for how a paladin must start as the same alignment as their deity but doesn't lose their powers afterwords if their alignments change, however, there may be story based consequences such as being chased by members true to the tenants of the faith.
Indeed. Though while the alignment ties were an important part of old school Dragon Lance, an update to the setting could probably loosen the restriction making the schools into mere factions. Those factions might have strong alignment tendencies but not actual requirements. It could be a lot like the rules for how a paladin must start as the same alignment as their deity but doesn't lose their powers afterwords if their alignments change, however, there may be story based consequences such as being chased by members true to the tenants of the faith.
Yeah no. My dm pulled alignment out completley we dont bother with it at all. I dont know why anyone would. Why do people like this division of magic based on alignment anyway? Besides I dont want spell casters to have to be tied to an orginization in a campaign setting what if I dont want my wizard or warlock to have to be part of some guild?
As to new settings I have that wotc can come up with something Ebaron was really original and the 4e desingers have proven they are willing to push the envelope with the new psion and monk classes.
Besides I dont want spell casters to have to be tied to an orginization in a campaign setting what if I dont want my wizard or warlock to have to be part of some guild?
It'd be the same as playing a cleric or paladin that is not a member of any particular faith. The default for both classes assumes that the player is both a member of an organized faith and in good standing with other members of that faith. Breaking with the tenants of the faith is possible and the character will suffer no mechanical penalties (such as loss of power) for doing so, but it is implied to have serious story based consequences which the DM could use as plot hocks for future adventures. Dragon Lance's schools of wizardry would basically just be applying the same principles to arcane classes (or at least to wizards) that the default setting applies to most divine classes.
Yeah no. My dm pulled alignment out completley we dont bother with it at all. I dont know why anyone would. Why do people like this division of magic based on alignment anyway? Besides I dont want spell casters to have to be tied to an orginization in a campaign setting what if I dont want my wizard or warlock to have to be part of some guild?
As to new settings I have that wotc can come up with something Ebaron was really original and the 4e desingers have proven they are willing to push the envelope with the new psion and monk classes.
In Dragonlance MOST wizards are part of the Order. Some arent' and are considered renegades and dangerous because they refuse to follow the rules of the Order and the gods of magic (which have no priests of their own) and seen as a threat to the world because of magical disasters of the past.
When you join the Order your alignment determines what color robe you are associated with and it's done based on personality type alignment. Also because DL had a more fluid alignment system (in game rules they had a scale that you could slide along and change alignments based on your actions) it was also possible a wizard's robes could change as their alignment changed (like Rastlin going from a red robe to a black robe).
Again also by the time of the War of Souls the Order of High Sorcery was much weaker and 'renegade' wizards were more common. Also the Order only exists on Ansalon and not the rest of Krynn. Also low level wizards didn't belong to the Order. In older editions it was level 3 or so that you joined by taking a test. In 4e it'd be more likely a PP that is part of the character's development.
In Dragonlance MOST wizards are part of the Order. Some arent' and are considered renegades and dangerous because they refuse to follow the rules of the Order and the gods of magic (which have no priests of their own) and seen as a threat to the world because of magical disasters of the past.
When you join the Order your alignment determines what color robe you are associated with and it's done based on personality type alignment. Also because DL had a more fluid alignment system (in game rules they had a scale that you could slide along and change alignments based on your actions) it was also possible a wizard's robes could change as their alignment changed (like Rastlin going from a red robe to a black robe).
Again also by the time of the War of Souls the Order of High Sorcery was much weaker and 'renegade' wizards were more common. Also the Order only exists on Ansalon and not the rest of Krynn. Also low level wizards didn't belong to the Order. In older editions it was level 3 or so that you joined by taking a test. In 4e it'd be more likely a PP that is part of the character's development.
Yeah I hope they kill of the gods of magic in DL like they did in FR if they redo it. In fact I fully expect it. And as far as Im aware Ansalon is the only continent they have ever detailed on DL. it really isnt a large enough campaign world. In my opinion anyway.
Yeah I hope they kill of the gods of magic in DL like they did in FR if they redo it. In fact I fully expect it. And as far as Im aware Ansalon is the only continent they have ever detailed on DL. it really isnt a large enough campaign world. In my opinion anyway.
Ansalon is one of three continents detailed for Dragonlance. Taladas, the second continent on the opposite side of the planet, was detailed a lot in 2e. Adlatum, the third continent, was fan-created but was listed in a few official products.
And what is the ruler that decides if a campaign world IS big enough? We can't have all campaign worlds with continents as large as Faerun, after all.
Ansalon is one of three continents detailed for Dragonlance. Taladas, the second continent on the opposite side of the planet, was detailed a lot in 2e. Adlatum, the third continent, was fan-created but was listed in a few official products.
And what is the ruler that decides if a campaign world IS big enough? We can't have all campaign worlds with continents as large as Faerun, after all.
No but Ebaron is about the size id expect from a campaign setting with 3 large continents at least. This is all in my opinion but the more area you have the more different kinds of adventure you can cover.
Diterlizzi!
He sucked, interesting, but all his stuff look pure cartoonish, washed out and humanoids looked like concentration camp victims! :/
Oh and Spelljammer better bloody well be out before 2015 or Boo will lonely!!!! ;)
Yeah I hope they kill of the gods of magic in DL like they did in FR if they redo it. In fact I fully expect it. And as far as Im aware Ansalon is the only continent they have ever detailed on DL. it really isnt a large enough campaign world. In my opinion anyway.
1) Won't happen.
2) The DL world is about the same size as Eberron. Maybe larger since 4e has shrunk Eberron down.
Yes, I know. Hence my subtle use of irony.
I'm pretty sure I took care of this in the other thread. You think that, whereas my experience writing and running Dragonlance over the years says different.
We published a complete, 1st thru 20th level campaign adventure trilogy that proved that you didn't need to rehash the War of the Lance to have a successful campaign. While I agree that treatments in the past have attempted to somehow capture this lightning once again using the original story, I don't agree that Dragonlance is a one-story world.
In other words, I'm sorry to hear your own experiences with Dragonlance have lead you to believe that it's full of frustrating little races and tiresome retreads, but I am very glad to know that hundreds of player groups had the opposite experience under our watch. Whether it happens again in 4E is obviously up for debate.
Cheers,
Cam
Personally adventuring in Dragonlance always suffered in the same manner that the Star Wars RPG did for me. I always felt supplementary to the setting because of the iconic nature of the setting.
It's the same reason I avoided 3E Forgotten Realms. I prefer something without massive iconic canon behind it.
1) Won't happen.
2) The DL world is about the same size as Eberron. Maybe larger since 4e has shrunk Eberron down.
1 why not? would make it more interesting
2. Did not know that. The main continent seems a lot smaller than khovaire by a lot.
I also agree with the last poster who said the novels define the setting way too much. That is my number one problem with the setting. IF they give it the FR treatment and make everything from the books obscalesent then I might look into it.
1 why not? would make it more interesting
Well, no it wouldn't make it more interesting. But as for why - between FR & Eberron, Eberron kept all it's gods. Why? Well defined and relative low number. Neither of which FR can claim.
FR's gods numbered more than the combined amount of every other TSR/WotC setting combined. That's why so many were killed, retconned into being Exarchs, or retconned into being other gods in disguise. Plus most were either poorly defined or too similar to other gods.
Dragonlance's Pantheon does not have that problem. While having a few more gods than Eberron, they are otherwise pretty similar in the lack of problems. Therefore there will be no reduction of gods.
Plus, as much as I enjoyed the gutting FR got, I doubt WotC enjoyed the backlash. They're not going to risk a repeat.
Well, no it wouldn't make it more interesting. But as for why - between FR & Eberron, Eberron kept all it's gods. Why? Well defined and relative low number. Neither of which FR can claim.
You forgot the most important part of Eberron's gods, potentially non-existent. As such their numbers really don't matter that much.:P
You forgot the most important part of Eberron's gods, potentially non-existent. As such their numbers really don't matter that much.:P
Actually, the numbers do matter. Specifically. The numbers of the gods.
It's hard to explain.
2) The DL world is about the same size as Eberron. Maybe larger since 4e has shrunk Eberron down.
Wait, what? Eberron is huge, but Khorvaire isn't even the biggest continent. (The only thing that I can think of with regards to size is that in 4E, perhaps the maps are now better scaled, but I haven't seen the new Campaign Guide yet.) OTOH, everything I've seen of Krynn suggests that it's a tiny little moon compared to other campaign worlds.
Wait, what? Eberron is huge, but Khorvaire isn't even the biggest continent. (The only thing that I can think of with regards to size is that in 4E, perhaps the maps are now better scaled, but I haven't seen the new Campaign Guide yet.) OTOH, everything I've seen of Krynn suggests that it's a tiny little moon compared to other campaign worlds.
Eberron has been shrunk down though. I mean, it looks the same, but all the distances listed, square mileage, whatever, has been reduced. I don't know the square mileage of DL anymore, but I doubt it's that small.
Wait, what? Eberron is huge, but Khorvaire isn't even the biggest continent. (The only thing that I can think of with regards to size is that in 4E, perhaps the maps are now better scaled, but I haven't seen the new Campaign Guide yet.) OTOH, everything I've seen of Krynn suggests that it's a tiny little moon compared to other campaign worlds.
It has been postulated that there are as many as nine continents on Krynn, three are known. The landmass that is Ansalon is definitely smaller than Khorvaire, but if you include Chorane, the southern polar continent (Ansalon is in the southern hemisphere), which is directly connected to Ansalon currently, the entire landmass is much larger than Khorvaire. I believe the northern hemisphere continent of Taladas is much larger than Ansalon.
Eberron has been shrunk down though. I mean, it looks the same, but all the distances listed, square mileage, whatever, has been reduced. I don't know the square mileage of DL anymore, but I doubt it's that small.
Hmm... I'll have to check that out. Sounds plausible though, given how inconsistent the map scaling was in Eberron in 3.5E.
I'd love a playable Centaur.
Same. However based on everything we've seen so far in 4th ed, I won't be holding my breath.
And while I understand that having being aquatic as your schtick can be limiting, I'd love sea elves or something similar too.
Once again, I also agree. I'm seriously considering homebrewing Sea Elves on my own
The sea elves schtick is that they shapeshift into animals. The Dargonesti, Deep Elves, shift into dolphins (Dark Dargonesti shapeshift into sharks), the Dimernesti, Shoal elves, shift into sea otters(which is frickin' awesome!) (Dark Dimernesti shapeshift into manta rays... not as awesome). But yeah, the whole aquatic thing is their other drawing force.
I didn't know that. Now I'm twice as inclined to homebrew a Sea Elf race ;)
I thouroughly disagree. Personaly I would have bought both the EPG and FRPG even if the only mechanical elements in them were the feats (well I might have skipped the FRPG, but only becuase I'm a DDi subscriber and thus have full Compendium access).
I think the fact you can't even say for sure you'd have bought both books does more to prove Undrave correct than incorrect.
Personally I'd be willing to buy a Dragonlance Player's Guide if it had a class or two (either like the Swordmage, Spellscared or the Warlock option in the FRPG) along with a few races (2 or 3). And I don't anticipate ever playing in Dragonlance.
WotC must realise there are people out there like me, so it should play a factor as to which campaign gets a new campaign setting.
There doesn't need to be speculation. If Dragonlance isn't 2010, it should be 2011. If Dark Sun isn't 2010, it should be 2011. Simple as that.
Except of course for the fans of setting X who will come out of the woodwork to rave on for pages and pages about how great their setting is ;)
Personally I'd love an 'age of discovery' setting where the PCs explore a new continent filled with native tribes for far off empires and as they rise in tier establish their own domain and start exploring other planes entirely... with the right flavoring and a new Primal class (or something not Arcane) and a few ideas grabbed from Spelljammer it could be awesome!
I could get behind that. I don't know when, if ever, I would run a campaign in the setting :P But I'd be there for that
I also might plunder the setting for stuff to do in an Eberron campaign.Am I the only one who would find it depressing if it took half a decade for 4th edition to get its own setting, something new and actually designed around 4th-ed mechanics?
Probably. I'd personally be ecstatic if 4th ed was around for a decade.
Now, I'm not the wisest lorekeeper of Dragonlance. I've only read the first trilogy, so there is plenty I don't know about it...but for the core of that setting, and for everything in the 3.5 player's guide, I could pull out stats from the various books for almost everything.
And that's the problem I see.
Your list leaves off Sea Elves, Irda, Kyrie, Shadowpeople (who are psionic in nature which would be a good match with the PHB3) and Thaoni (which you acknowledged you removed). While Sea Elves might not be included in 4th ed, I'd say the others could definitely be included (although Shadowpeople need a new name).
Ignoring even less races, I could say you can play Dark Sun right now (which is pretty much the only D&D setting I know a fair bit about other then Forgotten Realms or Eberron). You could:
* make goliaths be half-giants
* Have Templar be a title and have them ranging from clerics to invokers.
This only requires me to ignore muls and thri-kreen. Because I seriously doubt we'll see 4th ed Dark Sun reflavour divine classes into elemental classes. Instead you're going to get the divine power source as either powers handed down to you by becoming a templar, or have them be religions based on an idea (like the Blood of Vol in Eberron) and have that imbue you with a power that deals radiant damage.
So I'd say Dark Sun is more playable now then Dragonlance is :P
I'll say it, then. Dragonlance is a poor setting.
What are some examples of good settings? Greyhawk? Forgotten Realms? Hollow World?
Only in so much as playing D&D of any stripe is pure nostalgia for those days before WoW.
Cheers,
Cam
I started playing D&D after WoW came out. What does that make it for me? ;)
Tinker gnomes are impossible to implement in a satisfying way.
I've got what I call "tinker gnomes" in Eberron. They don't have any special mechanics, they just as a race tend towards occupations and classes that invent stuff. Such as an artificer. I personally prefer tinker gnomes to mischevious fey gnomes. I don't know what the mechanic for tinker gnomes was in past editions, but I don't understand why they would need a new mechanic in 4th ed.
There was only one new full setting during the span of 3e. If there are any new settings for 4e, I bet there will also only be one.
Weren't there only 3 settings in 3rd edition? Greyhawk which went unnamed from my understanding, Forgotten Realms and then Eberron. If a third of 4th ed's settings were original I'd be quite happy
You forgot the most important part of Eberron's gods, potentially non-existent. As such their numbers really don't matter that much.:P
You won't be saying that after a smite you with the radiant energy as I channel the might of the silver flame ;)
I think the fact you can't even say for sure you'd have bought both books does more to prove Undrave correct than incorrect.
Personally I'd be willing to buy a Dragonlance Player's Guide if it had a class or two (either like the Swordmage, Spellscared or the Warlock option in the FRPG) along with a few races (2 or 3). And I don't anticipate ever playing in Dragonlance.
WotC must realise there are people out there like me, so it should play a factor as to which campaign gets a new campaign setting.
Except I explicitly listed my status as DDi subscriber and thus access to the online Compendium as being only reason I had that even made me consider not buying the FRPG. In some respects I only still by any of the actual books out of habit (and to a lesser degree out of a desire to support WotC).
Also, as you listed spellscared (a pseudo-class) and the warlock's dark pact (a class build) as being reasons to buy the FRPG, I think it's reasonable to say that there don't have to be any actual full classes to attract buyers like yourself. Which had been more so my point all along.
Except I explicitly listed my status as DDi subscriber and thus access to the online Compendium as being only reason I had that even made me consider not buying the FRPG.
So do you hesitate before buying every D&D book? If not, what about the FRPG made you hesitate if it wasn't because it was for a particular campaign?
Also, as you listed spellscared (a pseudo-class) and the warlock's dark pact (a class build) as being reasons to buy the FRPG, I think it's reasonable to say that there don't have to be any actual full classes to attract buyers like yourself. Which had been more so my point all along.
The point was if you don't throw enough generic crunch into a book, the book isn't going to sell as well as a campaign player book that does have "enough" generic crunch. Getting into the semantics of whether or not Spellscarred qualifies as a class is pretty much missing the point entirely.
It has been postulated that there are as many as nine continents on Krynn, three are known. The landmass that is Ansalon is definitely smaller than Khorvaire, but if you include Chorane, the southern polar continent (Ansalon is in the southern hemisphere), which is directly connected to Ansalon currently, the entire landmass is much larger than Khorvaire. I believe the northern hemisphere continent of Taladas is much larger than Ansalon.
Only known continents matter though as those are the only ones people will ever use. No point in having landmass that isnt going to be used at all. I do hope the 4e book gives more info on adventuring on the other continents and not just Khovaire.
So do you hesitate before buying every D&D book? If not, what about the FRPG made you hesitate if it wasn't because it was for a particular campaign?
I didn't hesitate in buying the FRPG. What I said is that I might have skipped it if it were only feats, but only because of my DDi account. In the "what if" scenario of the book only containing feats the main determining factor would be how many. If it only had the number of feats as the actual release and all the class/race content was replaced with setting fluff I probably would have skipped, but if all the race/class stuff was replaced with even more feats I probably would have still bought the book anyway. In other words, I bought the book because it was about 50% generic crunch, but quite honestly wouldn't have cared all that much what from that generic crunch took.The point was if you don't throw enough generic crunch into a book, the book isn't going to sell as well as a campaign player book that does have "enough" generic crunch. Getting into the semantics of whether or not Spellscarred qualifies as a class is pretty much missing the point entirely.
I think you're missing the point. I wasn't trying to argue about what does and what doesn't count as a class. Mostly I was agreeing with you, while pointing out that the meaning of "class" can refer to more than just complete classes like swordmage and artificer, but also to pseudo-classes like spellscared and builds like dark pact.
Personally adventuring in Dragonlance always suffered in the same manner that the Star Wars RPG did for me. I always felt supplementary to the setting because of the iconic nature of the setting.
It's the same reason I avoided 3E Forgotten Realms. I prefer something without massive iconic canon behind it.
As much as I LOVE Dragonlance (Chronicles and Legends era) I'd have to agree. I playing in such settings.
I've still yet to see anybody explain how it can be Dragonlance after we've been told that the next setting would be surprising. After all as has been said in this thread, Dragonlance is just about the most obvious setting to the general D&D playing audience while Dark Sun is quite a surprise.
Why is it people have it in their heads that Dark Sun is AT ALL surprising? Next year is Psionics, the sheer idea of Dark Sun NOT coming out is surprising more. You have not made a case whatsoever that Dark Sun is surprising. Whereas, next year being Psionics, you would think they would go with a setting where Psionics are common, like Dark Sun, rather than a setting where they are all but unheard of, like Dragonlance.
Admittedly, when I found out that the Monk was psionic, I had a hard time thinking WotC would release Dragonlance. But now Ampersand, the column that would be dropping hints at the next setting, has been having a lot of Dragonlance stuff. Total number of Dark Sun hints in Ampersand - one, and that is a goliath (non-Dark Sun race) holding a non-metal blade, something they did on the cover of the PHB2.
So yes, Dragonlance IS surprising, you just aren't looking at it through the right lens.
Why is it people have it in their heads that Dark Sun is AT ALL surprising? Next year is Psionics, the sheer idea of Dark Sun NOT coming out is surprising more. You have not made a case whatsoever that Dark Sun is surprising. Whereas, next year being Psionics, you would think they would go with a setting where Psionics are common, like Dark Sun, rather than a setting where they are all but unheard of, like Dragonlance.
Because statements like the one in question, present on the main site and in the flagship periodical, not on the forum, are NOT directed towards people like we who populate these forums. They are directed towards the masses, who AREN'T die-hard fans. Folks on these forums, EN World, RPGNet, et al, are NOT representative of most people who play D&D, and most people who buy D&D novels and put them on the bestseller lists. They are firmly, if rather vocally, a minority.
If you ask any of the majority of D&D players and readers of novels what the next most likely campaign setting is, Dragonlance will easily top the list. By a wide margin. Other than perhaps the Forgotten Realms, and then in large part thanks to R. A. Salvatore, DL is the most well-known D&D world.
To people like that, what do you think dropping hints about psionics is likely to be construed as? A hint about Dark Sun (remember, this was a fair bit before any confirmation about the Psionic power source being in the PH3). Mentioning the name "defiler" which is completely out of context for the rest of the article? The small number of those folks who are even aware of, or caught that reference at all, are likely to see it as a hint about Dark Sun. Same with the goliath with the obsidian sword. Not just any non-metal, mind you, but specifically the single most common non-metallic weapon material in...Dark Sun. No mention of muls and half-giants and thri-kreen in said Dragon issues. No mention of sorcerer-monarchs, dragon-kings, avangions, or elemental clerics. All of those would be much, much more overt references, and hardly hints at all so much as giant arrows with neon lights pointing in bright, Vegas-like style.
That is the lens I am looking through, and that is the lens I would wager good money the marketing department is looking through. When a WotC rep talks about something being a surprise, that is the lens they are most likely to be looking through as well. Step back a moment, and think about it as though you were merely one of the multitudes of folks who only has a passing, pop culture level of knowledge about D&D, as opposed to a more die-hard type of player/reader/etc.
That is why.
We really won't know until GenCon. While someone out there will probably be right to others it will be a surprise. Especially to those in the camp that said it wouldn't be what they chose. Of course it's also possible it wouldn't be nearly as much of a surprise as they think. We've already seen plenty of cases where R&D's ideas of 'surprise' and 'good' don't mesh with the player's ideas.
Because statements like the one in question, present on the main site and in the flagship periodical, not on the forum, are NOT directed towards people like we who populate these forums. They are directed towards the masses, who AREN'T die-hard fans. Folks on these forums, EN World, RPGNet, et al, are NOT representative of most people who play D&D, and most people who buy D&D novels and put them on the bestseller lists. They are firmly, if rather vocally, a minority.
Read what Bill wrote in the Ampersand. He wrote the setting "will surprise and delight many of you out there". He is not addressing the masses, he is addressing the D&D Insiders. He is addressing the vocal minority. If he were to be addressing D&D players in general, he would have used different wording, something on the order of "will surprise and delight DMs and players around the world".
Mentioning the name "defiler" which is completely out of context for the rest of the article?
Read the friggin' sentence and you will see that it is EXACTLY in the context of the article. The author is listing nefarious individuals, including necromancers and liches in the mix. Besides, Bill stated that the hints would be coming in Ampersand over the next few columns, not a joke column written by Jerry Holkins, but by Bill himself (he specifically says "I" in the sentence and columns implies only Ampersand, since that is the only column Bill writes).
DARK CRYSTAL
Aw yeah.
I've figured it out - the most unexpected setting, the one it surely must be -
DARK CRYSTAL
Aw yeah.
As in the Jim Henson produced fantasy film using puppets? SCORE!
BTW, someone corrected me on this before, but Obsidian isn't a crystal, it is a glass. Now you know, and knowing is half the battle. GI JOE!
Heck it could even be something from Mystara/Hollow World/Red Steel days of boxed sets for rules rather than hardbound books.
Actually those last two are about the only setting it CAN'T be :P We got told the useless clue that it has an a in the name ;)
As in the Jim Henson produced fantasy film using puppets? SCORE!
Muppets good sir, muppets. :D
In all seriousness, the fact that there isn't any form of muppet rpg yet is criminal.
Actually those last two are about the only setting it CAN'T be :P We got told the useless clue that it has an a in the name ;)
Well I put the /'s in there because they're all actually the same planet, just different parts or themes to it. Sort of like by second edition Kara-Tur(OA), Maztica, and Al'Qadim are all part of Toril just like Faerun is (the base of the FR campaign setting).
Muppets good sir, muppets. :D
In all seriousness, the fact that there isn't any form of muppet rpg yet is criminal.
If you're hankering to get your muppet on, Toon will get you reasonably close.
It'll be something totally different because people are expecting EITHER Dark Sun or Dragonlance. They said it'd be a surprise, but also familiar.
There's really only two explanations that meet that rule.
(1) Wizards (like so many other people) have forgotten that their collective ability to be surprising is vastly inferior to the ability of millions of fans to pre-guess their surprises, and have Dark Sun, Dragonlance, or a less popular pre-existing setting in mind anyway.
OR
(2) Wizards have licenced a world belonging to someone else to do as a setting. Which is odd, as most worlds big enough to be worth licencing are big enough to do their own RPG that they get a bigger chunk of the profits for.
I'll say it, then. Dragonlance is a poor setting. Its sole distinguishing characteristic is the integration of game rules of old editions into the setting, and far too much of the setting is geared toward setting up a single adventure, and anyone who might've been interested already knows how that one goes. Everything that happens afterward is still focused on it.
Dragonlance love is pure nostalgia.
I am a huge Dragonlance fan and I have never played D&D before 4th Edition. Obviously old mechanics are not why I love it.
Chronicles was three books and not even in my opinion the best three books. 3.5 Dragonlance was geared toward post-War of Souls adventures for the most part. The Heros of the Lance have been dead a long time now as well.
You're just arguing from an uneducated position.
Yeah, no. I opt out of raids to play D&D because it provides an experience WoW doesn't. I'm sure I don't need to explain this to anyone here. They're just not the same thing.
I went through a DM'ed trip through the secret catacombs beneath Wyrmrest Temple last Sunday where my character (a red dragon shifted into gnomish form) recovered an artifact that helped her understand her heritage better. We had an adventuring party, the DM told us what we saw, and we told him what we were doing. Using a mod called GHI he also gave us custom created items we found along the way. All within the game.
You need to play on another server. Try a RP one and find a good RP guild. It's a total different experience. My main character has three years of stories built up, an extended family (played by many different players), and an ever-evolving storyline.
I actually get more role-play out of World of Warcraft than I have ever gotten out of D&D. Maybe because it's easier to play someone through text. More likely because I can log on any hour of the day and go role-play.
D&D is different and the face to face time can't be replaced. But it is in no way a superior way to role-play.
Yeah I hope they kill of the gods of magic in DL like they did in FR if they redo it. In fact I fully expect it.
What would be the point? They just came back. I think maybe you don't understand their role in the world or why it makes mages in Dragonlance unique.
And as far as Im aware Ansalon is the only continent they have ever detailed on DL. it really isnt a large enough campaign world. In my opinion anyway.
No but Ebaron is about the size id expect from a campaign setting with 3 large continents at least. This is all in my opinion but the more area you have the more different kinds of adventure you can cover.
First of all there are a lot of advantages of a close knit continent. The factions and nations are all within a reasonable distance to one another and this provides a lot more interaction and story possibilities than a more wide spread continent. And yet Ansalon still has many unexplored and mysterious places to check out as well.
More importantly with the limited amount of room provided with only one campaign guide, player book, and adventure a larger continent wouldn't provide anything more anyway.
And of course there is Taladas which just recently had a novel trilogy dedicated to it.
Personally adventuring in Dragonlance always suffered in the same manner that the Star Wars RPG did for me. I always felt supplementary to the setting because of the iconic nature of the setting.
Star Wars and Dragonlance are both very large settings where it comes to story potential. If you can't find room to shine something is wrong with your DM. Just look at the sheer amount of dragonlance books (hundred or more?). The heroes of the lance did their thing in only three of them. Obviously the writers have a different view than you do.
The Heroes of the Lance ARE DEAD and have been for some time. They are NOT relevant to playing in the world and have not been for YEARS.
What many of you think you know about the Dragonlance setting is dead wrong.
To be honest all I know about Dragonlance is what I learned from this thread. I came in open minded and asked about details of what make the setting unique and interesting, hoping one of you could sell it to me.
Where you looking for mechanics or flavor? On the first it's all interchangable really. They're put into the campaign books to sell paper to people who don't care about campaign settings. They can stick anything in there really and to those people it won't matter what the campaign setting is. Do we really think WotC would have trouble making something up? Really?
If it's the later I could probably write a very large post on the matter if you're really interested.
Here's the thing though, WotC only wants to sell novels that support their game line. The Dragonlance novel line is very successful. Finally the Dragonlance novels must certainly make more money than a single campaign guide, players guide, and adventure can possibly make. Enough people will buy the dragonlance sourcebooks to return the investment and it satisifies whoever is in WotC that made that very stupid decision that a set of three sourcebooks trump novel sales.
Dragonlance IS coming in 2010 or 2011. Count on it. I know Dragonlance fans don't believe it and Dark Sun fans hate the idea of it. But both are in for a surprise.
Quick note: Dragonlance is my favorite campaign setting but Dark Sun is the setting I've most wanted to try but never got to. So I'm set either way. I'm jazzed on the idea that it'll be one and then the other.
Looking at it alignment seems too tied to everything.
There is a threefold balance in place that does nothing more than serve as a foundation for who the good guys are, who the bad guys are, and who seek to preserve the balance between them. Alignment is only tied to everything in the same sense that any other fantasy world with concepts of good and evil are.
The wizards group themselves by their moral choices, sure, and the Holy Orders are aligned with gods that are, in turn, aligned with one of these three moral paths, but mortals are free-willed creatures. The "hero" of my Dragonlance novel, Vanderjack, is a mercenary who has worked for both sides of the War and is not a clear-cut good guy, for instance.
If you look at it, you'll see no more of this than you saw in the Realms or any other D&D setting. It's as restrictive or as liberating as you want it to be.
Cheers,
Cam
There is a threefold balance in place that does nothing more than serve as a foundation for who the good guys are, who the bad guys are, and who seek to preserve the balance between them. Alignment is only tied to everything in the same sense that any other fantasy world with concepts of good and evil are.
The wizards group themselves by their moral choices, sure, and the Holy Orders are aligned with gods that are, in turn, aligned with one of these three moral paths, but mortals are free-willed creatures. The "hero" of my Dragonlance novel, Vanderjack, is a mercenary who has worked for both sides of the War and is not a clear-cut good guy, for instance.
If you look at it, you'll see no more of this than you saw in the Realms or any other D&D setting. It's as restrictive or as liberating as you want it to be.
Cheers,
Cam
See but I prefer not to list alignment but go by motivations. I dont think raistlin was ever actually evil in the books. He always helped the companions at least in the books i read. Good and evil are never that simple which is why I hate the alignment system. Any use of it is inherently restrictive. Any group that uses it is not a group I want to belong to. Id rather have seen alignment chucked completley in 4e. Its also that spell selection was restricted by moral choice which I disagree with strongly. Even the most evil of power can be used in a good way.
I am a huge Dragonlance fan and I have never played D&D before 4th Edition. Obviously old mechanics are not why I love it.
Chronicles was three books and not even in my opinion the best three books. 3.5 Dragonlance was geared toward post-War of Souls adventures for the most part. The Heros of the Lance have been dead a long time now as well.
You're just arguing from an uneducated position.
Actually, this sounds an awful lot like me back when I was a Dragonlance fan. Hadn't played much D&D, apart from an occasional mucking about with 2E. My roommate in the barracks got me started on the Dragonlance novels, and I highly enjoyed them.
3.0 came out around that time, and I started playing D&D more. Eventually, I started playing in Dragonlance games and trying to run them myself, and they were always horrible. This surprised me, but finally I actually had to subject my beloved setting to critical analysis.
My conclusions were that the setting's heavy emphasis on alignment adds a bizarre, artificial element to roleplaying, there are too many disruptive elements (largely races) included for the sake of silliness, and the material's heavy focus on familiar elements from the novels, combined with players' familiarity with those novels, discouraged the telling of a new story in favor of being somehow involved with the existing one.
So no, I'm not arguing from an "uneducated position." I'm arguing from a position similar to yours, except that I then tried to actually use the Dragonlance campaign setting for D&D.
I went through a DM'ed trip through the secret catacombs beneath Wyrmrest Temple last Sunday where my character (a red dragon shifted into gnomish form) recovered an artifact that helped her understand her heritage better. We had an adventuring party, the DM told us what we saw, and we told him what we were doing. Using a mod called GHI he also gave us custom created items we found along the way. All within the game.
You need to play on another server. Try a RP one and find a good RP guild. It's a total different experience. My main character has three years of stories built up, an extended family (played by many different players), and an ever-evolving storyline.
I actually get more role-play out of World of Warcraft than I have ever gotten out of D&D. Maybe because it's easier to play someone through text. More likely because I can log on any hour of the day and go role-play.
D&D is different and the face to face time can't be replaced. But it is in no way a superior way to role-play.
That's an awful lot of effort to make WoW into D&D when you could actually just, y'know, play D&D. And D&D still offers more freedom. Still, I never said it was a "superior way to role-play." I just said that it wasn't the same thing, that the experiences were completely different. And I stand by that.
Star Wars and Dragonlance are both very large settings where it comes to story potential. If you can't find room to shine something is wrong with your DM. Just look at the sheer amount of dragonlance books (hundred or more?). The heroes of the lance did their thing in only three of them. Obviously the writers have a different view than you do.
The Heroes of the Lance ARE DEAD and have been for some time. They are NOT relevant to playing in the world and have not been for YEARS.
What many of you think you know about the Dragonlance setting is dead wrong.
As I previously mentioned, I own many, many Dragonlance books. Star Wars books too, as it happens. And I've observed that the vast majority of these books focus on the protagonists of the main trilogy, and most of the rest focus on continuing and expanding the main trilogy's story, rather than creating their own. There are a number devoted to filling out the settings' history and such, which is a positive thing, but the other kind - wholly unconnected characters doing wholly unconnected things - tend to be weak, flat and uninteresting. They tend to feel like bland generic stories with familiar names tacked on. This is because the settings have largely been presented as backdrops for their primary heroes to do their thing.
The Heroes of the Lance are only dead if you choose to play after their death - an even weaker part of the setting than that in which they are alive. However, even in that case, people who have performed several monumental, world-changing deeds hardly cease to be relevant upon their death. Indeed, the entire setting after the War of the Lance seems to be about the impact of the changes they made.
There is a threefold balance in place that does nothing more than serve as a foundation for who the good guys are, who the bad guys are, and who seek to preserve the balance between them. Alignment is only tied to everything in the same sense that any other fantasy world with concepts of good and evil are.
The wizards group themselves by their moral choices, sure, and the Holy Orders are aligned with gods that are, in turn, aligned with one of these three moral paths, but mortals are free-willed creatures. The "hero" of my Dragonlance novel, Vanderjack, is a mercenary who has worked for both sides of the War and is not a clear-cut good guy, for instance.
If you look at it, you'll see no more of this than you saw in the Realms or any other D&D setting. It's as restrictive or as liberating as you want it to be.
Ahh, the old alignment-isn't-that-bad argument.
Yes. It really was.
See but I prefer not to list alignment but go by motivations. I dont think raistlin was ever actually evil in the books. He always helped the companions at least in the books i read. Good and evil are never that simple which is why I hate the alignment system. Any use of it is inherently restrictive. Any group that uses it is not a group I want to belong to. Id rather have seen alignment chucked completley in 4e. Its also that spell selection was restricted by moral choice which I disagree with strongly. Even the most evil of power can be used in a good way.
It is clear that you have read a limited amount of source material. You honestly haven't got a clear handle on most of the setting, as evidenced by your posts in this thread.
Nothing wrong with that, except that you continually use false "facts" to support your anti-Dragonlance argument.
Fine, you'd have liked to have seen alignment thrown out in 4e. Well, sorry dude, WotC didn't see it that way. You'll have to learn to live with that. No campaign setting in 4e is going to completely drop alignment, so holding it against Dragonlance is ridiculous when Wizards themselves are including it in every setting.
What spells in DL are restricted by moral choice? This is news to me. In fact, your robe color in Dragonlance does reflect your motivations, because they are specifically granted to you based on your motivations. This is specifically something you claim to want.
Every one of your posts has been disputed. As has been repeated over and over, we all understand you don't like Dragonlance. Noone has a problem with that. You've got just as much right to dislike it as we do to love it. What you don't have a right to do, and I've said this at least once in this thread already, is to spam this thread repeatedly with your false information based completely on your assumptions.
You've presented your case, and every time you present another argument trying to support it, you go further towards invalidating yourself. Let it go. You don't like Dragonlance, and everyone knows it. Your reasons are based on complete falsehoods, but there are myriad topics in the world where the same thing can be said, so I won't hold it against you. Just don't seek to spread support for your opinion through falsehoods.
It is clear that you have read a limited amount of source material. You honestly haven't got a clear handle on most of the setting, as evidenced by your posts in this thread.
Nothing wrong with that, except that you continually use false "facts" to support your anti-Dragonlance argument.
Fine, you'd have liked to have seen alignment thrown out in 4e. Well, sorry dude, WotC didn't see it that way. You'll have to learn to live with that. No campaign setting in 4e is going to completely drop alignment, so holding it against Dragonlance is ridiculous when Wizards themselves are including it in every setting.
What spells in DL are restricted by moral choice? This is news to me. In fact, your robe color in Dragonlance does reflect your motivations, because they are specifically granted to you based on your motivations. This is specifically something you claim to want.
Every one of your posts has been disputed. As has been repeated over and over, we all understand you don't like Dragonlance. Noone has a problem with that. You've got just as much right to dislike it as we do to love it. What you don't have a right to do, and I've said this at least once in this thread already, is to spam this thread repeatedly with your false information based completely on your assumptions.
You've presented your case, and every time you present another argument trying to support it, you go further towards invalidating yourself. Let it go. You don't like Dragonlance, and everyone knows it. Your reasons are based on complete falsehoods, but there are myriad topics in the world where the same thing can be said, so I won't hold it against you. Just don't seek to spread support for your opinion through falsehoods.
It was my understanding that you could only take certain spells if you wore a certain robe. That was even mentioned by another poster. Alignment does not equal motivation. Good and evil are almost always subjective.
DL makes okay novels at least the first three, after that I was confused. As a game setting its horrible. The novels define the setting way too much. There really isnt a new story or original plot line a dm can come up with in DL because everything has been done. Old FR had the same problem too many novels and too much detail.
It was my understanding that you could only take certain spells if you wore a certain robe. That was even mentioned by another poster. Alignment does not equal motivation. Good and evil are almost always subjective.
I don't ever recall seeing where spell selection was constrained to robe color, but it could be true in some cases.
DL makes okay novels at least the first three, after that I was confused. As a game setting its horrible.
Completely subjective. As I've (and many others) have said, you have a right to your opinion.
The novels define the setting way too much. There really isnt a new story or original plot line a dm can come up with in DL because everything has been done. Old FR had the same problem too many novels and too much detail.
And here you're just wrong.
Period.
End of story.
Alignment is extremely pervasive in Dragonlance, and wizards are the clearest example. Alignment = which god of magic was the source of your power = defined spell list = robe color.
Alignment = which god of magic was the source of your power = defined spell list = robe color.
True on the first, but exceptionally wrong on the second, at least in the most recent versions of the setting. In 3.5e, your robe color was the only thing determined by your alignment, spell lists and school specializations were not. The different order favored certain schools, but there was nothing that precluded the player from being a member of one order and specializing in a school favored by another order. One could make a white robe necromancer (necromancy is favored by the black robes) without any negative effects.
Robe color really was just a physical marker for alignment, it ultimately didn't have any required game effects, and truth be told, a wizard didn't to wear robes at all (see Dunbar Mastermate in Dragons of Summer Flame).
It seems a great deal of the information you are using is out of date.
Ahh, the old alignment-isn't-that-bad argument.
Yes. It really was.
Alignment always was, and still is, only as bad as any group chooses to make it.
If the DM is a jerk who takes perverse pleasure in slapping players with the alignment stick at the slightest transgression, then its a pointless straitjacket
If the DM works with players, talks about what alignment means in their particular setting, and most importantly treats it as the roleplaying guideline it was always meant to be, then it can be a wonderful tool.
Alignment is extremely pervasive in Dragonlance, and wizards are the clearest example. Alignment = which god of magic was the source of your power = defined spell list = robe color.
I don't really see a problem. It sounds a lot like how clerics and other divine classes function under the current default rules.
True on the first, but exceptionally wrong on the second, at least in the most recent versions of the setting. In 3.5e, your robe color was the only thing determined by your alignment, spell lists and school specializations were not. The different order favored certain schools, but there was nothing that precluded the player from being a member of one order and specializing in a school favored by another order. One could make a white robe necromancer (necromancy is favored by the black robes) without any negative effects.
Robe color really was just a physical marker for alignment, it ultimately didn't have any required game effects, and truth be told, a wizard didn't to wear robes at all (see Dunbar Mastermate in Dragons of Summer Flame).
It seems a great deal of the information you are using is out of date.
Yeah, I was remembering second edition rules, which was what I had available when I was playing with and analyzing the setting. 3.5 Dragonlance was significantly after. It's true that 3.5 didn't restrict spells based on robe color. But Alio was arguing that people who thought that hadn't read much of the material. For most of the setting's history, including that during which most of the books were written, what William and I said was true.
Besides, spell list is a secondary consideration to roleplaying implications, and the setting is saturated in alignment-based elements.
Yeah, I was remembering second edition rules, which was what I had available when I was playing with and analyzing the setting. 3.5 Dragonlance was significantly after. It's true that 3.5 didn't restrict spells based on robe color. But Alio was arguing that people who thought that hadn't read much of the material. For most of the setting's history, including that during which most of the books were written, what William and I said was true.
Besides, spell list is a secondary consideration to roleplaying implications, and the setting is saturated in alignment-based elements.
Well really, my biggest gripe has been with williamhm's lack of familiarity with the material, and his subsequent use of fabricated "facts" to support his argument. (I don't even recall what else he's stated he's read at this point, but it wasn't anything considered "contemporary" on the world of Krynn.)
I'm unfamiliar with pre-3.5 source material on the setting, but none of that is "valid" anymore in terms of the current state of the game. The 3.5 stuff is as close to currently official as you can get. If you're unfamiliar with it, you can't legitimately say what elements exist or do not in the game at this point.
Now as for alignment-based elements, it's a setting feature not a restriction. It adds to the role-playing value of the setting. It is no more detremental to a DM's plot lines than it is in any other setting. The only difference you could argue is that "good" and "evil" have traditionally had clearer lines drawn between them in Dragonlance than other settings might have had, but in the "modern" era, which I assume would be the one WotC would publish for, those lines have been very, very blurred.
As for saturation, where do you find so many alignment-based elements? Sure, Wizards get robes based on their motivations when they complete their test, but beyond that, what is their restriction? Apart from Wizards, what else is restricted by alignment? Clerics, I guess, but clerics in any setting are restricted the same way, according to their deity's alignment, and it's really more that you're restricted by dogma than you are alignment, and that's in every setting.
Really, as has been pointed out, there are very few alignment restrictions in Dragonlance.
Well really, my biggest gripe has been with williamhm's lack of familiarity with the material, and his subsequent use of fabricated "facts" to support his argument. (I don't even recall what else he's stated he's read at this point, but it wasn't anything considered "contemporary" on the world of Krynn.)
I'm unfamiliar with pre-3.5 source material on the setting, but none of that is "valid" anymore in terms of the current state of the game. The 3.5 stuff is as close to currently official as you can get. If you're unfamiliar with it, you can't legitimately say what elements exist or do not in the game at this point.
Now as for alignment-based elements, it's a setting feature not a restriction. It adds to the role-playing value of the setting. It is no more detremental to a DM's plot lines than it is in any other setting. The only difference you could argue is that "good" and "evil" have traditionally had clearer lines drawn between them in Dragonlance than other settings might have had, but in the "modern" era, which I assume would be the one WotC would publish for, those lines have been very, very blurred.
As for saturation, where do you find so many alignment-based elements? Sure, Wizards get robes based on their motivations when they complete their test, but beyond that, what is their restriction? Apart from Wizards, what else is restricted by alignment? Clerics, I guess, but clerics in any setting are restricted the same way, according to their deity's alignment, and it's really more that you're restricted by dogma than you are alignment, and that's in every setting.
Really, as has been pointed out, there are very few alignment restrictions in Dragonlance.
William didn't say much that I didn't, and I'm very familiar with Dragonlance.
You don't think the setting's entire basis is "valid" when talking about the current state of the setting? The 3.5 version was only a conversion of material written decades ago. The setting was created with the assumptions of those rules in place. It's very valid and relevant.
Three factions of gods based on alignment division and are shown to be actively judging which side you are on is a pretty big alignment-based setting element, I would say. Makes it awfully difficult to ignore the alignment system when it is the single most significant element of the setting. This, in my experience and that of many other players - see any of the thousands of debates on alignment - is extremely harmful to roleplaying.
William didn't say much that I didn't, and I'm very familiar with Dragonlance.
Are you familiar with it as of 3.5? Because if not, you may as well be complaining about 2nd edition AD&D in general, and I'm not going to argue with you there.
Look. We're all pretty much in agreement that there have been major issues in the past with Dragonlance, with some people having atrocious experiences with it. Many people didn't, but you're not one of them. I can tell from your posts that your analysis has uncovered a substantial bias against a lot of the structure or themes that Dragonlance has, in the past, embraced as a result of being a setting created in 1st edition and monkeyed with in 2nd and in SAGA. I get it. You hate the goofy little races and the gods who take people away when they're 18th level and the uber-powerful cavalier-subclass Solamnic Knights and the restrictive spell lists for wizards.
Yup, so did we.
All better now, thank you.
Cheers,
Cam
I'm not particularly familiar with all the Dragonlance 3.5 materials, no. Because I read my copy of the CS, and discovered that it was very much the same Dragonlance, I didn't continue spending time and money on it. Now, given the responses you've provided about what was done in 3.5, I've got to say that I think you and any others responsible did a great job addressing some of the more glaring issues. Well done. But honestly, I think that you were making the best of a bad situation. You couldn't exactly do a fundamental rewrite at that stage, could you? Dragonlance, like so many things beloved by thousands of fans, isn't actually that good when subjected to critical analysis and compared to its purpose and other options.
I'm not the greatest fan in the world of certain other published settings, but Dragonlance fails on a fundamental level when compared to them; they were designed to create a broad and varied environment full of possibilities to create as broad a variety of stories as possible. Dragonlance is much more like a homebrew setting that evolved to fit the needs of a single group, and it shows. Most of the setting's history is background for the War of the Lance. Most of the time periods presented as play possibilities are focused on the events of the Heroes of the Lance, their families, etc. You can try to make your own story in the Dragonlance setting, but if you do, you're left with little to build on except generic fantasy and a map, plus perhaps the other problem elements.
Kender, tinker gnomes, gully dwarves, etc. They work okay in novels, but there's a difference between novels that you read and roleplaying games that you play. A good rule of thumb is, if the characters in a novel universally don't want a thing around, then your players and characters will generally hate them at least as much. Kender are meant to be constant extreme nuisances. That's how they've been written all along, and you, Cam, seem to have been working to minimize the detrimental impact of their defining features. No matter how brilliant your work is, you're never going to change that kender are kender, and being horrible is the point. Tinker gnomes are a race of comedic relief inept-mad-scientist archetypes. And gully dwarves exist to be scorned and pitied. None of these contribute anything positive to roleplaying, and anyone can ruin a game by playing a member of this race exactly as they were in the novels.
Alignment-based pantheon and themes. This is huge. Alignment can sometimes be largely ignored in some settings, which is the only safe way to handle alignment without protective gloves and a mask. This is impossible in the Dragonlance setting, because it is so central to what Dragonlance is all about.
That's my issue, really. I tried to work with Dragonlance and make a campaign I could enjoy with my group by trimming out the problem elements, but when I was left, there was nothing left that was Dragonlance. I feel that the setting has nothing to offer that I or my players would find interesting or useful, and so do not wish to see a Dragonlance 4E setting fill the official setting slot for next year. I would prefer something that might contain material worth my time and money.
Most of the time periods presented as play possibilities are focused on the events of the Heroes of the Lance, their families, etc. You can try to make your own story in the Dragonlance setting, but if you do, you're left with little to build on except generic fantasy and a map, plus perhaps the other problem elements.
I'm really not understanding where this is coming from. At all. The vast majority of my DL novels do not feature those characters. I have never seen this setting as merely a backdrop for the Heroes of the Lance. I think you just needed to look at it through a different lens.
No matter how brilliant your work is, you're never going to change that kender are kender, and being horrible is the point.
Not it isn't. The point is to have a character with a childlike wonder of the world around him. To bring a touch of hurmor and whimsy to the adventure. Cam and MWP's didn't "change" anything to make do in a bad situation. They merely provided guidelines on how they were always meant to be used.
The real reason Dragonlance should be done in 4th edition is because it has soul. It is uplifting. Because it IS about good vs evil... and more importantly hope vs despair. Because it DOES have that touch of whimsy and fun. That it can be deadly serious and amusing at the same time.
But most of all because it's the only D&D setting with a true sense of wonder and enchantment about it.
What you find there is why we all became interested in fantasy in the first place. Many may have grown too cynical and jaded to enjoy playing there anymore and that is their loss. But D&D needs Dragonlance because it has nothing else like it.
Dark Sun and Ravenloft are fun places to adventure in for a time but neither can ever be home for me because who would ever want to live there? Who truly feels in a better mood after having spent time there?
How is DL uplifting? How many main characters die? War of souls is all about a paladin of an evil goddess what is uplifting about it? Im confused. I found it sad and depressing, especially with how screwed up the world gets with every novel series. Any campaign setting that is well thoughtout has soul. To me Darksun is more uplifting. Yeah things are bad in the present but there are hints that things could get better. With DL every time things start to get better they go to hell, again.
Well, for me I don't have a problem playing in dark gritty worlds and I think the post-apocalyptic feel elements of Dark Sun combined with its history and world elements (cannibalistic halflings, the racial genocides that took place in the past, the scarcity of resources and innately hostile natural environment, the whole Mesopotamian or ancient Mediterranean feel of many of the city states, despotic rulers that heroes have to fight against or work with) is what attracts me to the world.
I have read the Dragonlance novels and I own all the Dragon Lance gaming material going back to 1st edition but I have never really desired to play in the Dragon lance world there is just too many things I don't like about it. First, yes dark world shattering stuff does happen in Dragon Lance but I'm sorry the books can only be so dark when you have Kender, Gully Dwarves, and Tinker Gnomes running around the world. I detest this level of whimsy in the fantasy literature that I read so for that reason alone I would vote against Dragon Lance.
Secondly, I agree with you that in Dragon Lance no matter what things your heroes accomplish they seem to serve as a backdrop to the Heroes of the Lance and that was certainly the case and a very common complaint about the first modules of Dragonlance that were released. Other DnD campaign worlds have suffered from this to some extent, but even in FR I never felt Elminster of Drizzt overshadowed the PCs the way the Heroes of the Lance's exploits did in Dragonlance, and note both 3.5 and even more so 4th edition FR has done a lot to correct this perception of the game and emphasis the PCs as the central focus of the campaign world.
Third, I also concur with the sentiment I have read that Dragonlance really doesn't offer anything different from a standard Tolkinesque campaign setting, except perhaps the introduction of more small folk (kender, gully dwarves and tinker gnomes), which again is an addition I personally can do without. The history of Dragonlance is very rich but I would hope that WOTC in the future decides to publish campaign worlds that deviate from standard fantasy. Forgotten Realms and the "Points of Light" setting both serve as standard fantasy setting (I have to admit I would like to see Greyhawk released in 4th edition though), which should be more than enough standard fantasy to appease most people so why not publish worlds that deviate from the norm whether it is older worlds like Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Al-Qadim, etc or new original worlds like Eberron?
Lastly, one pet peeve I always had about Dragonlance is the way the magic system works. Yes, it is very original having magic tied to the three moons and such, but why would evil wizards goes around wearing black robes advertising that their evil? Sure, there are some villains that are out in the open but usually in good fiction most villains don't advertise that they are villains and in fact many villains don't consider themselves villains from their perspective. I know this is a minor complaint but this has always never set right with me about DL. Now, sure in Dark Sun the Dragon Kings are open in their villainy, but those are Dragon Kings epic level characters able to take out whole mobs citizens and supported by a regime of corrupt officials i.e. Templers who control the infrastructure of the society and are the law unlike the Black Robes in DL, but yet in DL a first level wizard whose evil would just walk into a town of superstitious country folk wearing her black robes and nothing is supposed to happen?
Anyhow, I'm not opposed to DL eventually being published in 4E and I still buy the DL books, but I really hope DS gets the slot for the 2010 setting.
Peace,
Fallstorm
If you don't like this kind of thing, and you also don't like comic relief being present in various ways, then no, you shouldn't really be playing in a Dragonlance campaign.
I make no apologies for the setting's tone or thematic elements. I did work very hard not to make the setting seem like a one-trick story, and I believe that having published a full-length campaign adventure trilogy set in the Age of Mortals that goes from 1st to 20th level, with multiple endings and various sandbox elements, pretty much proves that it's not.
To my mind, you have a choice when you're playing D&D. Nobody is forcing you to play in any specific world. Some folks like the pulp action and lightning rail action of Eberron, others like Ed's monumental and magical landscape of the Realms. But not everybody does. Apply a critical analysis of each of the D&D worlds and you'll uncover things that won't appeal to the entire audience. It's the nature of the beast.
But if you're trying to make the case that Dragonlance fails as a game setting, you've only proved it isn't the game setting for you. And, like I said, that's totally OK with me.
Cheers,
Cam
PS: It isn't the setting for 2010. So you can take a deep breath and move on.
PS: It isn't the setting for 2010. So you can take a deep breath and move on.
Wait, whoa, is this a confirmation that Dragonlance isn't the 2010 setting for 4E? If so, can you make that claim with authority?
Yes, alignment (or at least moral associations of good vs. evil with neutrality as a balance) is a major theme of Dragonlance. It is not a mechanically-limiting theme, at least not in 3.5, and there's no problem whatsoever with running a campaign in which the player characters are all selfish jerks, but it was designed to be a setting for heroes who oppose villains while dealing with their own personal struggles and conflicts.
If you don't like this kind of thing, and you also don't like comic relief being present in various ways, then no, you shouldn't really be playing in a Dragonlance campaign.
I make no apologies for the setting's tone or thematic elements. I did work very hard not to make the setting seem like a one-trick story, and I believe that having published a full-length campaign adventure trilogy set in the Age of Mortals that goes from 1st to 20th level, with multiple endings and various sandbox elements, pretty much proves that it's not.
To my mind, you have a choice when you're playing D&D. Nobody is forcing you to play in any specific world. Some folks like the pulp action and lightning rail action of Eberron, others like Ed's monumental and magical landscape of the Realms. But not everybody does. Apply a critical analysis of each of the D&D worlds and you'll uncover things that won't appeal to the entire audience. It's the nature of the beast.
But if you're trying to make the case that Dragonlance fails as a game setting, you've only proved it isn't the game setting for you. And, like I said, that's totally OK with me.
Cheers,
Cam
PS: It isn't the setting for 2010. So you can take a deep breath and move on.
Comic is all well and good some settings work that way but small races as a joke just doesnt. I like battles of good and evil but I like villians to be more believable, to have motives beyond just gaining power. I much prefer home brew setting or now ebaron.
I also dont see how alignment can be anything but restrictive. There is no way that ive seen that alignment doesnt hinder player creativity. Just my experience but characters that use alignment rarley grow and develop.
Also if DL were published Id look at it but only if they detailed way more than just 2 continents. Cause I wouldnt want to play on ansilon at all.
Yes, alignment (or at least moral associations of good vs. evil with neutrality as a balance) is a major theme of Dragonlance. It is not a mechanically-limiting theme, at least not in 3.5, and there's no problem whatsoever with running a campaign in which the player characters are all selfish jerks, but it was designed to be a setting for heroes who oppose villains while dealing with their own personal struggles and conflicts.
I think every DnD world is has a themetic element of good vs. evil to it without being mechanically limiting per se. In Dark Sun, while characters possessing the altruism of a paladin may be rare to non-existent, the essential theme of the world the heroes trying to survive and fighting against the world depleting Dragon Kings definately possesses a themetic element of good vs evil. I also, agree that DL wasn't limiting in terms of what you alignment you could play. I mean your character could be play the same range of alignments as what was open in any DnD world and even play dark characters like a Knight of Takhisis, etc. Like I said, in my post the only thing I thought was stupid or really bothered me about the Dragonlance alignment system was the whole evil wizards going around wearing black robes.
If you don't like this kind of thing, and you also don't like comic relief being present in various ways, then no, you shouldn't really be playing in a Dragonlance campaign.
I make no apologies for the setting's tone or thematic elements. I did work very hard not to make the setting seem like a one-trick story, and I believe that having published a full-length campaign adventure trilogy set in the Age of Mortals that goes from 1st to 20th level, with multiple endings and various sandbox elements, pretty much proves that it's not.
To my mind, you have a choice when you're playing D&D. Nobody is forcing you to play in any specific world. Some folks like the pulp action and lightning rail action of Eberron, others like Ed's monumental and magical landscape of the Realms. But not everybody does. Apply a critical analysis of each of the D&D worlds and you'll uncover things that won't appeal to the entire audience. It's the nature of the beast.
But if you're trying to make the case that Dragonlance fails as a game setting, you've only proved it isn't the game setting for you. And, like I said, that's totally OK with me.
Well, I am not opposed to the whole good vs evil thing. It is a cornerstone element of speculative fiction, and in fact I am very much in favor of the whole points of light thing with the heroes being small flickers of light in a world of darkness. As a matter of fact I don't think the baseline DnD does enough to emphasis this. I mean, the heroes are supposed to these bastions of light in a world of darkness and when 4E was first released I was expecting to see the baseline PoL campaign setting be something along the lines of the world in the Warhammer Fantasy Role-Play game (now that is points of light in darkness) needless to say my friend that I was somewhat disappointed when I saw the depiction on page 196 of the DMG with the heroes walking through a city wiht an elf selling pink cup cakes in the corner and everyone looking all clean cut. I mean, where are the beggars, the women of the night, the lurking figures in the alleys with a look on their face that says, "Should I try to rob these fools or are they too tough?"
The tone I had a problem with in Dragonlance was all the whimsical stuff embodied by the presence of the tinker gnomes, kender, and gully dwarves but you are correct some people like this stuff and that is cool with me I just had to add my opinion to the pool of people who don't like it and want to see DS released soon. You are correct it doesn't prove DL is a failure as a campaign setting though.
Cheers,
Cam
PS: It isn't the setting for 2010. So you can take a deep breath and move on.
While I am happy to hear this I have to ask, how do you know this for sure?
Peace,
Fallstorm
Wait, whoa, is this a confirmation that Dragonlance isn't the 2010 setting for 4E? If so, can you make that claim with authority?
No, I can't. I'm just saying I really don't think it is. This is the 25th anniversary year, which is why all of this stuff is showing up now. There's no fiction planned for next year other than reprints, there's no sign of Dragonlance being supported in any way for 2010. So, I'd put my money on Dark Sun or something else.
Cheers,
Cam
How is DL uplifting? How many main characters die? War of souls is all about a paladin of an evil goddess what is uplifting about it? Im confused. I found it sad and depressing, especially with how screwed up the world gets with every novel series. Any campaign setting that is well thoughtout has soul. To me Darksun is more uplifting. Yeah things are bad in the present but there are hints that things could get better. With DL every time things start to get better they go to hell, again.
Actually, the reason I personally dislike Dragonlance is because it is basically a significant assumption of the setting that the gods are always going to smash the world every time things get too happy and cheerful. In other words, I simply can't stand the ridiculous justification for the original Cataclysm, in which the world gets destroyed because there is too much Good, and the gods need to preserve the "balance". It is so terrible that it pretty much completely ruins the setting for me. It basically means that the good guys are never allowed to win, and that the "good" gods really aren't good at all.
Actually, the reason I personally dislike Dragonlance is because it is basically a significant assumption of the setting that the gods are always going to smash the world every time things get too happy and cheerful. In other words, I simply can't stand the ridiculous justification for the original Cataclysm, in which the world gets destroyed because there is too much Good, and the gods need to preserve the "balance". It is so terrible that it pretty much completely ruins the setting for me. It basically means that the good guys are never allowed to win, and that the "good" gods really aren't good at all.
Yeah, that whole situation was nonsense. Looked at with any sort of critical eye, it was clear that he was forming an evil, oppressive society through his misguided pursuit of ultimate goodness. But that's a very shades-of-gray, goal-vs-action type of view, and very anti-Dragonlance.
This is, in my opinion, the setting's biggest flaw. The central theme is a very defined, concrete ultimate Good, a similarly defined Evil, and a very important cosmological need to enforce balance between the two - and the balance can readily go too far in either direction. Without this theme, it's just not Dragonlance, but exploring the theme leads to some bizarre and nonsensical conclusions that destroy the heroic feel of the campaign and confuses players.
I also dont see how alignment can be anything but restrictive. There is no way that ive seen that alignment doesnt hinder player creativity. Just my experience but characters that use alignment rarley grow and develop.
Sometimes, often even, restrictions can breed their own kind of creativity.
It's easy to right unaligned on your character sheet (or leave alignment a blank), and then just make things up as you go along never bothering to consider what truly motivates the character (or simply calling their motive "too complex to be categorized").
Comparatively it can be a lot harder to pre-choose a set of guideline and the try to stick to those guidelines, and one can certainly be creative in contemplating those guidelines shape the character. None of this is to say that alignment is required to accomplish such, and one can be just as detailed in crafting a character completely from scratch, but alignment can provide a convenient and consist starting point when developing a character.
To use an analogy. Imagine you have a box of crayons. Now image that you have the choice between an outlined tracing or a blank piece of paper. The blank paper is certainly less restrictive, as you can draw literally anything on it, but that doesn't mean that coloring the tracing cannot be an equally rewarding experience. You can't choose what picture to draw with the tracing, but the choice of which colors to use and how to use them is still yours to make. Furthermore, any number of people could take the same tracing and yet choose different colors in different combinations, thus creating a series of similar yet distinct pictures.
On some levels, all of us have already chosen the tracing by choosing to play D&D in the first place. Certainly there would be fewer restriction if we all just gatherd with our friends for a simple game of "let's play pretend", but instead we choose a specific gaming system to serve as a frame work. Do you really think that in choosing a specific gaming system over just making it all up as we go makes any of us less creative?
No, I can't. I'm just saying I really don't think it is. This is the 25th anniversary year, which is why all of this stuff is showing up now. There's no fiction planned for next year other than reprints, there's no sign of Dragonlance being supported in any way for 2010. So, I'd put my money on Dark Sun or something else.
Cheers,
Cam
Hmm... Well sir, let me thank you for your frankness! Your professional opinion is appreciated, even if you're not technically "in the loop".
Dalamar was a black robe but didn't help Takhisis and actually did more to help the Heroes of the Lance. He was an outcast 'dark elf' because of his motivations and outlook on life but he wasn't the movie-cliche evil wizard. He was just more self-centered and willing to do 'evil' things to gain more power.
In DL most wizards weren't welcome in most villages as DL was a campaign where fear of magic and mages was prevalent. During the War of the Lance this is because mages were a threat to the seekers (false religious leaders who had a lot of powre) so slandered to incite fear, including being blamed for the Cataclysm almost as much as the gods who'd "forsaken" everyone.
Wizards didn't NEED to wear the colored robes except when visiting a tower of high sorcery. Many still wore them just so they could use the recognition from other people to influence, intimidate, or distance themselves.
Also the gods punished man in the Cataclysm for turning on them not because things were going good. After that man lost his faith in the gods so they sat there and watched and waited. They wanted man to find their way back to the gods and instead man in his usual manner blamed the gods and turned their back on them, then claimed the gods had forsaken them.
The reason Takhisis and the evil gods get away with so much is they're the meddling gods while the neutral and good gods try to get man (and the other races) to rise up and handle things themselves so they grow, rather than holding their hand. It's why Paladine appeared as Fizban. He helped the Heroes out when really needed but mostly just nudged them in the right direction and got them to rise to the challenge of the threat to their life and freedom.
The later books while interesting I found they did have the flaw that 3.5 and most movie sequesl do: power creep. To try to keep things "interesting" after a big world-shaking event there has to be a BIGGER world-shaking event. After fighting Chaos there wasn't much they could do bigger other than have Takhisis steal the world away in a power grab. Too bad her hopefull champion Mina was really a nascent god herself and that the other gods eventually found the world. The good part of the whole thing though was it made the gods less than omnipotent since if they were as powerful as gods in most other campaigns they would have found Krynn much sooner than they did.
Of course FR can't do something like that since they have an overgod who keeps things in check amongst the gods while having nothing to do with the mortal world itself. He's the DM to the FR god's being players (and mortals their characters). Krynn has no overgod so it's a free-for-all amongst the gods. Even most polytheistic Earth religions there was a ruler god who kept the others in check, at least to a degree (Odin, Zeus, etc.)
Actually black robes in DL aren't always villains. They just are selfish and willing to do anything to gain power. That's why Rastlin went from red to black (that and the growing influence of a truly evil ancient wizard's spirit who was trying to take control of him).
Dalamar was a black robe but didn't help Takhisis and actually did more to help the Heroes of the Lance. He was an outcast 'dark elf' because of his motivations and outlook on life but he wasn't the movie-cliche evil wizard. He was just more self-centered and willing to do 'evil' things to gain more power.
Yeah, that's what "villain" means.
Also the gods punished man in the Cataclysm for turning on them not because things were going good. After that man lost his faith in the gods so they sat there and watched and waited. They wanted man to find their way back to the gods and instead man in his usual manner blamed the gods and turned their back on them, then claimed the gods had forsaken them.
So, you never read about the Kingpriest, then? The balance was supposedly tipped so far in the direction of Good - that is, people serving the gods of Light gained too much power, rather than actually doing good things - and they threw a mountain at the world, and then left. The whole "Man forsaking the gods" thing you present here is a fabrication, though I'm not sure whether it's yours, or an attempt to justify this rather bizarre justification for absent gods.
The reason Takhisis and the evil gods get away with so much is they're the meddling gods while the neutral and good gods try to get man (and the other races) to rise up and handle things themselves so they grow, rather than holding their hand. It's why Paladine appeared as Fizban. He helped the Heroes out when really needed but mostly just nudged them in the right direction and got them to rise to the challenge of the threat to their life and freedom.
Doesn't sound familiar, but I'm not ruling out the idea that this excuse was made somewhere. Whether it was or not, that's just absurd.
Of course FR can't do something like that since they have an overgod who keeps things in check amongst the gods while having nothing to do with the mortal world itself. He's the DM to the FR god's being players (and mortals their characters). Krynn has no overgod so it's a free-for-all amongst the gods. Even most polytheistic Earth religions there was a ruler god who kept the others in check, at least to a degree (Odin, Zeus, etc.)
FR can't do something like this because its writers have learned from example that it can't be executed well. (Seriously, what were the writers thinking? Stealing the world and hiding it? Wow.) But despite the overgod keeping somewhat of an eye on things, FR's gods have considerably more freedom, including that to murder each other.
What can a new set of Dragonlance books actually contribute to 4th Edition? See, setting books work two ways. On the one hand, they feed the setting with new readers, allow more individuals to experience the history, the tone, the world. But they also make contributions to the edition itself.
Fluff? Fluff can be recycled. All the history, all the maps, all the stories are still there. Everyone who loves their Dragonlance books can transplant fluff directly into 4th Edition.
But crunch?
No new classes. Dragonlance is based on the core 3.5 stuff. A few paragon paths, certainly, but not enough to merit a full writeup like the spellscarred: you don't ride a dragon in heroic tier, and the knights are not unique enough for more than a standard PP.
Races? The Irda are isolationist, and wouldn't touch an adventuring party with a ten foot pole. "However, in order to retain their magical abilities and beauty, the Irda were forced to relieve themselves of social contact, resulting in their isolation from the rest of Krynn's races and the distancing of themselves from each other." And what prevents using the Deva in their place? Walrus folk/Thanoi? Generic tribal anthropomorphic critters, rather thematically dull. Shadowpeople? Actually slightly interesting, but again, isolationist. Also, I have to ask, are they significant enough to the setting, something which makes people think "Oh, yeah, Dragonlance! The setting with Shadowpeople!"
Drow are a huge component of FR, changelings, kalashtar, and warforged are a core component of Eberron. If the only crunch that can be found for Dragonlance is on its peripherals, things barely touched on in novels, let alone a normal campaign setting, then why would you need a Player's Guide?
Just because a setting was fun, just because it is interesting doesn't mean it needs three books in the 4th Edition line. Greyhawk has elaborate history and a fan following, but you can play a Greyhawk game right now, you don't need a book retyping fluff you already know.
Old stuff must prove itself interesting and fun, yes.
But it must also contribute to the new edition through the crunch at the core of its story.
So.
What is currently lacking to run a Dragonlance game? Proof must be provided that a Player's Guide is necessary, not just a superficial addition to rehash old fluff.
Also if DL were published Id look at it but only if they detailed way more than just 2 continents. Cause I wouldnt want to play on ansilon at all.
In Soviet Ansalon, Dragonlance plays you.
.
.
.
.
Somebody had to do it.
Yeah, that's what "villain" means.[\quote]
Not really. Doing things for selfish reasons does not a villain make.So, you never read about the Kingpriest, then? The balance was supposedly tipped so far in the direction of Good - that is, people serving the gods of Light gained too much power, rather than actually doing good things - and they threw a mountain at the world, and then left. The whole "Man forsaking the gods" thing you present here is a fabrication, though I'm not sure whether it's yours, or an attempt to justify this rather bizarre justification for absent gods.
No, actually he got it 100% correct. You're describing what happened BEFORE the Cataclysm. He's describing what happened AFTER the Cataclysm. Just kinda sorta different scenarios there.Doesn't sound familiar, but I'm not ruling out the idea that this excuse was made somewhere. Whether it was or not, that's just absurd.
It happened, and it's not more absurd than any event involving any gods in any form of fiction. Read the Forgotten Realms stuff, or any comics involving Wonder Woman, Thor, or Hercules. It's a cliche of the "god fiction" genre.FR can't do something like this because its writers have learned from example that it can't be executed well. (Seriously, what were the writers thinking? Stealing the world and hiding it? Wow.) But despite the overgod keeping somewhat of an eye on things, FR's gods have considerably more freedom, including that to murder each other.
I have no idea where you get the idea that FR gods have more freedom than the DL gods. Because everything I've read shows they have roughly equal freedoms.
Fluff? Fluff can be recycled. All the history, all the maps, all the stories are still there. Everyone who loves their Dragonlance books can transplant fluff directly into 4th Edition.
The same could have been said for FR, before it's revamp, or Eberron, which barely changed at all ....
No new classes. Dragonlance is based on the core 3.5 stuff. A few paragon paths, certainly, but not enough to merit a full writeup like the spellscarred: you don't ride a dragon in heroic tier, and the knights are not unique enough for more than a standard PP.
Well, for one, 3.5? don't you mean 1st edition?
And for another, just because you can't think of a class doesn't mean there isn't one for it. Engineer (non-magic), Sailor, the long whined for Martial Controller, hell, maybe even some new thing related to whatever reboot/future era bump it gets.Races? The Irda are isolationist, and wouldn't touch an adventuring party with a ten foot pole. "However, in order to retain their magical abilities and beauty, the Irda were forced to relieve themselves of social contact, resulting in their isolation from the rest of Krynn's races and the distancing of themselves from each other."[\quote]
Because that's so different from the isolationist fluff ascribed to any other already made into PC race races?And what prevents using the Deva in their place?
Because they have absolutely nothing in common?Walrus folk/Thanoi? Generic tribal anthropomorphic critters, rather thematically dull.
Your opinion only.Shadowpeople? Actually slightly interesting, but again, isolationist. Also, I have to ask, are they significant enough to the setting, something which makes people think "Oh, yeah, Dragonlance! The setting with Shadowpeople!"
Again, isolationism is not a valid excuse for not making a PC. It's not even close to valid. Heroes never follow the rules. As for significance? Please describe for me just how significant Genasi are to Forgotten Realms. Or Changelings to Eberron.Drow are a huge component of FR, changelings, kalashtar, and warforged are a core component of Eberron. If the only crunch that can be found for Dragonlance is on its peripherals, things barely touched on in novels, let alone a normal campaign setting, then why would you need a Player's Guide?
That ... doesn't even make sense. That's a case for a PG, not against.Just because a setting was fun, just because it is interesting doesn't mean it needs three books in the 4th Edition line.
I could say the same for Forgotten Realms. OH WAIT, it got the 3 book treatment. With setting updates and changes. Something that can happen just as easily with any other setting.What is currently lacking to run a Dragonlance game? Proof must be provided that a Player's Guide is necessary, not just a superficial addition to rehash old fluff.
On the other hand, you've yet to provide proof that none of that can happen with Dragonlance.
Not really. Doing things for selfish reasons does not a villain make.
willing to do anything to gain power
That's a pretty good indication of villainy right there.
No, actually he got it 100% correct. You're describing what happened BEFORE the Cataclysm. He's describing what happened AFTER the Cataclysm. Just kinda sorta different scenarios there.
I was trying to look up information on it as I posted, but it's sort of hard to find in a timely manner. Now that you bring it up, though, it does sound sort of familiar. It's just even more absurd. The gods decided that the people didn't believe in them enough, while the people lived under a theocracy derived from the gods' authority, threw a mountain at a man for believing in them TOO much but in the wrong way, and left for centuries in a sulk. Wow.
It happened, and it's not more absurd than any event involving any gods in any form of fiction. Read the Forgotten Realms stuff, or any comics involving Wonder Woman, Thor, or Hercules. It's a cliche of the "god fiction" genre.
Yes, historical gods can act in bizarre ways, but they usually make more sense than THIS.
I have no idea where you get the idea that FR gods have more freedom than the DL gods. Because everything I've read shows they have roughly equal freedoms.
Seems to me that gods removing each other in Dragonlance involves considerably more than a simple assassination job.
I was trying to look up information on it as I posted, but it's sort of hard to find in a timely manner. Now that you bring it up, though, it does sound sort of familiar. It's just even more absurd. The gods decided that the people didn't believe in them enough, while the people lived under a theocracy derived from the gods' authority, threw a mountain at a man for believing in them TOO much but in the wrong way, and left for centuries in a sulk. Wow.
You're still getting it wrong. They threw a mountain at the King Priest because he was tipping the balance of the world out of whack. Then they left because they had to in order for the balance to restore, as well as to punish the world for damaging the balance in the first place. And no one stopped believing in the gods before hand. And afterwards they first blamed the gods, then started disbelieving in the gods after a few centuries of absence. I don't even know where you got the idea there was sulking involved.
I guess that leaves me to address the suggestions you've actually made.
Engineer? I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that there's never going to be a tech-powered class in D&D. It's a horrible idea, because there's no reason such a character should adventure at all, instead of handing off the gizmos to others and staying home to make more.
Sailor? What do you expect a Sailor class to consist of, exactly?
See dozens of other conversations about the Martial Controller and how it's never going to happen.
As for something connected to a hypothetical future... Like what?
You're still getting it wrong. They threw a mountain at the King Priest because he was tipping the balance of the world out of whack. Then they left because they had to in order for the balance to restore, as well as to punish the world for damaging the balance in the first place. And no one stopped believing in the gods before hand. And afterwards they first blamed the gods, then started disbelieving in the gods after a few centuries of absence. I don't even know where you got the idea there was sulking involved.
See, that's what I said the first time. That'll teach me to listen to you telling me I got it wrong.
And yes, it's hard to believe that perfectly innocent people would blame the gods for what the gods in fact did, isn't it? And shame on those people, for not believing in things that aren't, in fact, there.
The gods refused to stop the Kingpriest until he screwed up royally, and then wrecked the world and stormed off, screwing everybody over.
You people need to accept something - Dragonlance will be updated to 4e. Whether or not it's 2010? I don't know. But it will happen, no matter how much you whine and complain and yell against it happening.
See, that's what I said the first time. That'll teach me to listen to you telling me I got it wrong.
And yes, it's hard to believe that perfectly innocent people would blame the gods for what the gods in fact did, isn't it? And shame on those people, for not believing in things that aren't, in fact, there.
The gods refused to stop the Kingpriest until he screwed up royally, and then wrecked the world and stormed off, screwing everybody over.
No, you really did get it wrong, since you were claiming he got it wrong, when he was just describing a different era. They forsook the gods AFTER the Cataclysm. Just like he said.
And once again, the gods did not storm off. They had to leave. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your god-hate.
Frankly, I don't know and I don't care. Hell, I'd rather have Dark Sun first. But all this whining about Dragonlance by people who either don't know what they're talking about or are just filled with irrational hate annoys me. Almost as much as people that are absolutely certain there is nothing it can contribute, yet can go off nothing more than personal bias.
You people need to accept something - Dragonlance will be updated to 4e. Whether or not it's 2010? I don't know. But it will happen, no matter how much you whine and complain and yell against it happening.
Yeah, no. If people indeed didn't know what they were talking about, it would indeed be "irrational" hate. But that's not the case. It's been five or six years since I bothered to read anything Dragonlance-related, so the details are just a touch fuzzy, but I used to be quite the expert. I loved the thing. Which is why I tried very hard to make it work and was very disappointed when I found it did not.
You yourself admit that you have no idea what it could possibly contribute. What's your personal bias, then?
"You people" need to accept something. There is no sign of Dragonlance moving forward to 4E. This has been stated by the best authority on the current state of things available to us. It might be updated, but it probably won't.
"You people" need to accept something. There is no sign of Dragonlance moving forward to 4E. This has been stated by the best authority on the current state of things available to us. It might be updated, but it probably won't.
You mean Cam? As I recall, all he's said is not 2010. I don't believe he's said it will never happen.
No, you really did get it wrong, since you were claiming he got it wrong, when he was just describing a different era. They forsook the gods AFTER the Cataclysm. Just like he said.
And once again, the gods did not storm off. They had to leave. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your god-hate.
Ahh, I did misread a bit, because of the "turned on the gods" bit. Where did humanity - and the demihumans too - turn on the gods? Because what I read was that humanity accepted the Kingpriest that ruled by the authority of the gods, and when that one person turned out to be a nutjob, they punished the whole world. And then the gods "had to leave". Why was that, again? You just said that Dragonlance gods had no overgod to tell them what to do. They could've come back and helped with some of the damage their actions caused.
But instead they stayed away, leaving the innocent people whose world they'd just destroyed to suffer without their aid. And then it's the fault of the people that they blame the gods and then stop believing? Wow. That's some top-grade rubbish. The cream of the crap.
You mean Cam? As I recall, all he's said is not 2010. I don't believe he's said it will never happen.
Nothing at all is happening with the setting in 2010. No new fiction. No support in any form. To my mind, that's a bigger indication of "nothing happening" than "definitely something happening."
If I do recall, there is a All Father in the Dragonlance setting, but I don't believe he has a church.
Gods, as myth and religion often remind us, are wrathful beings. So if the head priest of their religion is using some hoodoo to take divine power that could compeletly upset the fabric of the universe, throwing a mountain on the problem might be the best solution. It can also make for some good storytelling to some.
If I do recall, there is a All Father in the Dragonlance setting, but I don't believe he has a church.
Yeah, but he wasn't relevant to anything until the book he showed up in, and then he stopped being relevant again. EDIT: Except that he took out Tasslehoff in the process. That's pretty important.
I can possibly see the justification for the Cataclysm. It's clearly nothing more than a plot hook for the main adventurers the setting was crafted for, but okay, maybe breaking the world was the best option. But then leaving, and acting like people were at fault for blaming and losing faith in the entities who were actually to blame? Yeah, no.
I still say Slayers would make a cooler setting >.>
We could explore the other worlds created by the Lord of Nightmare. And we'd probably get a PC write up for Fishmen and Foxmen :p
Throwing a mountain on it is how Zeus defeated Typhoon!
I still say Slayers would make a cooler setting >.>
We could explore the other worlds created by the Lord of Nightmare. And we'd probably get a PC write up for Fishmen and Foxmen :p
I'd buy that one. Possibly two or three times. And every book that came out to support it.
Ahh, I did misread a bit, because of the "turned on the gods" bit. Where did humanity - and the demihumans too - turn on the gods? Because what I read was that humanity accepted the Kingpriest that ruled by the authority of the gods, and when that one person turned out to be a nutjob, they punished the whole world. And then the gods "had to leave". Why was that, again? You just said that Dragonlance gods had no overgod to tell them what to do. They could've come back and helped with some of the damage their actions caused.
But instead they stayed away, leaving the innocent people whose world they'd just destroyed to suffer without their aid. And then it's the fault of the people that they blame the gods and then stop believing? Wow. That's some top-grade rubbish. The cream of the crap.
They had to leave because of the whole balance of the world thing. Something about the Cataclysm would tip the world towards evil, and if the gods were still tehre it would just be a repeat of the King Priest unbalancing. Which of course Takhisis attempted anyways. It really wasn't their choice. Paladine, among other wanted to stay, but they couldn't.
You keep making it out into a blame the gods, blame the victims issue. It's not.
Krynn has a Highgod and Chaos, who would probably count as primordials in 4E (or at least, Chaos would). They are equal and opposite forces. The world and everything in it was created from Chaos, hence his fiery aspect's claim to be the Father of All and Nothing. But it was the Highgod who brought the gods to the universe of Krynn, and the Highgod who enforces whatever cosmic laws the gods must abide by.
Cheers,
Cam
The Gods actually sent all kinds of warnings, including the removal of all of the remaining true clerics from Ansalon.
Then they destroyed Istar.
Then no one worshipped them faithfully anymore until Goldmoon.
Also — if you think historical Gods weren't much stupider than this, you need to read more, starting with the Old Testament.
Actually, the Gods never left Krynn after the Cataclysm. The Reign of Istar was a sort of golden age for Ansalon, and it culminated in the Kingpriest demanding the power of the Gods so that he could finally eradicate evil.
The Gods actually sent all kinds of warnings, including the removal of all of the remaining true clerics from Ansalon.
Then they destroyed Istar.
Then no one worshipped them faithfully anymore until Goldmoon.
Also — if you think historical Gods weren't much stupider than this, you need to read more, starting with the Old Testament.
Yeah, I have, thanks. Studied a number of religions in depth, including Christianity and Judaism.
The Cataclysm really looks like a shoddily put together justification for a "bring back the gods" storyline. Probably for a good reason.
After reading all this ******** about "what-i-wanna-daddy", I've decided to put a clinical little research about the so-called-future-setting.
About Clues
Dragonlance has the over absolute decisive and concrete blast preference. If you guys have read the Eberron Players Guide, go to the last page. See the illustration of Drizzt and Guenwyvar fighting a big white dragon? Let's read what it says: "Follow Bold Heroes On Epic Quests Sets In Your Favorite Fantasy World. Explore the Forgotten Realms, Eberron and Dragonlance, guided by some of the best authors, and immerse yourself in adventure that will inspire you to tell stories of your own"
Bellow, we see pics of four major books being released.
After this, we have Draconians (in minis and Draconomicon II; we alredy have Cyan Bloodbane in DR I), a human cleric male that much resembles a well know illustration of a dragonlance villain.
And for Dark Sun: nothing. 0. Less than 1. Nada. Zica. Fudeu.
And man, I don't know much about Dark Sun, but looks cool. But there's no MARKETING indication that it will be the next setting (for 2010 or 2011). If wotc really want's a dark sun setting in 2010 they will have some months of work in publicity, for there's nothing of it in any place. Sorry, but it's true. Even in the books section, Dark Sun (like Ravenloft) isnt even quoted as a setting.
And to finish
Dragonlance Players Guide (if come at all): some sub-races (kender's racial feat to halflings, as a variation of halfling; silvanesti and qualinesti racial feats, as a variation of eladrin; elfs are just the kagonesti, so there's no modification); new races: minotaur, half-ogre, aquatic elf (much like shifters); paragon paths (to knights of Solamnia, dragon riders, wizards, exarchs of gods, etc... much to discuss in a single thread), class-variations to the core classes (class variations and new builds to Cleric, Paladin, Invoker, Wizard, Sorcerer); until this, you could even think: "but, mastah Lenny, there's not a new class like "swordmage" or "artificer", so why dragonlance????" and I will calmy answer you: "plenty of class variations, new builds, new powers, for you all to enjoy". And I mean it.
Feats?? How about a new feat-system do add more ROLEPLAY to the overall dungeon? Yep... 4th edition is much critized for not given way to roleplayers, so Dragonlance is the real answer to this. Things like Traits in the old edition (that add little mechanics conveniences or inconveniences, but add much in the way of roleplaying). That will be cool TO D&D AS A WHOLE. New Rituals, new magic itens (man, DRAGONLANCES!!!!!!), and a whole setting full o lore and tales to even the more tragic fan of "i-hate-what-i-dont-know" shine happy with his DLPG.
just my cents about it :D
Dragonlance has the over absolute decisive and concrete blast preference. If you guys have read the Eberron Players Guide, go to the last page. See the illustration of Drizzt and Guenwyvar fighting a big white dragon? Let's read what it says: "Follow Bold Heroes On Epic Quests Sets In Your Favorite Fantasy World. Explore the Forgotten Realms, Eberron and Dragonlance, guided by some of the best authors, and immerse yourself in adventure that will inspire you to tell stories of your own"
Bellow, we see pics of four major books being released.
You almost had me there...until i looked at my copy of the EPG. That page is an ad for the novels, not game books. We are all fully aware that they are still releasing Dragonlance novels.
You almost had me there...until i looked at my copy of the EPG. That page is an ad for the novels, not game books. We are all fully aware that they are still releasing Dragonlance novels.
That ends this year, together with all the trilogies and series that have been ongoing in Dragonlance. Next year it's all reprints, mass market versions of this year's hardcovers, etc. We haven't heard anything yet about new novels coming out in 2010 or beyond.
Cheers,
Cam
That ends this year, together with all the trilogies and series that have been ongoing in Dragonlance. Next year it's all reprints, mass market versions of this year's hardcovers, etc. We haven't heard anything yet about new novels coming out in 2010 or beyond.
Cheers,
Cam
The same goes for Dark Sun, except that it doesn't even have the luxury of any new novels this year either. Neither of the two "front runner" settings have any books planned for next year. Which leads me to believe that we won't see novels announced until GenCon time, with releases mid-next year. I don't really known, you are the one that has written a novel, Cam.;)
The thing is, at least Dragonlance has product planned for next year, even if it is mass-market versions of the books. Dark Sun doesn't have ANY product planned for next year.
Alignment always was, and still is, only as bad as any group chooses to make it.
If the DM is a jerk who takes perverse pleasure in slapping players with the alignment stick at the slightest transgression, then its a pointless straitjacket
If the DM works with players, talks about what alignment means in their particular setting, and most importantly treats it as the roleplaying guideline it was always meant to be, then it can be a wonderful tool.
.
OK.
There is no such thing as a True Neutral alignment. The closest thing I can ever think of is a Passafist. One who goes through life with as little interaction between others as possible.
This is why I never liked the Alignment system. Ever.
Unaligned is a better way to go, but is somewhat outside of the whole alignment scion. That Lawful and Chaos has been dwindled to a selection in the Good/evil paragon instead of an axis like in the previous editions is a step toward a better understanding for the alignments altogether.
The main thing about the alignment switch is the mechanical aspect, which has been removed completely. It is more toward motive and aspirations than it is a basic classification for each and every living thing in the D&D universe.
Neutrality is not something that most heroes will look upon as a possibility. Unlike the now gone neutral alignment, Unaligned doesn't mean that a person is completely in the middle on things. He is instead his own man, choosing to go his own way and siding with those that favor his own ideals.
Alignment is not a factor in this new edition, and the order of the wizards will most likely use a different paragon for their splits, not good/neutral/evil.
Neutrality is not something that most heroes will look upon as a possibility. Unlike the now gone neutral alignment, Unaligned doesn't mean that a person is completely in the middle on things. He is instead his own man, choosing to go his own way and siding with those that favor his own ideals.
It was always possible to play a true neutral character as some one just choosing their own way, just as it is still possible to play an unaligned character as being dedicated to an ideology of balance. The concepts are really not so different as you make them out to be.
Alignment is not a factor in this new edition, and the order of the wizards will most likely use a different paragon for their splits, not good/neutral/evil.
Alignment is still most definitely a factor in 4E. Go read any divine class if you don't believe me.
They had to leave because of the whole balance of the world thing. Something about the Cataclysm would tip the world towards evil, and if the gods were still tehre it would just be a repeat of the King Priest unbalancing. Which of course Takhisis attempted anyways. It really wasn't their choice. Paladine, among other wanted to stay, but they couldn't.
You keep making it out into a blame the gods, blame the victims issue. It's not.
You know, this is exactly what gets me about the whole thing...
Why did they "have" to cause the Cataclysm and leave? To preserve the "Balance" between good and evil. But why do they need to preserve a balance between good and evil? It is never explained, and I don't think you could possibly explain it. It is a total arbitrary abstraction forced upon the setting by its authors, and it doesn't really make any sense on its own, and undermines any normal conception of what good and evil really mean. Not to mention it is completely counter-intuitive when compared to any existing religion, where it is always presumed that good is better than evil and that, even if they are roughly equal in power, good will eventually triumph (the Norse belief that the world after Ragnarok will be better than the world before, the Christian belief that death and evil will eventually be banished from the cosmos, even the dualistic Zoroastrianism holds that Ahura Mazda will eventually banish the evil that Angra Mainyu represents from the world). The idea that evil is somehow necessary, and that the gods may kill a lot of good people in order to help more evil survive in the world, is simply alien to the very ideas of good and evil.
the awesomeness of 1st ed. case in point:
18th was the highest level. Only the head white robe could be 18th everyone else maxed at 17th (17th level granted 9th level spells) only White Robes could cast spells from the school of Abjuration (protection spells for those of you not familiar). Head of the white robes was determined by vote.
Head of the black robes was attained at 13th+! level and 13th level granted level 8 and level 9 nine spells! All other black robes were limited to max out at 12th level...but they got 7th level spells then. head of the black robes was determined by combat. Only Black robes had access to the school of necromancy.
Black robes took less exp. per level and got higher level spells soon, white robes leveled more slowly but ended up with more spells in the long run.
Red robes leader was level 16+ and were the only ones with access to the school of divination.
1st edition was cool because every class in the game (from barbarian, ranger, magic-user, cavalier, assassin, monk, bard, etc) had it's own rules and exp requirements and so the designers could just make up random stuff for a class that sounded cool, "Hey! lets let black robes level faster because they're greedy! etc". If they re-start Dragonlance I hope they really let that type of flavor throughout. (not to mention how the moons effected your spell casting!)
The difference between white robes and red robes (or rose knights and crown knights) can't just be "fluff" it has to be backed up by solid rules that make the different "wizards of high order" practically different classes.
What made the setting cool wasn't just the stuff your character could do...it was what he "couldn't" do. DnD has lost a bit of this since every character is supposed to be usefull in every facet of the game.
...Of course Rastlain famously broke this law and became the first mortal to convince his DM to let him go into epic tier :D
In fact, Ansalon such a small world it would fall apart after paragon levels anywho.
as a side note. I would have to say that, like the level 18 requirement. Player characters would (by decree of the gods) max out at paragon tier.
The 18th level limit was introduced in that book and never really had support outside of it. It certainly wasn't supported in the modules, which had several NPCs of levels greater than 18th.
Of course in 1st edition, once you reached "name level" not a heck of a lot happened to you at higher levels anyway, unlike later editions of the game.
Cheers,
Cam
and I'll tell you why:
Any of you read it, you'll know why! :D
********Spoiler alert********
now take it away.
Doubt it.
Ill tell you why..... Spelljamer will not work w/o a bunch of worlds to work with.
bingo
If we were to get Spell Jammer I'd expect it to be probably the final campaign setting before 5th edition is released.
SPOILERS FOR CORSAIR!
in the book, which is very good by the way, they Sail the Sea of Night to the Tears of Selune in a Spelljamming ship!
that's what the cover of the book shows.
ROCK ON, TOMMY! as we used to say here, some years ago! :D
(as in, rather "bloody good!")
in the book, which is very good by the way, they Sail the Sea of Night to the Tears of Selune in a Spelljamming ship!
that's what the cover of the book shows.
ROCK ON, TOMMY! as we used to say here, some years ago! :D
(as in, rather "bloody good!")
1st edition draganlance hardbook was the superior iteration of the game. 2nd edition and 3rd edition didn't allow enough sway in basic games rules to make it interesting.
the awesomeness of 1st ed. case in point:
18th was the highest level. Only the head white robe could be 18th everyone else maxed at 17th (17th level granted 9th level spells) only White Robes could cast spells from the school of Abjuration (protection spells for those of you not familiar). Head of the white robes was determined by vote.
Head of the black robes was attained at 13th+! level and 13th level granted level 8 and level 9 nine spells! All other black robes were limited to max out at 12th level...but they got 7th level spells then. head of the black robes was determined by combat. Only Black robes had access to the school of necromancy.
Black robes took less exp. per level and got higher level spells soon, white robes leveled more slowly but ended up with more spells in the long run.
Red robes leader was level 16+ and were the only ones with access to the school of divination.
1st edition was cool because every class in the game (from barbarian, ranger, magic-user, cavalier, assassin, monk, bard, etc) had it's own rules and exp requirements and so the designers could just make up random stuff for a class that sounded cool, "Hey! lets let black robes level faster because they're greedy! etc". If they re-start Dragonlance I hope they really let that type of flavor throughout. (not to mention how the moons effected your spell casting!)
The difference between white robes and red robes (or rose knights and crown knights) can't just be "fluff" it has to be backed up by solid rules that make the different "wizards of high order" practically different classes.
What made the setting cool wasn't just the stuff your character could do...it was what he "couldn't" do. DnD has lost a bit of this since every character is supposed to be usefull in every facet of the game.
I hope you're being sarcastic.Doesn't AV1 have spelljammers?
Nah, "Manual of the Planes" has them (or "it", rather and it's not THE Spelljammer itself) ;)
Some of the characters in the books while they might be Knights, sure did act very selfish and did things for the greater good, so the new alignment would probably work easily in a DL setting. I just don't see that as being a real problem.
A few reasons.
1) It means everyone is a renegade wizard for the entirety of the heroic tier.
2) You'd have to wait until paragon level to finally play the class you rolled (I mean some people play most of their games in heroic...so they'll never get to play a black robe)?
3) Limits multi-classing for arcane characters and makes everyone cookie cutter as every white robe would have the same paragon class.
My thoughts: All below would have controller aspects.
Black robes would be arcane strikers a la warlocks (odd isn't it that in the books most wizards with "mentors" and "masters" were black robes...) This also plays into their desire for quick power focusing on illusion and necromancy.
White robes would be arcane leaders kind of replacing bards (as krynn never had them) this works well as the abjuration and divination could fullfill a bardic niche.
Red robes: pure arcane controller, most phb of the "wizard" class.
----------------
Or....They're all just wizard/controllers but are differenciated by the "at will" powers they take similar to what all classes get now (dark pact, fey, infernal, for example)
Black int+con
white int+wis
red int+dex
at wills:
black: ray of enfeeblement/necrotic touch (illusion/necro)
white ??
red...??
warlocks would be renegade wizards taking their power from other than the moons.
----------------
thoughts?
The same was true of Knights of Solamnia, members of the Legion of Steel, and so forth. Our reasoning was that it wasn't fair to keep a player from being a law-abiding wizard, knight, etc just because they didn't take a specific prestige class.
The same should definitely be true in 4E.
Cheers,
Cam
If I want fluff I'll read a novel, I buy a dnd hardcover for rules. I could have a wizard carry a sword and call himself a sword mage but that's not quite the same....or put a fighter in a loincloth and role-play really really angry and call myself a barbarian, but that's not why I pay 40 dollars. At the very least they should be divided with their at will powers and secondary stats even if they do all remain in one class (which allows of course for swaping at wills and changing robes at some point).
In our 3rd edition products, we didn't make having the WoHS prestige class a requirement. Indeed, belonging to the Orders and passing the Test was a roleplay/story element, and was a prerequisite for taking the PrC. In other words, you could play a straight wizard all the way through and still consider yourself a Wizard of High Sorcery. The PrC was for those who were more invested in their membership, had a closer relationship with their moon, and knew more secrets as a result.
The same was true of Knights of Solamnia, members of the Legion of Steel, and so forth. Our reasoning was that it wasn't fair to keep a player from being a law-abiding wizard, knight, etc just because they didn't take a specific prestige class.
The same should definitely be true in 4E.
Cheers,
Cam
This is how it should be. The habit of some players to confuse the idea of belonging to an in-character organization and having a class devoted to that organization on their character sheets is one of the most frustrating things ever.
At the very least they should be divided with their at will powers and secondary stats even if they do all remain in one class (which allows of course for swaping at wills and changing robes at some point).
Sure. But you can achieve this with new wizard builds associated with types of mage, so it's no problem.
Cheers,
Cam
To MathiasKaiser:
I can see how you'd say that about some random clan/cult/mage academy in some random world. But the wizards of high sorcery are a central part of that World.
To just dump the basic rules into DL would be beyond lazy. Why didn't WotC in the FR book just tell all the sword mages to just multi-class wizard/fighter? Why not just tell rogues to "role play" if they want to be an assassin (I'm looking at you PHB3)?
Either black robe wizards are different from white robes or they are not. If it's just fluff? Fine I don't need to buy the source-book then. Either there are rules associated with their predeliction towards necromancy or it's all just fluff and why not have white robe infernal warlocks or multi-class bard/barbarian knights of the rose?
3rd edition actually went one worse, is that you weren't really a WoHS until level 11 with a PrC. So not only did they shoe-horn 3rd edition rules into DL they changed the fluff to match the rules!
I can see how you'd say that about some random clan/cult/mage academy in some random world. But the wizards of high sorcery are a central part of that World.
To just dump the basic rules into DL would be beyond lazy. Why didn't WotC in the FR book just tell all the sword mages to just multi-class wizard/fighter?
Possibly because they want a sword-using magic user to be an option that is actually playable and not-crap.
Why not just tell rogues to "role play" if they want to be an assassin (I'm looking at you PHB3)?
Don't ask me, as that's what I would've suggested. Have suggested, even.
Either black robe wizards are different from white robes or they are not. If it's just fluff? Fine I don't need to buy the source-book then. Either there are rules associated with their predeliction towards necromancy or it's all just fluff and why not have white robe infernal warlocks or multi-class bard/barbarian knights of the rose?
This, too, sounds suspiciously like arguments I have made. We don't need rules. It's perfectly playable with an application of existing fluff.
3rd edition actually went one worse, is that you weren't really a WoHS until level 11 with a PrC. So not only did they shoe-horn 3rd edition rules into DL they changed the fluff to match the rules!
Oh no!!!
But those above groups make up everything unique about DL so really, in my opinion there aught to be rules and class features from level 1 on that deal with them.
To summarize my opinion.
1) I don't want to wait until paragon level to play a "class" or character that makes up everything about that campaign setting.
2) I don't want levels 1-10 to just be fluff.
3) Even when it's not fluff I don't want the differences to be yawn inducing and minimal.
seriously, if the difference between a knight of the crown and a knight of the rose is some fluff and if I'm lucky a paragon path (too bad heroic tier!) then dump the different names and just call them knights of solamnia, or wizard of high sorcery and make them all wear technicolor robes because seemingly/ironically DnD after 1st ed. can't handle dragonlance.
Why did they "have" to cause the Cataclysm and leave? To preserve the "Balance" between good and evil. But why do they need to preserve a balance between good and evil? It is never explained,
You misunderstand. Good became so powerful that with nothing to fight and keep it good it's champions BECAME evil. The Kingpriest was evil at the end.
Just look at the real world? When are people most "good"? During a disaster or a war. When there is a true darkness in the world the light shines brighter. When there isn't good grows complacent and corrupt.
Dragonlance isn't morally grey. But I think it captures something fundamental in human nature... the balance that truly drives human history.
This should be expanded on. This is where Dragonlance "adds" something to 4th Edition.
3rd edition actually went one worse, is that you weren't really a WoHS until level 11 with a PrC. So not only did they shoe-horn 3rd edition rules into DL they changed the fluff to match the rules!
This is incorrect. As I said, you were a Wizard of High Sorcery if you passed the Test in the game. You could take the prestige class as early as 5th level (wizard 4/WoHS1) but there was no reason to do so unless you specifically wanted access to the benefits of the class, which were more or less on par with other wizard-related prestige classes.
People underestimate "fluff" in D&D. The game should not be holding your hand through roleplaying or characterization. You need to bring a lot of that to the table. To sweeten the pot, you can incorporate such things as feats, new build options, or (as I've suggested in the past for WoHS) a multiclass-only class much like the spellplagued in FR, whereby a wizard would use feats to access specialized powers appropriate to his Order without any need to wait until the paragon tier. It can be done, it doesn't need to be overt, and it shouldn't replace a good story background and in-game play.
Cheers,
Cam
I think the organizations that make up Dragonlance are one of it's strengths. Dragonlance could be the campaign setting that brings back a lot of mechanics that encourage RP through it's organizations much like WoD does through it's various factions.
This should be expanded on. This is where Dragonlance "adds" something to 4th Edition.
All the rules that are necessary for roleplaying in organizations are already present in 4E. My current game has its own knightly and wizardly orders, and we need no further mechanics.
I think what you mean are mechanics for linking your character's abilities to an organization. Which I think is a horrible idea.
Dragonlance isn't morally grey. But I think it captures something fundamental in human nature... the balance that truly drives human history.
... What the !@#$ are you talking about?
This is incorrect. As I said, you were a Wizard of High Sorcery if you passed the Test in the game. You could take the prestige class as early as 5th level (wizard 4/WoHS1) but there was no reason to do so unless you specifically wanted access to the benefits of the class, which were more or less on par with other wizard-related prestige classes.
People underestimate "fluff" in D&D. The game should not be holding your hand through roleplaying or characterization. You need to bring a lot of that to the table. To sweeten the pot, you can incorporate such things as feats, new build options, or (as I've suggested in the past for WoHS) a multiclass-only class much like the spellplagued in FR, whereby a wizard would use feats to access specialized powers appropriate to his Order without any need to wait until the paragon tier. It can be done, it doesn't need to be overt, and it shouldn't replace a good story background and in-game play.
Cheers,
Cam
I agree with this. Id even look at towers of high sorcery in 4e IF they didnt have alignment restrictions on them. Tying any mechanic to alignment is stupid. IF they push the timeline way forward and give the setting the FR treatment it might be good, but the gods obsession with balance always confused me. Paladine shouldnt have just stopped being a god just cause takhissis was dead the gods shouldnt have left after the cataclysm things like that make the setting feel really contrived.
I agree with this. Id even look at towers of high sorcery in 4e IF they didnt have alignment restrictions on them. Tying any mechanic to alignment is stupid. IF they push the timeline way forward and give the setting the FR treatment it might be good, but the gods obsession with balance always confused me. Paladine shouldnt have just stopped being a god just cause takhissis was dead the gods shouldnt have left after the cataclysm things like that make the setting feel really contrived.
I really think that any 4e incarnation of WoHS would do exactly what you're hoping for, and I'd agree that it's the best way. (I've never been a fan of alignment myself either.) I would think that given how magic has wreaked havoc on Krynnish life (from the Kingpriest, to the Seekers, to the Irda letting out Chaos, to the Dragon Overlords, to the loss of magic, etc.) the Moons are going to have a reasonably harder time rebuilding their following. (I actually wouldn't even be surprised if they allowed Sorcerers and Warlocks to co-exist without hunting them as renegades, or even outright welcoming them into the Conclave.)
As for the time line being pushed forward, it's already done. With the end of the War of Souls and the completion of the Dark Disciple trilogy, the pantheon is changed forever, the Moons are looking at an entirely different business of putting their towers back together (the head of the White Robes is a former sorcerer, Nuitari did some back-office business behind his cousins' backs.) You've also got an entirely different landscape now, with an Ogre nation, the Minotaur taking over elven lands, all of Ansalon having been affected by the Dragon Overlords, the War of Souls, and Mina's exploits. I would think Ansalon has been well prepped for the Points of Light paradigm in the current age.
I don't see what your problem with the balance is for the pantheon though. It's a plot dynamic. Right now, the neutral gods outnumber the good and evil ones by 2 (I think; hopefully my math is correct.) Paladine didn't stop being a god because Takhisis died. Takhisis died as a by-product of Paladine's giving up of his divinity. When Paladine agreed to fall from Heaven, Takhisis lost her immortality. When Takhisis took mortal form, and was subsequently run through by Silvanoshei, she died from the wound. Paladine made the ultimate sacrifice to prevent Takhisis from conquering the entire world as a goddess in a mortal shell.
As far as your understanding of the Cataclysm, you're a bit off. The gods never left after the Cataclysm. They merely went "silent," which technically isn't completely true. The Kingpriest challenged the gods themselves because he believed in his own "holiness" so completely and convinced his followers that he should be a god (using quite a bit of arcane magic to spoof divine power.) The gods gave him (and everyone else in Istar) ample opportunity to avert disaster. Instead, the day came when the Kingpriest demanded that he be ascended into the pantheon, at which the entire pantheon took vengeance on he and his entire flock.
Rather than leave though, the gods simply stood back and waited for the people of Krynn to rediscover their faith. Your misunderstanding coincides with exactly what the people of Krynn went through during the period between Istar's reign and the War of the Lance. The people believed that the gods abandoned them and allowed the Cataclysm to happen to them. Instead, the gods created the Cataclysm to teach the people humility, and then waited patiently for the people to return to faith on their own.
Actually, the entire point of the opening scene of the Chronicles is the Companions returning from their search for the "true gods." And keep in mind, 3 gods never went silent at all. All three moons remained for the Wizards of High Sorcery.
I really think that any 4e incarnation of WoHS would do exactly what you're hoping for, and I'd agree that it's the best way. (I've never been a fan of alignment myself either.) I would think that given how magic has wreaked havoc on Krynnish life (from the Kingpriest, to the Seekers, to the Irda letting out Chaos, to the Dragon Overlords, to the loss of magic, etc.) the Moons are going to have a reasonably harder time rebuilding their following. (I actually wouldn't even be surprised if they allowed Sorcerers and Warlocks to co-exist without hunting them as renegades, or even outright welcoming them into the Conclave.)
As for the time line being pushed forward, it's already done. With the end of the War of Souls and the completion of the Dark Disciple trilogy, the pantheon is changed forever, the Moons are looking at an entirely different business of putting their towers back together (the head of the White Robes is a former sorcerer, Nuitari did some back-office business behind his cousins' backs.) You've also got an entirely different landscape now, with an Ogre nation, the Minotaur taking over elven lands, all of Ansalon having been affected by the Dragon Overlords, the War of Souls, and Mina's exploits. I would think Ansalon has been well prepped for the Points of Light paradigm in the current age.
I don't see what your problem with the balance is for the pantheon though. It's a plot dynamic. Right now, the neutral gods outnumber the good and evil ones by 2 (I think; hopefully my math is correct.) Paladine didn't stop being a god because Takhisis died. Takhisis died as a by-product of Paladine's giving up of his divinity. When Paladine agreed to fall from Heaven, Takhisis lost her immortality. When Takhisis took mortal form, and was subsequently run through by Silvanoshei, she died from the wound. Paladine made the ultimate sacrifice to prevent Takhisis from conquering the entire world as a goddess in a mortal shell.
As far as your understanding of the Cataclysm, you're a bit off. The gods never left after the Cataclysm. They merely went "silent," which technically isn't completely true. The Kingpriest challenged the gods themselves because he believed in his own "holiness" so completely and convinced his followers that he should be a god (using quite a bit of arcane magic to spoof divine power.) The gods gave him (and everyone else in Istar) ample opportunity to avert disaster. Instead, the day came when the Kingpriest demanded that he be ascended into the pantheon, at which the entire pantheon took vengeance on he and his entire flock.
Rather than leave though, the gods simply stood back and waited for the people of Krynn to rediscover their faith. Your misunderstanding coincides with exactly what the people of Krynn went through during the period between Istar's reign and the War of the Lance. The people believed that the gods abandoned them and allowed the Cataclysm to happen to them. Instead, the gods created the Cataclysm to teach the people humility, and then waited patiently for the people to return to faith on their own.
Actually, the entire point of the opening scene of the Chronicles is the Companions returning from their search for the "true gods." And keep in mind, 3 gods never went silent at all. All three moons remained for the Wizards of High Sorcery.
I prefer settings where gods can just die. He shouldnt have had to give up his immortality so she can die. I prefer it when gods are killable like in mythology and such. Most gods in mythology while being powerful were killable by some means without another god haveing to fall as well. What ever the reason the gods shouldnt have just gone silent it was a very contrived plot device like all the others in DL. To me at least DL doesnt make much sense in the novels too much time hopping, world shifting and events that the characters themselves have no hope of effecting. I dont like events like that in books or campaign settings. I really prefer the gods to not show up at all or at a distance. I dont know anything bout post war of souls. The last I read was the first one with mina and I put it down because I cant stand a book mostly about an evil character, and as far as I could tell mina was evil I could be wrong though.
I don't think you can really say that the gods going silent was a forced plot device. It was the specific device that gave birth to the setting. If you wanted to argue that Takhisis stealing the world, or the Dragon Overlords was contrived, I would at least say you have an argument (though I would disagree since I think those were pulled off masterfully.)
Just out of curiosity, how do you feel about Toril in the current setting? I'm currently reading the Empyrean Odyssey trilogy.
****SPOLIER ALERT FOR THOSE READING IN E-MAIL****
Show
Which shows the actual death of Mystra at the culmination of a plot between Cyric and Shar. The results of which lead to modern-day Toril. The current Forgotten Realms setting is about as contrived as it gets. Not that I think it's a bad thing there either, but it is definitely more contrived than Dragonlance has ever been. I haven't read any Eberron, so I can't speak intelligently on that setting in these terms.
Which is fine. It all comes back to the fact that you just don't like Dragonlance, which again, is perfectly acceptable. There are few people (if any) that love every single available campaign setting (or fictional world/setting.)
I don't think you can really say that the gods going silent was a forced plot device. It was the specific device that gave birth to the setting. If you wanted to argue that Takhisis stealing the world, or the Dragon Overlords was contrived, I would at least say you have an argument (though I would disagree since I think those were pulled off masterfully.)
Just out of curiosity, how do you feel about Toril in the current setting? I'm currently reading the Empyrean Odyssey trilogy.
****SPOLIER ALERT FOR THOSE READING IN E-MAIL****ShowWhich shows the actual death of Mystra at the culmination of a plot between Cyric and Shar. The results of which lead to modern-day Toril. The current Forgotten Realms setting is about as contrived as it gets. Not that I think it's a bad thing there either, but it is definitely more contrived than Dragonlance has ever been. I haven't read any Eberron, so I can't speak intelligently on that setting in these terms.
Havent read those. But I do know about that plot but FR needed to kill off a lot of the gods somehow. The sword mage triligoy is more the kind of fantasy story I like. Im not sure you can pull a world shaking event like takhessis moving the world off well it makes the good gods look really lame and stupid In my opinion anyway. Even weakend by fighting chaos they should at least have been able to fight it. Also NO dragon should be able to devestate an entire nation of elves. I dont buy it at all and events like that completley ruined the novels as did the time hopping kender few if any books do time travel well. Only two series that I liked time travel in Death Stalker series and Ring of Fire series. And new star trek it was done fairly well. But most of the time time travel ends up not working well for my suspension of disbelief.
EDITery seldom do writers do fictional dieties well either. In most of the fr novels they are either not present or are there at one remove. Exception to this is Elaigne Cunninghams windwalker series which still has to be my favorite FR series.
Just as you feel they "needed" to kill off a bunch of FR gods, there is a (larger than I'd like) faction of Dragonlance fans that was all-too-happy to see Takhisis die. Me personally, I hate that Takhisis is dead, and the same goes for Mystra.
You have misunderstood something else. It wasn't because the gods were weak that Takhisis was able to steal the world. It was because they were busy trying to prevent an apocalypse at the hands of Chaos. Chaos was literally trying to destroy creation, so it's not hard to believe that every god was trusting every other god to put their entire effort into preventing that from happening, thereby leaving the opportunity for one to betray them all.
As for your understanding of the Dragon Overlord dominating the elves, again, you completely misunderstand, and it's probably because you haven't read enough of the story. There were no gods, or at least, the single god that existed was far too weak to act (not that she would have saved the elves anyway.) Therefore, there was no divine magic, and no arcane magic. So it was just a bunch of pointy ears hiding in the trees with bows and arrows against this massive beast with the arcane power of (at least) hundreds of dragons. If you can't understand why a dragon the size of a football stadium would laugh at a bunch of elves with pointy sticks, especially when she has magic and they don't, then you haven't read nearly enough fantasy to have this conversation.
Not liking the time travel I can give you. Personally, I don't have any problem with it. I liked Tasselhoff, and I hate sci-fi, so the time travel element wasn't a problem for me either in the War of Souls or the Legends era. It was simply a plot device that has not been overused to me. Not liking a plot device is understandable and defensible though, so I don't hold that against you.
BTW: I have to tell you, every time you make a comment utilizing the words "stupid" and "lame" I get the urge to tear into you. I am going to ask this as politely as possible: please refrain from outright insults of people's hard work. I have a lot of respect for the writers of Dragonlance fiction, and your insults have been grating on my nerves. There is a way to express disapproval like an adult without resorting to insults.
Yeah...no.
If I was to play in DL my character would be totally fed up with the gods. What do mortals need them for anyway? Mortals should forge their own future and not care about those gods who don't give a damn about them! Faith has to be earned, its not an undeniable right, even for those divine jerks!
Want me to find you? Give me a good reason to want to.
So... let me get this straight...the gods dropped a mountain on the guy clamoring to become a god himself, causing a huge cataclysm, and then went silent, waiting for men to 'find their faith again'. Essentially the gods assumed that the natural order of things would be for mortals to worship them and have faith in them?
Yeah...no.
If I was to play in DL my character would be totally fed up with the gods. What do mortals need them for anyway? Mortals should forge their own future and not care about those gods who don't give a damn about them! Faith has to be earned, its not an undeniable right, even for those divine jerks!
Want me to find you? Give me a good reason to want to.
Uh, no.
You see in Krynn, the gods are real and have power. If mortals want to get access to that power they have to do what's necessary.
You're looking at through the eyes of the real world, where their are things such as science and gods don't actually exist. You can blaspheme the gods in the real world and nothing will ever happen to you because of it.
If you live on Krynn and ever wanted to be healed of a malady, you better understand and accept who has that power.
Uh, no.
You see in Krynn, the gods are real and have power. If mortals want to get access to that power they have to do what's necessary.
You're looking at through the eyes of the real world, where their are things such as science and gods don't actually exist. You can blaspheme the gods in the real world and nothing will ever happen to you because of it.
If you live on Krynn and ever wanted to be healed of a malady, you better understand and accept who has that power.
Yes. Have faith in the entities that smashed the world - almost entirely made up of blameless citizens - and then ignored the cries of help for centuries, establishing the status quo that having faith does, in fact, do nothing.
So... let me get this straight...the gods dropped a mountain on the guy clamoring to become a god himself, causing a huge cataclysm, and then went silent, waiting for men to 'find their faith again'. Essentially the gods assumed that the natural order of things would be for mortals to worship them and have faith in them?
Yeah...no.
If I was to play in DL my character would be totally fed up with the gods. What do mortals need them for anyway? Mortals should forge their own future and not care about those gods who don't give a damn about them! Faith has to be earned, its not an undeniable right, even for those divine jerks!
Want me to find you? Give me a good reason to want to.
If you can, try to grab the "War of Souls" trilogy. There's a character (Gerard uth Mondar) that have the same feeling about gods that you do. So, don't be fooled thinking Dragonlance is a one way setting. There is space just enough to create all kind of adventures and heroes, and better, with a real flavor of setting that isnt easy to find or describe in fantasy settings.
best regards
Yes. Have faith in the entities that smashed the world - almost entirely made up of blameless citizens - and then ignored the cries of help for centuries, establishing the status quo that having faith does, in fact, do nothing.
Yes, because there is no real world historical reference to a vengeful god punishing innocents, like first born Egyptians, or anything.
Yes, because there is no real world historical reference to a vengeful god punishing innocents, like first born Egyptians, or anything.
That entire story is a supreme example of divine dickery, yes, but the firstborn Egyptians were never expected to believe at all. At this point, the deity in question was concerned only with the welfare of His chosen people. If I remember the book correctly, the Jews were never abandoned for centuries at a time. They were occasionally taught a sharp lesson due to unfaithfulness, but the deity in question never punished the innocent and faithful, or turned His back on His worshipers. Unlike in Dragonlance after the Cataclysm.
That entire story is a supreme example of divine dickery, yes, but the firstborn Egyptians were never expected to believe at all. At this point, the deity in question was concerned only with the welfare of His chosen people. If I remember the book correctly, the Jews were never abandoned for centuries at a time. They were occasionally taught a sharp lesson due to unfaithfulness, but the deity in question never punished the innocent and faithful, or turned His back on His worshipers. Unlike in Dragonlance after the Cataclysm.
And that is where you missed the point. The pantheon did not punish their faithful worshipers. They punished the heathens that expected the Kingpriest to be raised into the pantheon in return for a supposed abolition of evil.
Obviously the biblical story differs from Dragonlance but there are parallels.
Another thing to remember is that the gods did not ignore their faithful. Their true faithful were taken away (one would assume to Heaven but I don't recall ever seeing an official explanation.) Those people who survived the Cataclysm blamed the gods for not saving them, rather than accepting the fiery mountain as the punishment it was. As time went on people either took the Cataclysm as a myth or just stopped believing in the true gods altogether, many of which came to worship false gods. Not much motivation there to be a benevolent god. And again the gods of magic never left their faithful at all.
That entire story is a supreme example of divine dickery, yes, but the firstborn Egyptians were never expected to believe at all. At this point, the deity in question was concerned only with the welfare of His chosen people. If I remember the book correctly, the Jews were never abandoned for centuries at a time. They were occasionally taught a sharp lesson due to unfaithfulness, but the deity in question never punished the innocent and faithful, or turned His back on His worshipers. Unlike in Dragonlance after the Cataclysm.
Ahem.
Just as you feel they "needed" to kill off a bunch of FR gods, there is a (larger than I'd like) faction of Dragonlance fans that was all-too-happy to see Takhisis die. Me personally, I hate that Takhisis is dead, and the same goes for Mystra.
You have misunderstood something else. It wasn't because the gods were weak that Takhisis was able to steal the world. It was because they were busy trying to prevent an apocalypse at the hands of Chaos. Chaos was literally trying to destroy creation, so it's not hard to believe that every god was trusting every other god to put their entire effort into preventing that from happening, thereby leaving the opportunity for one to betray them all.
As for your understanding of the Dragon Overlord dominating the elves, again, you completely misunderstand, and it's probably because you haven't read enough of the story. There were no gods, or at least, the single god that existed was far too weak to act (not that she would have saved the elves anyway.) Therefore, there was no divine magic, and no arcane magic. So it was just a bunch of pointy ears hiding in the trees with bows and arrows against this massive beast with the arcane power of (at least) hundreds of dragons. If you can't understand why a dragon the size of a football stadium would laugh at a bunch of elves with pointy sticks, especially when she has magic and they don't, then you haven't read nearly enough fantasy to have this conversation.
Not liking the time travel I can give you. Personally, I don't have any problem with it. I liked Tasselhoff, and I hate sci-fi, so the time travel element wasn't a problem for me either in the War of Souls or the Legends era. It was simply a plot device that has not been overused to me. Not liking a plot device is understandable and defensible though, so I don't hold that against you.
BTW: I have to tell you, every time you make a comment utilizing the words "stupid" and "lame" I get the urge to tear into you. I am going to ask this as politely as possible: please refrain from outright insults of people's hard work. I have a lot of respect for the writers of Dragonlance fiction, and your insults have been grating on my nerves. There is a way to express disapproval like an adult without resorting to insults.
GODS should not control arcane magic. There is nothing divine in arcane magic. Even without it there is or should be psionics. Even without magic there are things called ballistas and catapults. Im sure elves are plenty smart enough to make them and use them. Even when she moved the world the gods should have been able to find it right after defeating chaos.
I have no problem with Takhessis dying it should have been easier in fact. Paladine should not have had to give up his divinity so it could happen. Also if magic is gone its gone for everybody. So it really didnt make sense that the dragon overlords had magic but no one else did.
18th was the highest level. Only the head white robe could be 18th everyone else maxed at 17th (17th level granted 9th level spells) only White Robes could cast spells from the school of Abjuration (protection spells for those of you not familiar). Head of the white robes was determined by vote.
Head of the black robes was attained at 13th+! level and 13th level granted level 8 and level 9 nine spells! All other black robes were limited to max out at 12th level...but they got 7th level spells then. head of the black robes was determined by combat. Only Black robes had access to the school of necromancy.
Black robes took less exp. per level and got higher level spells soon, white robes leveled more slowly but ended up with more spells in the long run.
Red robes leader was level 16+ and were the only ones with access to the school of divination.
doubt wee will go back to that or anything like it...I hope we can get 3 diffrent roles...warlock black (striker dark bent), Bard White (goodie goodie leader). and Wizard Red (more neutral controler)
The difference between white robes and red robes (or rose knights and crown knights) can't just be "fluff" it has to be backed up by solid rules that make the different "wizards of high order" practically different classes.
why...
GODS should not control arcane magic. There is nothing divine in arcane magic.
QFT...
So... let me get this straight...the gods dropped a mountain on the guy clamoring to become a god himself, causing a huge cataclysm, and then went silent, waiting for men to 'find their faith again'. Essentially the gods assumed that the natural order of things would be for mortals to worship them and have faith in them?
Yeah...no.
If I was to play in DL my character would be totally fed up with the gods. What do mortals need them for anyway?
Ironicly it worked in previus edtions becuse it was healing no one could do with out it. atleast not adventurers... so now with warlord, artaficer, bard, shawman, or any other.
so yea in 4e we need to rethink this...
Mortals should forge their own future and not care about those gods who don't give a damn about them! Faith has to be earned, its not an undeniable right, even for those divine jerks!
in 4e we can do just that...turn to any other power source.
Want me to find you? Give me a good reason to want to.
yea, I agree
You see in Krynn, the gods are real and have power. If mortals want to get access to that power they have to do what's necessary.
lucky you can go without that power source...
You're looking at through the eyes of the real world, where their are things such as science and gods don't actually exist. You can blaspheme the gods in the real world and nothing will ever happen to you because of it.
If you live on Krynn and ever wanted to be healed of a malady, you better understand and accept who has that power.
leaders of any and all power sources...I can tell the gods to **** off in 4e no longer are clerics needed to adventure.
GODS should not control arcane magic. There is nothing divine in arcane magic.
Considering that prior to DnD the majority of literary and mythological examples of what DnD terms arcane magic came from divine sources ... I have to say you're wrong.
Ahem.
So, is it the general consensus of the Jewish community that God actually turned his back on the Jews altogether during the Holocaust? If so, that's interesting. If not, stop being a wise!@#.
Considering that prior to DnD the majority of literary and mythological examples of what DnD terms arcane magic came from divine sources ... I have to say you're wrong.
since 30+ years of D&D says otherwise...I have to say you are wrong...
since 30+ years of D&D says otherwise...I have to say you are wrong...
25 years of Dragonlance says there can be exceptions.
25 years of Dragonlance says there can be exceptions.
I will except there are exceptions that break the rule...
Because all magic is of godly origin, arcane magic is as well. It's not "divine" in the sense of "4E power source" but it's definitely influenced, focused, directed, or however you want to picture it. The sorcerers of the Fifth Age, however, learned that arcane magic was present in the world. Without the moon gods around to interfere and with Chaos' lingering presence acting as a sort of catalyst, they were able to channel that power themselves. Even this, however, is ultimately the power of Creation.
For all intents and purposes, of course, magic is magic is magic, and depending on what your class is or who you serve or what you know, your use of it will merely be an expression of your character class. But from a purely theoretical (and occasionally practical) perspective, there's a god (or primordial) at the root of all magic.
Cheers,
Cam
So, is it the general consensus of the Jewish community that God actually turned his back on the Jews altogether during the Holocaust? If so, that's interesting. If not, stop being a wise!@#.
As a point of interest, WW II did mark what many called "the death of god." A term used to describe, essentially, the belief that god can not exist, because if god existed he could not have allowed something like the holocaust to happen. Alternatively, god might exist, but if so, he was too much of a bastard to be worth worshiping.
This notion is not, however, the general consensus of the Jewish community (last I checked, at least).
As a point of interest, WW II did mark what many called "the death of god." A term used to describe, essentially, the belief that god can not exist, because if god existed he could not have allowed something like the holocaust to happen. Alternatively, god might exist, but if so, he was too much of a bastard to be worth worshiping.
This notion is not, however, the general consensus of the Jewish community (last I checked, at least).
That's what I thought. So, this really freaky and disgusting attempt to liken the Cataclysm to the Holocaust is just as intellectually bankrupt as it seemed.
Those of you responsible forfeit your right to be called 'human beings'. Seriously, WTF.
Uh, no.
You see in Krynn, the gods are real and have power. If mortals want to get access to that power they have to do what's necessary.
You're looking at through the eyes of the real world, where their are things such as science and gods don't actually exist. You can blaspheme the gods in the real world and nothing will ever happen to you because of it.
If you live on Krynn and ever wanted to be healed of a malady, you better understand and accept who has that power.
No. I'm actually looking through the eyes of THIS guy:
Most of what I said was things were paraphrased from him actually.
If I'm going to play in DL I'm going to play a character who rely only on his own power (or at least the Primal Spirits if they exist in that world). Probably a Psionic character.
since 30+ years of D&D says otherwise...I have to say you are wrong...
Centuries of literature and millenia of myths trump a few decades of DnD. :P
Centuries of literature and millenia of myths trump a few decades of DnD. :P
I've actually got to agree with CelticMutt on this one. There's no reason whatsoever that gods can't be the source of arcane magic, and in most published settings they are. EDIT: Also, like CelticMutt said, in most real-world cultures that believe in magic, there's usually at least one god involved.
The color-coding of magic is an issue, but having divine sources of magic in the first place makes a lot of sense, and I don't understand why there was an objection to it.
That's what I thought. So, this really freaky and disgusting attempt to liken the Cataclysm to the Holocaust is just as intellectually bankrupt as it seemed.
Those of you responsible forfeit your right to be called 'human beings'. Seriously, WTF.
How about a WTF back. It was perfectly appropriate comparison, except for the fact that one was real and one was fictional.
The holocaust was a terrible human tragedy — if we had gods and they threw a fiery mountain at us, it would be at least as terrible. A god who allows either to happen deserves only hatred.
No. I'm actually looking through the eyes of THIS guy:
Most of what I said was things were paraphrased from him actually.
If I'm going to play in DL I'm going to play a character who rely only on his own power (or at least the Primal Spirits if they exist in that world). Probably a Psionic character.
I don't know who that is, so I can't argue with you.
That's what I thought. So, this really freaky and disgusting attempt to liken the Cataclysm to the Holocaust is just as intellectually bankrupt as it seemed.
Those of you responsible forfeit your right to be called 'human beings'. Seriously, WTF.
WTF yourself, good sir.
Please explain how, aside from one being real and one fictional, these events differ in any fundamental capacity.
I would very much like it if they put the pantheon back in order, seems like it would be fairly easy to do. As long as Paladine is walking Krynn there is that hope that he could once again re take the mantel of god hood thus bringing back Takhisis in the process. They could use the new "Mina" god as a bridge for Paladine to return to his rightful position thus canceling out her short stint as a god as well.
GODS should not control arcane magic. There is nothing divine in arcane magic. Even without it there is or should be psionics. Even without magic there are things called ballistas and catapults. Im sure elves are plenty smart enough to make them and use them. Even when she moved the world the gods should have been able to find it right after defeating chaos.
The issue of gods supporting divine magic has been addressed already, but I'll just mention something else: Mystra.
In DL 4e there will obviously have to be psionics, but I don't see why there should have been previously. What you want is every setting to be exactly the same, so why bother having different ones?
As for your whole "catapults and ballistas" argument, do me a favor. Think about this for a minute. Have you ever seen a football stadium? They're pretty big. Like, massively huge. Now picture a big lizard with wings that size. Who breathes fire. And doesn't like you. And has a level of magic that you don't.
You didn't read the War of Souls. Don't assume to understand why the gods couldn't find Krynn. By the same token you would have to assume Mystra would see an assassination plot coming, considering she controls the same magical forces used by magic-users to see the future. It's part of the plot for them not to see it.
I have no problem with Takhessis dying it should have been easier in fact. Paladine should not have had to give up his divinity so it could happen. Also if magic is gone its gone for everybody. So it really didnt make sense that the dragon overlords had magic but no one else did.
The Balance is a critical plot device in Dragonlance. A lot like the Balance of the Force is a critical plot device for Star Wars. I suppose George Lucas is wrong for that as well, right?
Magic wasn't gone. Again, you don't know the story. The Dragon Overlords took their power from the remains of dragons they slaughtered. Magic-users took their magic from residual magic in artifacts and items left over from previous times. Mystics took their power from what would now probably be seen as Primal sources with the absence of Divine magic.
Think I've posted on this thread before that I would be happy either way if its Dark Sun or Dragonlance. I would prefer it to be DL as its been my favorite setting since I became interested in D&D.
I would very much like it if they put the pantheon back in order, seems like it would be fairly easy to do. As long as Paladine is walking Krynn there is that hope that he could once again re take the mantel of god hood thus bringing back Takhisis in the process. They could use the new "Mina" god as a bridge for Paladine to return to his rightful position thus canceling out her short stint as a god as well.
I would love this, except I want to keep Mina in the pantheon. Maybe if it is Wizards solely in charge it has a chance of happening too. I'm pretty sure Margaret Weis was dead-set on never allowing Takhisis to return. I really want the Dark Queen to return to her old tricks.
Well if we're still holding onto the whole hints based on the Design & Development articles and such there were lots of hints towards Dark Sun in the one that came out today but not a single mention of anything Dragonlance. Of course that could be because the article focused on the psionic power source and how it was formed, tweaked, and fleshed out.
I think that it was said that the hints would be in the Ampersands. But I would have to go back and reread the original article.
Bill actually says he will drop the hints in future articles, which I would think means articles written by him and not others.
The issue of gods supporting divine magic has been addressed already, but I'll just mention something else: Mystra.
Again I hated and despised old FR. You can have a god give magic to people but I see it much like Promethous giving humans fire once given cannot be taken away.
As for your whole "catapults and ballistas" argument, do me a favor. Think about this for a minute. Have you ever seen a football stadium? They're pretty big. Like, massively huge. Now picture a big lizard with wings that size. Who breathes fire. And doesn't like you. And has a level of magic that you don't.
Yeah no a massive rock to the head is a massive rock to the head, poisoned arrows. Trust me you can get real creative heck giant glass balls filled with alchemist fire and acid. Creative people can find creative solutions. Im sure elves still had druids.
You didn't read the War of Souls. Don't assume to understand why the gods couldn't find Krynn. By the same token you would have to assume Mystra would see an assassination plot coming, considering she controls the same magical forces used by magic-users to see the future. It's part of the plot for them not to see it.
Eh maybe so maybe no Shar is sneaky she is the god of secrets, shadows and assasins. Like I said any time gods get involved a setting gets stupid. Its just in DL the gods get involved way too much.
And Im sorry the gods should be able to find a planet. Kinda hard to hide that. especially when the gods are connected to it. Again to me it felt like a very contrived plot device that didnt even make sense at all.
The Balance is a critical plot device in Dragonlance. A lot like the Balance of the Force is a critical plot device for Star Wars. I suppose George Lucas is wrong for that as well, right?
Actually I find a lot wrong with Lucas's core premise and philosophy emotion isnt bad. Even anger can be used for a good purpose. Anyone who tries to purge all emotions is doomed to fail as it is our emotions as much as our intelect that makes us human. Lucas failed to recognize that. You can use fear, and anger in positive ways. Any atempt to seek balance between good and evil is going to fail. You must try to destroy evil where ever it is found otherwise it is going to prosper. A balance between good and evil only causes more suffering.
Magic wasn't gone. Again, you don't know the story. The Dragon Overlords took their power from the remains of dragons they slaughtered. Magic-users took their magic from residual magic in artifacts and items left over from previous times. Mystics took their power from what would now probably be seen as Primal sources with the absence of Divine magic.
Yeah sounds like a bogus plot device to me. If I saw dragons doing this then Id do the same and become stronger too. If a dragon can do it so can a smart wizard.
I would love this, except I want to keep Mina in the pantheon. Maybe if it is Wizards solely in charge it has a chance of happening too. I'm pretty sure Margaret Weis was dead-set on never allowing Takhisis to return. I really want the Dark Queen to return to her old tricks.
Just from what I read of the first book I want mina dead since she is EVIL
Again I hated and despised old FR. You can have a god give magic to people but I see it much like Promethous giving humans fire once given cannot be taken away.
So humans shouldn't have fire? Fantasy characters shouldn't have magic? What are you even saying here?
Why bother playing the game at all, really? It's just all one big silly nonsensical waste of time.
Yeah no a massive rock to the head is a massive rock to the head, poisoned arrows. Trust me you can get real creative heck giant glass balls filled with alchemist fire and acid. Creative people can find creative solutions. Im sure elves still had druids.
Umm, did you try to visualize the dragon like I asked? That's a pretty HUGE rock to the head. You think when she does her daily flybys she doesn't see them building a massive catapult to hurl that massive boulder at her, or better yet, rolling that massive boulder along? Somehow I doubt that long snout wouldn't be firing off a gout of flame large enough to char-broil the whole forest and every pointy-ear in it.
Here, I'll even spot you the 3e writeup of her available on http://www.dlnexus.com/fan/rules/12746.aspx:
Colossal Red Dragon (Fire)
Hit Dice: 46d12+552 (851 hp)
Initiative: +4 (Improved Initiative)
Speed: 40 ft., fly 200 ft. (clumsy)
AC: 47 (-8 size, +45 natural)
Attacks: Bite +58 melee, 2 claws +53 melee, 2 wings +53 melee, tail slap +53 melee; or crush +53 melee
Damage: Bite 4d8+20, claw 4d6+10, wing 2d8+10, tail slap 4d6+30, crush 4d8+30
Face/Reach: 80 ft. by 200 ft./20 ft.
Special Attacks: Breath weapon, frightful presence, spells, spell-like abilities, tail sweep 2d8+30
Special Qualities: Fire subtype, damage reduction 25/+4, SR 36, blindsight, keen senses
Saves: Fort +35, Ref +23, Will +33
Abilities: Str 50, Dex 10, Con 35, Int 30, Wis 31, Cha 30
Skills: Appraise +56, Bluff +56, Climb +66, Concentration +56, Diplomacy +56, Hide +30, Innuendo +56, Intimidate +56, Intuit Direction +56, Jump +66, Knowledge (arcana) +56, Listen +56, Move Silently +46, Scry +56, Search +56, Spellcraft +56, Spot +56
Feats: Cleave, Craft Wondrous Item, Flyby Attack, Great Cleave, Heighten Spell, Improved Initiative, Power Attack, Quicken Spell-Like Ability, Silent Spell, Snatch, Sunder, Wingover
Climate/Terrain: Warm hills, mountains, and underground
Organisation: Solitary*
Challenge Rating: 29
Treasure: Double standard
Alignment: Always chaotic evil
Advancement: —
Breath Weapon (Su): Malystryx's breath weapon is a cone of fire 90 feet long. Creatures caught in the cone suffer 28d10 fire damage (Reflex save halves, DC 45).
Frightful Presence (Ex): Malystryx can unsettle foes whenever she attacks, charges, or flies overhead. Creatures within a radius of 420 feet are subject to the fear if they have fewer than 46 HD.
An opponent that succeeds at a Will save (DC 43) remains immune to her fearful presence for one day. On a failure, creatures with 4 or fewer HD become panicked for 4d6 rounds and those with 5 or more HD become shaken for 4d6 rounds.
And here's a spoiler for you:
****E-MAIL SPOILER ALERT****
Show
The elves DID kill her eventually. That's the battle that lost them their homeland. Actions have consequences, but I'm sure you'll find fault with that too, because "Well, why can't elves do whatever they want? It's more contrived plot devices!"
So humans shouldn't have fire? Fantasy characters shouldn't have magic? What are you even saying here?
Im saying that once promethous showed man how to use fire they knew it and he could not then take the gift away magic should be the same. Once people have the power of magic its theirs and cannot be revoked ever.
Umm, did you try to visualize the dragon like I asked? That's a pretty HUGE rock to the head. You think when she does her daily flybys she doesn't see them building a massive catapult to hurl that massive boulder at her, or better yet, rolling that massive boulder along? Somehow I doubt that long snout wouldn't be firing off a gout of flame large enough to char-broil the whole forest and every pointy-ear in it.ShowThe elves DID kill her eventually. That's the battle that lost them their homeland. Actions have consequences, but I'm sure you'll find fault with that too, because "Well, why can't elves do whatever they want? It's more contrived plot devices!"
That would be very admirable if it weren't so blatantly trollish at this point.
Im saying that once promethous showed man how to use fire they knew it and he could not then take the gift away magic should be the same. Once people have the power of magic its theirs and cannot be revoked ever.
The people do have magic. AGAIN, had you read the books you'd understand that divine magic was replaced with mysticism, and arcane magic was either syphoned from items (or dragons in the case of Overlords) or there were sorcerers walking around the planet, one of which has become head of the White Robes.
I dont see how beating her could lose them their homeland again it does sound contrived.
Of course you don't. That's the problem when you don't read the fiction or listen to people who try to tell you what happened.
****YET ANOTHER SPOILER ALERT****
Show
The Minotaur were on their way to attempt to conquer territory on Ansalon. Coincidentally, it was at the same time the elves hatched their plan to have most escape through a tunnel network while the most brave remained behind on a suicide mission to kill Malystryx.
They managed to kill Malystryx, but in the process were depleted of defense forces, and most of the elves were in the desert running for their lives, so the Minotaur walked in and took over.
The plot is no more contrived that any plotline in any work of fiction. It's called fiction for a reason.
They managed to kill Malystryx, but in the process were depleted of defense forces, and most of the elves were in the desert running for their lives, so the Minotaur walked in and took over.
The plot is no more contrived that any plotline in any work of fiction. It's called fiction for a reason.
Would have liked summer flame if there had been more build up in the first three i didnt even see a sturm, female mercenary romance much less that they had a son. Had there been a couple of previous books with sturms son in them the build up would have been a bit better and it would have been far less confusing.
Again ill say serving evil diety=evil one of my friends tried getting me to read the stuff after tahkissis died and mentioned how melina then worked for a death god. As for the skulls I can see making a staff of several dragon skulls and carrying it around or grind them up first. Evil just always seems to win in DL. The good guys never really acomplish much they either die, or just hold the bad guys off and then more bad guys show up screwing everything over again. Summer flame was confusing because half the characters were new the first mina book was confusing because i didnt understand what was going on or had happened and they didnt explain it. After the first 100 pages i gave up.
Would have liked summer flame if there had been more build up in the first three i didnt even see a sturm, female mercenary romance much less that they had a son. Had there been a couple of previous books with sturms son in them the build up would have been a bit better and it would have been far less confusing.
So you couldn't keep up Summer Flame because there were too many new characters? But Dragonlance is a problem because it's always in the shadow of the original Heroes of the Lance.
You read 100 pages of an epic novel, and gave up, then complain about it? Seriously?
The good guys never accomplish much? I guess the original heroes didn't stop Takhisis from entering the world. I guess Caramon and Tasselhoff never stopped Raistlin from destroying the universe. I guess Silvanoshei never killed Takhisis to prevent her from entering the world.
Yeah, the good guys never win in Dragonlance.
As for your dragon totem idea, it wouldn't have worked. Know why? It's not the way the plot device was designed. Sorry, this isn't Burger King; you can't have everything "your way." You want it "your way" submit your own story to Wizards.
As for your whole thing about Sturm, you might want to go check your facts there too. Wait, I'll do it for you. There was a novel called The Second Generation. It tells Steel Brightblade's (Sturm's son) story. Also, there is a book I haven't read which details the relationship between Sturm and Kitiara that results in Steel's birth.
Quit while you're ahead.
How about a WTF back. It was perfectly appropriate comparison, except for the fact that one was real and one was fictional.
The holocaust was a terrible human tragedy — if we had gods and they threw a fiery mountain at us, it would be at least as terrible. A god who allows either to happen deserves only hatred.
WTF yourself, good sir.
Please explain how, aside from one being real and one fictional, these events differ in any fundamental capacity.
In what way are they at all similar, other than a lot of people dying and it being terrible?
The Holocaust was the work of one evil madman and his government, with the support - or at least lack of objection - of most of his people. It was not divine punishment. It was not God turning His back on His people. It was a matter of people killing people. Just about every mainstream, relevant religious authority will tell you so.
I can't even begin to list the flaws in your character that would lead to you bringing up the freaking Holocaust in this situation. Do you really think it would help your argument to link the Cataclysm and the Holocaust? Congratulations - you've just established that the entire pantheon is collectively a bigger dick than any real-world deity. Now go do some penance, preferably involving repetitive bodily harm to yourself.
EDIT: While I'm at it...
As for your whole thing about Sturm, you might want to go check your facts there too. Wait, I'll do it for you. There was a novel called The Second Generation. It tells Steel Brightblade's (Sturm's son) story. Also, there is a book I haven't read which details the relationship between Sturm and Kitiara that results in Steel's birth.
And it basically constituted the destruction of the character of Sturm via Kitiara-wankery. William is right - that could not have happened in-character.
So you couldn't keep up Summer Flame because there were too many new characters? But Dragonlance is a problem because it's always in the shadow of the original Heroes of the Lance.
You read 100 pages of an epic novel, and gave up, then complain about it? Seriously?
The good guys never accomplish much? I guess the original heroes didn't stop Takhisis from entering the world. I guess Caramon and Tasselhoff never stopped Raistlin from destroying the universe. I guess Silvanoshei never killed Takhisis to prevent her from entering the world.
Yeah, the good guys never win in Dragonlance.
As for your dragon totem idea, it wouldn't have worked. Know why? It's not the way the plot device was designed. Sorry, this isn't Burger King; you can't have everything "your way." You want it "your way" submit your own story to Wizards.
As for your whole thing about Sturm, you might want to go check your facts there too. Wait, I'll do it for you. There was a novel called The Second Generation. It tells Steel Brightblade's (Sturm's son) story. Also, there is a book I haven't read which details the relationship between Sturm and Kitiara that results in Steel's birth.
Quit while you're ahead.
WTF? Then those books should come before summer flame. I thought summer flame was right after war of the lance when i picked it up. The good guys did those things and it didnt matter as the world still ended up a mess anyway. What they did becomes overshadowed by other events that they had no control over.
WTF? Then those books should come before summer flame. I thought summer flame was right after war of the lance when i picked it up. The good guys did those things and it didnt matter as the world still ended up a mess anyway. What they did becomes overshadowed by other events that they had no control over.
This is actually the reverse of the actual problem. The Dragonlance timeline is basically a perpetual disaster, and either the Heroes of the Lance or their descendants are constantly cleaning it up, and the entire setting seems to be focused on these events or their aftermath.
In what way are they at all similar, other than a lot of people dying and it being terrible?
The Holocaust was the work of one evil madman and his government, with the support - or at least lack of objection - of most of his people. It was not divine punishment. It was not God turning His back on His people. It was a matter of people killing people.
yea I got to agree here. God didn't make hitler kill thousands...he just gave everyone free will and one evil bastard (also called the 2nd anti-christ by many) did some of the most horrid things ever (lets not forget hitler gets the press but there are worse monsters in history...scary thought) but it was the work of man. As was 9/11, pearl harbor, or anything else in the real world.
in the DL gods didn't just not help (like real world...depending on your inter) but THEY CAUSED IT. Now if you have an example of a god caused mass death we can look at it...
BUT as of right now all you did was prove there are eaither no good gods in DL, or the evil gods have WAY more sway. Becuse what the hitler analogy is is the cause...so the gods are like hitler...and I think everyone in the world (short of neo nazis) think Hitler is the example of Evil...so the gods of dragon lance are evil...
Show
I like the twins and the chronical series as books, and do not belive the gods to be anything like hitler...so I belive your anology failed in full, but I did show what you showed not what I belive...
This is actually the reverse of the actual problem. The Dragonlance timeline is basically a perpetual disaster, and either the Heroes of the Lance or their descendants are constantly cleaning it up, and the entire setting seems to be focused on these events or their aftermath.
Ah gotcha. So if the heros and their descendants are always taking care of problems whats left for pcs to do?
Ah gotcha. So if the heros and their descendants are always taking care of problems whats left for pcs to do?
You could conceivably venture off and have your own unrelated adventures in the setting, but you wouldn't have much support. The setting was developed to support the adventures of the Heroes of the Lance and their successors, and everything you do off the beaten path is your own creation.
And it basically constituted the destruction of the character of Sturm via Kitiara-wankery. William is right - that could not have happened in-character.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. What is William right about? The story of Sturm is one of human failure, resulting in the later chance at redemption. Why is this not plausable, even in-character?
WTF? Then those books should come before summer flame.
It did.
I thought summer flame was right after war of the lance when i picked it up.
You thought wrong.
The good guys did those things and it didnt matter as the world still ended up a mess anyway. What they did becomes overshadowed by other events that they had no control over.
What events?
What about the history of the heroes that appear in any timeframe in the setting's history are overshadowed by other events? Is WWI and its heroes overshadowed by WWII? Do either of them overshadow the American Revolution for citizens of the US? Are any of the above overshadowed by current military action for the US?
History happens. Dragonlance is epic fantasy which means epic events will consistently occur.
This is actually the reverse of the actual problem. The Dragonlance timeline is basically a perpetual disaster, and either the Heroes of the Lance or their descendants are constantly cleaning it up, and the entire setting seems to be focused on these events or their aftermath.
Not completely, but somewhat correct. As for those events and their aftermath, see above re: epic fantasy.
Ah gotcha. So if the heros and their descendants are always taking care of problems whats left for pcs to do?
Try reading the source material. Or even the epic 3-module super-adventure presented in 3.5.
There is even a 3.5 sourcebook for running a campaign during the WotL without ever involving the Companions.
You could conceivably venture off and have your own unrelated adventures in the setting, but you wouldn't have much support. The setting was developed to support the adventures of the Heroes of the Lance and their successors, and everything you do off the beaten path is your own creation.
Or you could use the material to do things your way during that timeframe, perhaps even changing the history of Krynn in your own campaign.
Or you could adventure in the modern era, where the Heroes of the Lance are no longer alive, the pantheon is significantly changed, the Conclave is in the process of rebuilding, empires are rising, displaced societies are looking for homes, the gods are pursuing new followers, and generally, every complaint someone makes about how Dragonlance has been in the past is being addressed with changes.
But why let facts continue to get in the way of your arguments?
Why did they call it summer flame then if it didnt happen right after? That makes no sense to have 3 books based on seasons with a 4th then have the 4th not in direct sequence.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. What is William right about? The story of Sturm is one of human failure, resulting in the later chance at redemption. Why is this not plausable, even in-character?
Because the character didn't act like a failure/redemption hero during Dragons of Autumn Twilight or Dragons of Winter Night. He was every inch the noble hero. Then they came along later and destroyed the character, adding a story of "failure" and "redemption" to a character that it didn't fit.
William was right in that the Sturm/Kitiara romance was absurdly out of character.
Not completely, but somewhat correct. As for those events and their aftermath, see above re: epic fantasy.
Your definition of "epic fantasy" is a bit different from that of the literary world.
But why let facts continue to get in the way of your arguments?
You mean like the fact that you just pointed out that the only real stories in the Dragonlance setting are the stories from the novels, and the only original stories the setting really provides for is dealing with the aftermath of the stories that have already been told, wherein you are always overshadowed by the events of the novels?
Epic fantasy doesnt mean gods get involved in every single book and im sorry what the gods do overshadows the entire setting. You as a pc will never be able to impact the setting as much as the heros of the lance. Nothing you do can compare to that.
Unless of course you use the material specifically designed to campaign in that era apart from the Companions.
Oh, and use a little imagination.
The one after war of souls might make an interesting world to adventure in as long as the gods stay the heck away and out of it except for granting clerics powers. Of course you still have kender, gully dwarves and tinker gnomes to deal with.
Which all comes back to the fact that you don't like Dragonlance, which for the fourth or fifth time is just fine with everyone. Trying to bolster your argument against it with made up "facts" is completely unacceptable though.
Why did they call it summer flame then if it didnt happen right after? That makes no sense to have 3 books based on seasons with a 4th then have the 4th not in direct sequence.
They are in sequence. Second Generation is a collection of short stories that delves into the lives of Steel Brightblade, (I think) Palin Majere (but it might be Silvanoshei, I can't recall) and "Raistlin's Daughter" who some believe to be Usha Majere, though Raistlin denies her.
Summer Flame occurs after the War of the Lance, and can be read without ever reading Second Generation. I read through the Chronicles and Summer Flame twice before I even knew Second Generation existed. It's not a necessary part of the collection, but I brought it up because you stated, incorrectly, that Steel had no backstory.
Because the character didn't act like a failure/redemption hero during Dragons of Autumn Twilight or Dragons of Winter Night. He was every inch the noble hero. Then they came along later and destroyed the character, adding a story of "failure" and "redemption" to a character that it didn't fit.
I admit, I set you up there.
Sturm's story of fall-from-grace and redemption has nothing to do with Kitiara (well, at least not the falling part.)
Sturm's fall occurs in his attempt to become a Solamnic Knight. He is a noble man with a past he cannot hide from. Then he crosses his superior who was out to get him in the first place. That is Sturm's fall.
His redemption occurs on the wall of the High Clerist's Tower. Against Kitiara.
William was right in that the Sturm/Kitiara romance was absurdly out of character.
I don't see why. I never read the book, but from what vague recollection I have of the story, they travelled together after the Companions broke up to search for the gods. At that point, Kitiara was not yet "evil."
Sometimes opposites attract. Sometimes that attraction results in a child. It's not very far-fetched at all really.
Your definition of "epic fantasy" is a bit different from that of the literary world.
Are you saying Dragonlance is not an epic fantasy setting?
You mean like the fact that you just pointed out that the only real stories in the Dragonlance setting are the stories from the novels, and the only original stories the setting really provides for is dealing with the aftermath of the stories that have already been told, wherein you are always overshadowed by the events of the novels?
Well, yeah, except for the ones you make yourself thanks to all the source material. You know, like the Age of Mortals sourcebook (that has nothing to do with the novels) or the full-scale campaign that culminates with your party facing the White Dragon Overlord (that has nothing to do with the novels.)
Then, yeah, I'm saying there are only stories from the novels possible in Dragonlance. That's exactly what I'm saying.
You two should really give it up already.
I admit, I set you up there.
Sturm's story of fall-from-grace and redemption has nothing to do with Kitiara (well, at least not the falling part.)
Sturm's fall occurs in his attempt to become a Solamnic Knight. He is a noble man with a past he cannot hide from. Then he crosses his superior who was out to get him in the first place. That is Sturm's fall.
His redemption occurs on the wall of the High Clerist's Tower. Against Kitiara.
That's not a "fall" so much as "his superiors being !@#holes." The failing was never his. The redemption wasn't his. It was the order that refused him in the first place that had fallen and was redeemed. That's why I didn't recognize your bizarre corkscrew thought pattern.
I don't see why. I never read the book, but from what vague recollection I have of the story, they travelled together after the Companions broke up to search for the gods. At that point, Kitiara was not yet "evil."
Sometimes opposites attract. Sometimes that attraction results in a child. It's not very far-fetched at all really.
No. Just... no. I did read the book, and yes, it's been a while, but I'm still angry at how Sturm, exemplar of honor, was apparently seduced by your common sword-swinging ****. (And that is an accurate description of Kitiara at the time.)
Are you saying Dragonlance is not an epic fantasy setting?
It sure doesn't have much in common with classic examples of epic fantasy.
Well, yeah, except for the ones you make yourself thanks to all the source material. You know, like the Age of Mortals sourcebook (that has nothing to do with the novels) or the full-scale campaign that culminates with your party facing the White Dragon Overlord (that has nothing to do with the novels.)
Then, yeah, I'm saying there are only stories from the novels possible in Dragonlance. That's exactly what I'm saying.
You two should really give it up already.
Oh, there's a bit of material out there. It's just rather weak and tacked on. "You, too, can adventure on the world of Krynn, just like the Heroes of the Lance!" sort of thing.
I don't know who that is, so I can't argue with you.
He's Gold Saint Leo Aiolia from Saint Seiya.
He's from a world where the gods (and monsters) of mythology are real.
Aiolia is a Saint of Athena, an order of powerful human warriors dedicated to protecting the world with Athena as their leader. However they don't do it by calling on her divine power, they do it by invoking their own inner power.
In the Episode G story Aiolia ends up facingthe 12 Titans of Greek mythology who have come back from Tartarus and plan to retake the world for their own. So Aiolia there ends up facing Ancient gods who claim that mortals have no chance against them and should cower before them. Aiolia replies with things like 'Mortals live a short life and thus must make it burn brightly' and so on. So far he's killed two of them and his buddy Shura killed one. Him and his colleagues also killed Giants who are also immortal with divine origins. Oh and he fought with Anubis once.
I figured the comparaison worked. If Aiolia found himself on Krynn he would have no respect for their gods.
He's Gold Saint Leo Aiolia from Saint Seiya.
He's from a world where the gods (and monsters) of mythology are real.
Aiolia is a Saint of Athena, an order of powerful human warriors dedicated to protecting the world with Athena as their leader. However they don't do it by calling on her divine power, they do it by invoking their own inner power.
In the Episode G story Aiolia ends up facingthe 12 Titans of Greek mythology who have come back from Tartarus and plan to retake the world for their own. So Aiolia there ends up facing Ancient gods who claim that mortals have no chance against them and should cower before them. Aiolia replies with things like 'Mortals live a short life and thus must make it burn brightly' and so on. So far he's killed two of them and his buddy Shura killed one. Him and his colleagues also killed Giants who are also immortal with divine origins. Oh and he fought with Anubis once.
I figured the comparaison worked. If Aiolia found himself on Krynn he would have no respect for their gods.
the kryn gods are not really worthy of respect the evil ones are petty and scheming and the good ones all seem to have had lobotomies at various points.
the kryn gods are not really worthy of respect the evil ones are petty and scheming and the good ones all seem to have had lobotomies at various points.
XD
that's why I'd want to make a character like Aiolia in DL.
"My fists are called fangs. My fangs exist not to destroy but to protect those I care about!"
"The idea that mortals should grovel at the feet of gods is nothing but a sad dillusion from the gods themselves!"
Probably as a monk. With lightning fists!
XD
that's why I'd want to make a character like Aiolia in DL.
"My fists are called fangs. My fangs exist not to destroy but to protect those I care about!"
"The idea that mortals should grovel at the feet of gods is nothing but a sad dillusion from the gods themselves!"
Probably as a monk. With lightning fists!
My next character might be a monk, or a warlord. Gods who needs those all you need is strength and determination and your foe is crushed. Ooh Goliath Brava warlord multi classed barbarian.
Cheers,
Cam
I'm frankly astonished that this thread is being maintained more or less by a handful of people who don't like Dragonlance any longer (or never did). I'm just going to assume that you folks are finding your joy in some other area of your gaming life.
Cheers,
Cam
Ive never seen a dm handle it well, and dragons of summer flame made no sense at all. Frankly though Ive found published settings in general kinda weak my dms just raid them for the juicy good bits. Home brew worlds always seem better, though like I said the best dms take elements from a lot of the worlds. And Ive never seen an adventure module I liked, or that was run well.
My next character might be a monk, or a warlord. Gods who needs those all you need is strength and determination and your foe is crushed. Ooh Goliath Brava warlord multi classed barbarian.
Oooh with some thaneborn powers!! That'd be sweet!
I'll give you one thing, you don't give up. No matter how wrong you are, or how much egg is on your face, you keep coming back for more.
That would be very admirable if it weren't so blatantly trollish at this point.
I wouldn't call it trollish (yet). Just very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very
OBSESSIVE
like obsessive-compulsive or something ....
I'm frankly astonished that this thread is being maintained more or less by a handful of people who don't like Dragonlance any longer (or never did). I'm just going to assume that you folks are finding your joy in some other area of your gaming life.
Cheers,
Cam
It's mostly the "well, you're wrong and you don't get it!" thing that draws me back in for more. People making really outlandish and absurd statements about what others don't understand about the setting's merits.
Alio and CM discussing our personal qualities isn't likely to result in a polite exchange of ideas involving mutual respect for our differing opinions either.
This could allow everyone to enjoy Dragonlance, with the book readers incorporating as much canon as they like and the rest of us treating it as a starting point which we will make our own as we go.
Being unfamiliar with Dragonlance, I would like to see WotC declare essentially a separation between "book canon" and "game canon." The setting sounds like it has some interesting themes, but they're drowned in a sea of canon, much of which seems absurd to many. So what if the CG said, "none of the books ever happened, here's the world, how will you change what happened?"
This could allow everyone to enjoy Dragonlance, with the book readers incorporating as much canon as they like and the rest of us treating it as a starting point which we will make our own as we go.
This wouldn't really work in Dragonlance. The stories of the books are the setting's central feature.
In effect, I think the new Dragonlance should attempt to capture the feel of the original without trying to be an actual copy of the original. Instead of contriving ways to slot Dragonborn in, just say, "they're here, they've always been here, and here's the new history we've written for them." If they plan on using the core cosmology (as they've said they will with all campaign settings), they should simply change it in the original instead of making up a reason the cosmology has shifted dramatically in the past 100 years.
If all Dragonlance has to offer are the stories, then the game form should be left to die, and the setting should live on in novel form. If Dragonlance has something interesting to bring to the game table (as many here have defended), then those things should be good enough to stand on their own, without the greatness of the stories backing them up.
Cheers,
Cam
WotC has no interest in publishing fiction unless it is supporting a game line. That's the key here. There really won't be anything new in DL novels unless there's a DL game product for it to support. And, if it's supporting it, it's going to have to more or less be the same continuity that's used.
Cheers,
Cam
The most puzzling thing is that neither of the supposed front-runner settings, DL or DS, have any new novels(besides the Fate of Thorbardin, which finishes off a trilogy, maybe the Gargoyle King) planned for next year (Dark Sun doesn't have any novels, new or old, planned, period).
The most puzzling thing is that neither of the supposed front-runner settings, DL or DS, have any new novels(besides the Fate of Thorbardin, which finishes off a trilogy, maybe the Gargoyle King) planned for next year (Dark Sun doesn't have any novels, new or old, planned, period).
probably wont announce new novels till the campaign setting is anounced. For darksun who would they get to write them I dont think troy denning is still writing. (could be wrong but havent seen anything new by him doesnt mean it doesnt exist)
probably wont announce new novels till the campaign setting is anounced. For darksun who would they get to write them I dont think troy denning is still writing. (could be wrong but havent seen anything new by him doesnt mean it doesnt exist)
The problem with that is that novels seem to spend a lot of time in limbo, between announcement, writing, editing, and printing. If the next setting comes out in June of next year, that gives nine months to get the whole process done. Is that feasible?
As for Dark Sun novels, I really don't know who they would have write them.
The problem with that is that novels seem to spend a lot of time in limbo, between announcement, writing, editing, and printing. If the next setting comes out in June of next year, that gives nine months to get the whole process done. Is that feasible?
As for Dark Sun novels, I really don't know who they would have write them.
The novels might be done just not released.
The novels might be done just not released.
I fielded that theory to Cam on another forum and he said it isn't likely. NDAs don't seem to be the reason nothing has been announced.
I fielded that theory to Cam on another forum and he said it isn't likely. NDAs don't seem to be the reason nothing has been announced.
Ah it was just a thought. But they havent released are not releasing any novels for any setting except Ebaron and FR next year so far so thats a bit strange.
This is what you will never understand. It is not the next book in the series.
Chronicles: dragons of autumn twilight, winters night, and sprin dawning.
Legends: time of the twins, war of the twins, test of the twins. These are set 5 years after the first book.
Second generation happens nearly 18 years after the first book.
Dragons of summer flame happens 20 years after the first book.
Then after that happened were the war os souls books which I think were at least 10 years after the summer of flame.
Actually, the War of Souls takes place about 40 years after Dragons of Summer Flame.
BTW, the Chronicles books reference months of the year (Autumn Twiligh=October, Winter Night=January, and Spring Dawning=March). Summer Flame is not a month, the title references the Summer of Chaos (where the big fire giant aspect of Chaos ran amuck).
One wouldn't know the naming scheme meant that unless they were versed in the game version of the series.
Ive never seen a dm handle it well, and dragons of summer flame made no sense at all. Frankly though Ive found published settings in general kinda weak my dms just raid them for the juicy good bits. Home brew worlds always seem better, though like I said the best dms take elements from a lot of the worlds. And Ive never seen an adventure module I liked, or that was run well.
Unfortunately, most homebrews I've ever seen end up looking like the face of old Toril (patched together in either an arbitrary or thinly-veiled manner) and that's a bad thing. OTOH, Eberron is amazing!
My point is that just because you don't know how to use a published setting properly doesn't mean they suck.
Epic fantasy doesnt mean gods get involved in every single book and im sorry what the gods do overshadows the entire setting. You as a pc will never be able to impact the setting as much as the heros of the lance. Nothing you do can compare to that. The one after war of souls might make an interesting world to adventure in as long as the gods stay the heck away and out of it except for granting clerics powers. Of course you still have kender, gully dwarves and tinker gnomes to deal with.
Why did they call it summer flame then if it didnt happen right after? That makes no sense to have 3 books based on seasons with a 4th then have the 4th not in direct sequence.
I didn't see anyone address this yet which surprises me. [Edit: ninja'd while being verbose.]
Chronicles 1-3 were basically a standalone trilogy. After their publication, large numbers of authors put out dozens of books expounding on the setting in every direction. The ancient history of the world was fleshed out in novel form. The more immediate history of the main characters from Chronicles was fleshed out in novel form, including both the heroes and the main villains. And a variety of random adventures, often having nothing to do with the main characters from Chronicles was fleshed out in novel form. However, there was a general rule in place (perhaps informally) that only the original authors could do massive world shattering events that move the world foreward as a whole. And they did so a bit with the Second Generation I guess but it never seemed important enough to me to read.. basically the novelization of the setting more or less orbitted around the events of the Chronicles.
And so at some point they came out with Chronicles volume 4, which by its name and numbering is clearly called out as an Important World Changing Event that all the fans needed to buy to see where things are going. And sure enough, it delivers on that, but does so under the understanding that you have read a fair bit of the intervening material since reading Chronicles 3. Read by someone with that sort of experience, such as I had at the time, it could be pretty awesome. Read by someone who just read volume 3 and expects volume 4 to be an immediate continuation of the story, I can see how it is confusing. It was simply written to a different audience.
Overall, the DL novels have a main central plotline that is written by Margarat Weis and Tracy Hickman and focuses heavily on their characters and tends to have some major world-shattering events, but the other books show that there is an awful lot of fantasy adventure going on in that world outside their exploits. A campaign set in the war of the lance could probably be run in a way that makes the Heroes of the Lance seem almost incidental to the plot. Hey, some NPCs showed up and provided you with some nice magic weapons: now you have to go out and do the real fighting! Overall the Heroes of the lance mostly move a few key plot items from point A to point B at the right time, and thwarted a few key details of Takhisis' plans. There were uncountably many other battles to be fought, plot items to be manipulated, intrigues to be thwarted, etc. The books give hints into bits and pieces of this. But the main books especially gloss over large parts of the war, presenting only the bits the main characters encountered themselves. Just find a portion of the war that isn't very tightly defined and play it out if that's what you want.
The as yet untold story of William's Irregulars, whose brave deeds are far less known, but were just as crucial to thwarting Takhisis' five-fold plot to world domination. Parts are unsung because the world was full of so many dragons dying in those days, that another four or five were hardly worth a bard's time, but those who were there do not think so little of it. And of course, other parts are unsung because even hinting at who relieved the Dark Queen's servants of their vital artifact and where it was laid to rest might some day lead to it being required by Her or some other evil. And yet other parts are unsung because those who were there speak as little as possible of what they saw and did, deep within the maddening plane of the Abyss.
You only have to break canon to make your deeds more well known than the Heroes, not to make them more epic or important.
Ah it was just a thought. But they havent released are not releasing any novels for any setting except Ebaron and FR next year so far so thats a bit strange.
It's not too strange; I heard WotC was downsizing their product lines to just the "core brands", which is why that one Ari Marmell novel (originally slated for normal publication) was cancelled, and ended up being published digitally in sections on the D&D website. If this is the case though, I'm not clear on exactly why Dragonlance aren't a "core" novel brand...
It's not too strange; I heard WotC was downsizing their product lines to just the "core brands", which is why that one Ari Marmell novel (originally slated for normal publication) was cancelled, and ended up being published digitally in sections on the D&D website. If this is the case though, I'm not clear on exactly why Dragonlance aren't a "core" novel brand...
Dragonlance does have some novels coming next year, but they are mostly mass-market paperback and the Raistlin Chronicles Omnibus. Some of the Dragonlance books are going out of print, but only some. It is hard to say what WotC is up to at this point.
So far everyone defending DL seems to have read at least two or three trilogies about the setting. So you must excuse those that are not as versed in the setting if it strikes them as bland. To me, the first impression of DL (even after reading one of the books) is that it offers nothing new, just some more generic fantasy that we already have in FR.
To me, the first impression of DL (even after reading one of the books) is that it offers nothing new, just some more generic fantasy that we already have in FR.
I think this is a very important point. Dragonlance is a high fantasy setting. A very different one from FR, in both content and tone, but with many of the same tropes and cliches. It seems unlikely that WotC will follow up with Dragonlance so soon after FR. It just doesn't seem like a good showcase of what D&D, 4e in particular, can do as far as the variety of your gaming experience is concerned.
That being said, the dominance of the narrative of the novels (particularly the Heroes of the Lance) should not be indicative of what the setting has to offer. If that were the case, almost everything that happens in the Realms would have to go through Elminster or Drizzt first, right? I think there is plenty of room to play in DL, either off screen of the events in the novels or right along side them. If that is the main gripe with DL, then the people making that argument either don't have a very good understanding of the setting, don't have a very good imagination or don't care and are just complaining to complain. Just because the novels have a very strong and epic storyline doesn't mean that the only thing that goes on in the world is contained in that storyline.
I'm no DL guru or a gigantic DL fan, even. Personally, as someone who has read the "big three" series of novels, I think the best route for a new setting would be to set it after the War of Souls. That would put the story of the setting more in line with what Eberron has going on. The beginning of the campaign would be a "here are the world-shattering events that got us here and the world is entering a new age" kinda thing. I'd give that setting a look, for sure.
I, personally, would have it so the Fifth Age never happened.
Seconded.
And look, honestly, if you look through the history of successful franchise relaunches, they've almost invariably ignored the intervening novel canon, and also as much of the previous central canon as was necessary to make a saleable product.
New Doctor Who? Ignores and often directly contradicts the Virgin/BBC novel range, and is unashamed to kick the original series under the couch when it thinks it has a better idea.
New Battlestar Galactica? Largely ignores the previous version.
New Star Trek movie? Franchise reboot does for sales figures what no previous movie or series has achieved.
Like 'em or love 'em, they've all been massively successful. They made money, and lots of it. I love those Doctor Who novels but I'll throw them overboard in a second if it means bringing the franchise back to mainstream prime-time television - and it has.
It's business, and you go where the money's at. The money is at attracting a massive new audience who are falling in love with the franchise for the first time, and you don't do that by emphasising an extensive previous continuity - you do it by leveraging nostalgia, focusing in on what is relevant and resonant for a modern audience, and then marketing the crap out of it.
I, personally, would have it so the Fifth Age never happened.
Me too.
I just agreed with thaX.
I'm sacred, somebody hold me!:P
Good job people!
I just want to make sure people are all caught up on all the information about next year's setting, and I have that all compiled (or at least all the new info since I started the site about a month ago), check it out @ www.4espoilers.blogspot.com for the info just on the next setting, check http://4espoilers.blogspot.com/search/label/2010%20Setting
I think this is a very important point. Dragonlance is a high fantasy setting. A very different one from FR, in both content and tone, but with many of the same tropes and cliches. It seems unlikely that WotC will follow up with Dragonlance so soon after FR. It just doesn't seem like a good showcase of what D&D, 4e in particular, can do as far as the variety of your gaming experience is concerned...
This. DL is high fantasy, and it is too similar to FR to those not familiar with the setting. Whatever the next setting is going to be it has to appeal to those that do not geek over everything DnD. It has to stand on its own without the back up of 30+ novels.
Dark Sun = Fallout DnD = unique
Spelljammer = DnD in space = unique
Council of Wrms = you can play as dragons = unique
I'm not saying any of those will make as 2010 setting, but they stand out without the support of the novels.
Is Krynn big enough for Paragon and Epic tier though? I mean is there other planes to visit?
Yes it does, it has several different planes. The Gods of Evil live a plane called the Abyss (very disimilar to the regular D&D Abyss). The Gods of Good dwell in the Domes of Creation. The Gods of Balance dwell in a plane I can't remember the name off. All of Creation floats in the Ethereal Sea, which comprises all of the Transitive planes (what would probably be the Shadowfell and the Feywild).
Dragonlance will come out simply so they can get the novels going again which are far more profitable than any campaign setting. It's only a matter of whether its' 2010 or 2011.
Remember people, these are three sourcebooks. Two months of the year and then they move on to another shiny new product.
Dark Sun would be great. So would Dragonlance. You're GOING to get both. And we all know it.
I'd suggest you all relax and enjoy the ride.
The entire continent of Ansalon is changed from anything you'd have read in the older books. You'll only get a proper view of the current world by reading trilogies that have come out within the past half-decade, and all of that can be covered in a DLCG.
In terms of being "different" from FR, I don't know if I can come up with satisfying answers for those who want something "different." What I see as different has been shown to be not good enough for some people.
I can say that I would be completely uninterested in a Dark Sun campaign, so Wizards doesn't get my money there. Someone gave me the original Spelljammer stuff, and I hated it, so no sale for me there either. I bought the Eberron Player's Guide because I wanted the stuff on the Artificer, but I won't touch the Campaign Guide because Eberron completely disinterests me.
Anyway, the only factor Wizards is going to consider when they decide what campaign to release each year is how much money they feel they're going to make on it. As has been discussed in other forums on this site, we're all combined a miniscule subset of the overall WotC customer community. We all just happen to be a lot more vocal than the vast majority. What we discuss in this thread, or even elsewhere on this site, will have very little to do with the decisions made. (And by "very little" I mean "nothing.")
PS: Barbaric kender, blackpowder mad gnomes and plaguebringer gully dwarves of morgion are awesome.;)
As a fan of dragonlance I must support a 4th edition take on the setting but I do so in fear and in hope of what they might change. I personally I no desire for yet another revised version of the same material. The holy six have been done to death. Move on with the storyline passed the age of mortals. Give the fans new novels with new information and give the players new adventures to play, instead of the same old thing with a different skin.
PS: Barbaric kender, blackpowder mad gnomes and plaguebringer gully dwarves of morgion are awesome.;)
Remove gully dwarves, and bring kender more in line with regular halflings and Ill take a look. Id love to see any setting that had good rules for black powder weapons. Those alone would make me pick up at least the players guide. I also agree with you on the new material. Fast forward the timeline so that any character that ever apeared in any novel is dead and we can play the heroes.
Remove gully dwarves, and bring kender more in line with regular halflings and Ill take a look. Id love to see any setting that had good rules for black powder weapons. Those alone would make me pick up at least the players guide. I also agree with you on the new material. Fast forward the timeline so that any character that ever apeared in any novel is dead and we can play the heroes.
You could always play the heroes in the adventures. In the war of the lance adventures you take the places of the heroes of the lance. The events that happen are basically set in stone and can't be changed (major changes) but the people who participate are only small ripples in the river of time. Who they are is not important.
Anyone can be lord soth, the deathknight, or raistlin the master of blah and blah or fistandantilus and so on. I'v played (and died horribly) in the war of the lance adventures as a minotaur and a draconian traitor. Same events, different characters.
But thats not to say I do not want dragonlance to quantum-leap into the future, for no other reason than to leave things how they are in the past! Removing the age of mortals, BAH!:D
Remove gully dwarves, and bring kender more in line with regular halflings and Ill take a look. Id love to see any setting that had good rules for black powder weapons. Those alone would make me pick up at least the players guide.
Of all the things I pray for (world peace, an end to hunger, seeing the Jets win the Super Bowl) "Dear Lord please give WotC the guidance to never include black powder weapons in core D&D" tops the list. Let a 3PP have black powder.
Actually you might want to look at Goodman Games. They have a Campaign Setting coming out soon that should interest you. It's a "what-if" setting that assumes the settings of fantasy have crossed over into the modern world. I would assume gunfire would play a role, but I haven't read enough to say for sure. (I saw it in something they produced for Free RPG Day this year, but I didn't read much of it once I saw the premise.)
I also agree with you on the new material. Fast forward the timeline so that any character that ever apeared in any novel is dead and we can play the heroes.
Honestly, that's completely unreasonable. No setting WotC actively produces occurs in a time where novels aren't concurrent. So you'd be asking Wizards to not produce fiction for the life of the product, which we can safely assume will never happen, regardless of the setting.
The current age of Dragonlance doesn't have any overshadowing heroes like you're looking at the HotL anyway, so you're worrying about a problem that doesn't exist. Well, that's not entirely true, I think Tanis and Laurana's son Gilthas is still alive and leading the elves in their exile, but I didn't read that trilogy, so I'm not certain. He wouldn't really count as overshadowing though. I guess maybe you could argue that the Conclave leaders, but even that only matters if you're looking to lead one of the Robes, and some simple "Well, Jenna died today" by your DM takes care of that.
Cheers,
Cam
Of all the things I pray for (world peace, an end to hunger, seeing the Jets win the Super Bowl) "Dear Lord please give WotC the guidance to never include black powder weapons in core D&D" tops the list. Let a 3PP have black powder.
Why? I think a truly renassance style setting with black powder would be fun. It makes no sense to have artificers and not have black powder.
Actually you might want to look at Goodman Games. They have a Campaign Setting coming out soon that should interest you. It's a "what-if" setting that assumes the settings of fantasy have crossed over into the modern world. I would assume gunfire would play a role, but I haven't read enough to say for sure. (I saw it in something they produced for Free RPG Day this year, but I didn't read much of it once I saw the premise.)
Does sound interesting
Honestly, that's completely unreasonable. No setting WotC actively produces occurs in a time where novels aren't concurrent. So you'd be asking Wizards to not produce fiction for the life of the product, which we can safely assume will never happen, regardless of the setting.
No they can produce fiction but make it understood like in Ebaron that the fiction is non canon. Trying to keep up with canon fiction is too difficult.
The current age of Dragonlance doesn't have any overshadowing heroes like you're looking at the HotL anyway, so you're worrying about a problem that doesn't exist. Well, that's not entirely true, I think Tanis and Laurana's son Gilthas is still alive and leading the elves in their exile, but I didn't read that trilogy, so I'm not certain. He wouldn't really count as overshadowing though. I guess maybe you could argue that the Conclave leaders, but even that only matters if you're looking to lead one of the Robes, and some simple "Well, Jenna died today" by your DM takes care of that.
Thats good then. Like I said keep producing novels that are not canon and let us play the game. Though Id prefer it if tanis's kid wasnt alive even in the first series I found him more whiny and emo than even Drittz. But thats just me Im sure. Personally I dont see how having black powder would be a bad idea WOTC has already proven that they can handle a lot of different stuff. I think firearms would be a good addition.
The current era of Dragonlance is the most suitable for gaming in. I think the problem is that 90% of D&D fans have no idea that there is a current era other than the War of the Lance.
Cheers,
Cam
part of the problem is finding which novels to read. I dont know what order to read the books in and since some of the books are written by different authors its hard to tell which books go where in the timeline. FR had kinda the same problem but the novels never impacted the setting as much.
part of the problem is finding which novels to read. I dont know what order to read the books in and since some of the books are written by different authors its hard to tell which books go where in the timeline. FR had kinda the same problem but the novels never impacted the setting as much.
Who needs to read the books to enjoy playing in the setting, though? As far as I'm concerned, all novels for all settings are outside of canon unless they are included in the backstory of the setting. I don't feel the need to read every Drizzt book to keep abreast of what is going on in FR, I think the same would go for DL. Granted, WotC would want future novels to sell, but I don't think the plots of those novels should dictate what goes on in any particular person's campaign. That's one great thing I think Eberron has going for it.
P.S. - The correct spelling is Eberron. Not trying to be picky, just letting you know. :D
Who needs to read the books to enjoy playing in the setting, though? As far as I'm concerned, all novels for all settings are outside of canon unless they are included in the backstory of the setting. I don't feel the need to read every Drizzt book to keep abreast of what is going on in FR, I think the same would go for DL. Granted, WotC would want future novels to sell, but I don't think the plots of those novels should dictate what goes on in any particular person's campaign. That's one great thing I think Eberron has going for it.
P.S. - The correct spelling is Eberron. Not trying to be picky, just letting you know. :D
I was responding when he said people do not know what the current age is in DL. That was the problem I wwas reffering to. Whatever setting they do I think they need to state very very clearly that all novels are non canon.
I was responding when he said people do not know what the current age is in DL. That was the problem I wwas reffering to. Whatever setting they do I think they need to state very very clearly that all novels are non canon.
What they are really saying is "you can do whatever you like with the setting once you start your game," not "the books are non-canon." Of course the book continuity is canon. It just shouldn't define what you do when you play. The problem is that many people can't keep those two things separate.
Cheers,
Cam
The current era of Dragonlance is the most suitable for gaming in. I think the problem is that 90% of D&D fans have no idea that there is a current era other than the War of the Lance.
Cheers,
Cam
I get where you're coming from, and you're probably right - the new era is most likely more gaming friendly.
My perspective is: I don't want a world maximised for gaming friendliness. I can make that world. I can homebrew it. If I'm buying Dragonlance products, it's because I want to play Dragonlance, flaws and all. And with all respect to the own-merits quality of the last ten years of the line, I just can't see the spirit of Dragonlance in anything from Dragons of Summer Flame onwards.
Lucasarts, for instance, made a massive push with the Star Wars prequel movies to say, "This is the main era now", and made that the only era with toys and merchandising attached for a long while. And even with their massive marketing engine on the backs of three movies that, critical reception aside, did huge business at the box office - they still underperformed. There was huge resistance from the fan base. There was the perception that this was not the Star Wars we fell in love with. And now they're back to talking about re-imagining the original trilogy with new actors. And that's the prequels: they've never had any success whatsoever in bringing any but the tiniest portion of the fan base with them into the New Jedi Order stuff.
Lord of the Rings has been a huge franchise since the movies, and they've rather wisely kept all of their merchandising within the time period covered by the movies. (Although rights issues re: the Hobbit and the Silmarillion might play a part there.) And that merchandising's been sucessful. Lord of the Rings has been around in books and movies for as long as anything and despite all that love there's never been a call to "take the story forward". Despite a few forays, by and large the public simply doesn't care what happens next. Good stories don't need to go on forever.
Look, you've seen the stats, presumably, on the recent Dragonlance books. Tell me this: has anything you've made outsold the Chronicles? For all your efforts over many years, can you honestly say you've grown the fan base? Is Dragonlance selling now - or at any point since 1999 - better than it did when those first books hit the stands? Because if so, then yes, you've got an argument.
But I suspect it hasn't. The future of Dragonlance, as a major money-winning franchise, is in a return to the core. A reboot of the War of the Lance with a reimagined 4E-compatible Krynn.
Who needs to read the books to enjoy playing in the setting, though? As far as I'm concerned, all novels for all settings are outside of canon unless they are included in the backstory of the setting. I don't feel the need to read every Drizzt book to keep abreast of what is going on in FR, I think the same would go for DL.
True... although they give some insight into the setting. For example, in FR with the 100 year leap and the Spellplague, some of the novels are touching on the time of the Spellplague and its immediate aftermath. (Plague of Spells and, I think, the Transitions series of Drizzt novels)
I think that DragonLance has, however, been a bit more directed by the extra material rather then expanded on and used as exhibition.
I think back to the days when the first books came out. Before the Chronicles, novels based on a simple role playing game were not often considered mainstream and were not published all that much. DragonLance came out between editions (Second Edition was not the smooth transition that the others ended up being, and was more of a clean up of the Advanced rules with a lot of popular house rules being put in) and was almost a whole separate edition of the game by itself. (The Kender... oh, god, the Kender!!)
I think TSR never expected it to sell like it did, or have the fanbase that it has, even to this day.
Look, you've seen the stats, presumably, on the recent Dragonlance books. Tell me this: has anything you've made outsold the Chronicles? For all your efforts over many years, can you honestly say you've grown the fan base? Is Dragonlance selling now - or at any point since 1999 - better than it did when those first books hit the stands? Because if so, then yes, you've got an argument.
Chronicles is a unique thing. Nothing TSR or WotC has ever done since the first six books (Legends should be included) has ever really topped the spectacular success of those books in the Eighties. But that's because there was literally nothing else like it, and they have consistently sold well ever since.
RA Salvatore's books have driven FR sales in a major way, and there have been other great books, but I think WotC has always tried to recapture that same incredible success. It's like Scholastic scrambling to get the next Harry Potter. It just doesn't happen by design.
Compared to everything else, later Dragonlance novels have sold very well. And of course Margaret and Tracy moved things into the current era with the War of Souls trilogy, but by popular demand they returned to the Chronicles period to "fill in the gaps" with their most recent trilogy, Lost Chronicles.
The thing is, I don't believe the D&D audience really knows any of that. They hear the stories of grognards on message boards about how terribly railroaded the original modules were, how annoying kender players are, how goofy gnomes and gully dwarves are, how Raistlin is an emo icon, how Tanis must be a ranger because he wears leather armor and carries a bow.
Dragonlance fans know different. They will not be happy with a handwaved reboot unless it is intelligently handled and recognizes that they, as one of the D&D property's largest and perhaps least catered to fanbases, have driven the sales of the property for 25 years. They're not going to be happy with merging it all into core, either. We'll have to see.
This then is the tricky part. You've got a big audience who want to see more Dragonlance, and you've got a big audience who doesn't really understand what Dragonlance is. Releasing a 4E campaign setting that upholds previous continuity for the former may cause the latter to turn up their noses and throwing out that continuity for the latter will alienate the former.
Cheers,
Cam
The thing is, I don't believe the D&D audience really knows any of that. They hear the stories of grognards on message boards about how terribly railroaded the original modules were, how annoying kender players are, how goofy gnomes and gully dwarves are, how Raistlin is an emo icon, how Tanis must be a ranger because he wears leather armor and carries a bow.
Dragonlance fans know different. They will not be happy with a handwaved reboot unless it is intelligently handled and recognizes that they, as one of the D&D property's largest and perhaps least catered to fanbases, have driven the sales of the property for 25 years. They're not going to be happy with merging it all into core, either. We'll have to see.
This then is the tricky part. You've got a big audience who want to see more Dragonlance, and you've got a big audience who doesn't really understand what Dragonlance is. Releasing a 4E campaign setting that upholds previous continuity for the former may cause the latter to turn up their noses and throwing out that continuity for the latter will alienate the former.
Cheers,
Cam
Gotta love the way you claim your fanbase is intelligent and discerning, and dismiss your detractors as unreasonable curmudgeons too stuck in pointless minutiae to understand.
Honestly, I think you know that 1/3 of your existing fanbase will loathe any attempt to alter or update the setting to make it playable, but buy it anyway out of loyalty, and the rest would buy the next major Dragonlance release and love it a whole huggy bunch even if it was nothing but a pile of horse manure sandwiched between two pictures of Raistlin.
I'm sort of intrigued by your decision to take a load of valid criticisms, lump them in with an assumption about a character's class, and try to make it sound like all of it is silly grognard-talk. How successful do you feel such a tactic is, generally? Because I would think that you couldn't do that with more than one or two solid points at a time, and the examples of pointless silliness would have to be a bit thicker.
Gotta love the way you claim your fanbase is intelligent and discerning, and dismiss your detractors as unreasonable curmudgeons too stuck in pointless minutiae to understand.
Just so as I'm not taken to be of the same viewpoint, I've been massively impressed by how polite, eloquent and respectful Cam's been this entire thread, especially given that stuff he's personally responsible for is under implicit criticism. If the whole internet could be the same we'd have a much nicer world (if one a little more boring).
I think I've put my views clearly, and I've heard and understood Cam's. Ultimately I still think the best solution is, primarily, a reboot, with a supplement detailing and providing support for the "expanded universe" era, but I think we can agree to disagree and both enjoy our common wish to see Dragonlance get a higher profile, whatever the form.
Gotta love the way you claim your fanbase is intelligent and discerning, and dismiss your detractors as unreasonable curmudgeons too stuck in pointless minutiae to understand.
I'm sorry. I think you might be reading a little more into this than I actually intended to get across, which might be why your posts are confrontational. I'm not calling anybody unreasonable. I'm saying that the biggest hurdle Dragonlance has to face is that it simply isn't regarded with any great degree of understanding or knowledge by the majority of D&D players, outside of what they hear on message boards.
I know and I'm assuming you know that there's a lot more to it than that. There's stuff you apparently can't stand about it, which is fine, since you're not the target audience for a new edition of the setting. But for those that are, or who could be, there's a lot to take care of before it will fly.
Cheers,
Cam
Just so as I'm not taken to be of the same viewpoint, I've been massively impressed by how polite, eloquent and respectful Cam's been this entire thread, especially given that stuff he's personally responsible for is under implicit criticism. If the whole internet could be the same we'd have a much nicer world (if one a little more boring).
I think I've put my views clearly, and I've heard and understood Cam's. Ultimately I still think the best solution is, primarily, a reboot, with a supplement detailing and providing support for the "expanded universe" era, but I think we can agree to disagree and both enjoy our common wish to see Dragonlance get a higher profile, whatever the form.
Given his public association with another company, I'd be surprised if he was allowed to be less civil than he is. Repeating several of my own arguments, adding a handful of silly ones, and labeling the result "stories of grognards on message boards" appears to be very calculated line-skirting.
Granted, I'd be pretty POed about steady criticism of a fictional construct I'd put a lot of work into as well. And Cam, from what I can tell, has had and implemented some pretty solid ideas regarding some of the setting's weaknesses and how to shore them up. This isn't a criticism of him as a professional at all. Every single one of my issues with the Dragonlance setting is fundamental, dealing with the setting as it was created and established, likely long before his involvement with the company.
But honestly, I've encountered more complaints about Dragonlance as a campaign setting than any other, and it's not like seeking out anti-fanboys is a hobby of mine. The arguments I'm making are mine, but they're not only mine. They've been ironed out with dozens of other people who wanted Dragonlance to be great, and ended up disappointed. To have them dismissed in that manner is infuriating.
But honestly, I've encountered more complaints about Dragonlance as a campaign setting than any other, and it's not like seeking out anti-fanboys is a hobby of mine. The arguments I'm making are mine, but they're not only mine. They've been ironed out with dozens of other people who wanted Dragonlance to be great, and ended up disappointed. To have them dismissed in that manner is infuriating.
I've played Dragonlance in its initial incarnation and as a 2nd Edition thing and I've never had those complaints. There seemed to be no difficulty in us having Kender that really enriched the group, no problem with tinker gnomes that were wacky yet balanced. We honestly had more problems with the inherent limitations of those rulesets than the setting.
Now, I'm not saying you didn't have those problems. Clearly many people did. But they are plainly neither inherent or unsolveable. And were every person you have ever met in your entire life to get together in mutual hatred of Dragonlance, you'd still not have a significant fraction of the total fanbase. Anecdotal evidence is just that - an anecdote - and I'll take yours and stack mine next to it, which is that the gamers of my acquaintance get together to mutually loathe trying to run games in the Forgotten Realms.
And as a side note, I'd suggest that much of what makes the D&D brand identity so strong may in part be the areas where it's memorably good - but it's just as much where it's memorably bad. We get as many chuckles out of 10x10 stone corridors and "checking for traps" as we do the really awesome moments, and if there's a truism of art it's that memorably bad sells about a million times better than unmemorable.
SIDE NOTE: All this forgets the truth of licenced products. The brand sells. It was once said of the Star Trek novel range that you could wrap a dead fish in a Star Trek cover and it'd still sell 10,000 copies. It doesn't matter whether the new era is a better gameplay setting than the original. It could be a brilliant nirvana of roleplaying where naked buxom angels serve up whiskey and play games of Rolemaster than magically don't suck. The brand power is in the original product, and it's what any effort to relaunch the franchise should be focused on.
Our editorial staff now is comprised of Nina Hess, Senior Editor for the Mirrorstone imprint, who is our resident expert in the field of fiction for young readers; and the editors Susan Morris, the Forgotten Realms line editor; Fleetwood Robbins, who we lured away from Del Rey to work on Magic: the Gathering and Dark Sun; and Erin Evans, who's primary responsibility now is Eberron, but who also works on some Forgotten Realms titles, and will be working on some new stuff we've cooking up for 2011.
It should be noted that there is no Dragonlance editor mentioned(kudos to Belorin in the other thread for pointing out this passage). Incidently it appears we might be getting a new setting for 2011.
The setting wars may be over! We have confirmation that WotC's Book Publishing Department is going to be doing Dark Sun books.
It should be noted that there is no Dragonlance editor mentioned(kudos to Belorin in the other thread for pointing out this passage). Incidently it appears we might be getting a new setting for 2011.
The 1st novels that led into the changes we saw in 4th edition in Forgotten realms came out a year previous to 4th editions release and the campaigns release. There are no DS books on the 2009 schedule at all but there are 7 new DL novels this year. I have not read any of them to be able to tell you if there is anything in there to hint at a transition as we saw in the FR novels.
With this information just coming to light it seems more likely that Darksun would be the 2011 setting. And the sentence you are quoting itself even mentions the new stuff for 2011. We will likely see DS novels coming out next year prepping us for the DS setting in 2011.
We will know next month but I have said for many months now its DL (or Greyhawk) in 2010 and Darksun in 2011.
The 1st novels that led into the changes we saw in 4th edition in Forgotten realms came out a year previous to 4th editions release and the campaigns release. There are no DS books on the 2009 schedule at all but there are 7 new DL novels this year. I have not read any of them to be able to tell you if there is anything in there to hint at a transition as we saw in the FR novels.
With this information just coming to light it seems more likely that Darksun would be the 2011 setting. And the sentence you are quoting itself even mentions the new stuff for 2011. We will likely see DS novels coming out next year prepping us for the DS setting in 2011.
We will know next month but I have said for many months now its DL (or Greyhawk) in 2010 and Darksun in 2011.
But they don't have an editor for Dragonlance novels, that means they have pretty much no intention of making a line of Dragonlance novels in the immediate future. They didn't put a complete stop on FR novels a year before 4th edition came out. They kept cranking them out.
WotC is closing shop on Dragonlance novels for the immediate future(something they would hardly be doing for upcoming setting) and they are opening shop on Dark Sun novels. That does not look good for Dragonlance's chances at all.
But they don't have an editor for Dragonlance novels, that means they have pretty much no intention of making a line of Dragonlance novels in the immediate future. They didn't put a complete stop on FR novels a year before 4th edition came out. They kept cranking them out.
WotC is closing shop on Dragonlance novels for the immediate future(something they would hardly be doing for upcoming setting) and they are opening shop on Dark Sun novels. That does not look good for Dragonlance's chances at all.
As far as I know Tracy Hickman is still the editor for the Dragonlance novels that are published by WOTC. He is not a WOTC employee however as most will know.
As far as I know Tracy Hickman is still the editor for the Dragonlance novels that are published by WOTC. He is not a WOTC employee however as most will know.
Ok having it an editor for your books that isn't on your payroll doesn't make a lick of sense to me, but I'm sure there are weirder things out there. Although I hardly think that falls under the category of "most will know". I'm pretty sure it wouldn't even fall under the category of "most D&D players will know". I'd give it 50/50 odds of being "most Dragonlance fans will know".:P
What they are really saying is "you can do whatever you like with the setting once you start your game," not "the books are non-canon." Of course the book continuity is canon. It just shouldn't define what you do when you play. The problem is that many people can't keep those two things separate.
Cheers,
Cam
Um Id rather the novels be possibilities then real cannon either that or no world shaking events in the books. Leave the world shaking stuff to the pcs.
As far as I know Tracy Hickman is still the editor for the Dragonlance novels that are published by WOTC. He is not a WOTC employee however as most will know.
No, he is not, and in fact he's never been the editor for Dragonlance fiction. Dragonlance has no editor assigned and no new books scheduled for 2010.
Cheers,
Cam
No, he is not, and in fact he's never been the editor for Dragonlance fiction. Dragonlance has no editor assigned and no new books scheduled for 2010.
Cheers,
Cam
Sorry I was just going by what was listed at Amazon (not that they are all that reliable by any means):
About the Author
Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman published their first novel in the "Chronicles" series of Dragonlance, Dragons of Autumn Twilight, in 1984. Over twenty years later they are going strong as partners - over thirty novels as collaborators - and , alone or together with other partners, over one hundred books, including novels, collections of short stories, role playing games, and other game products. Hickman is also the editor of a new Tracy Hickman Presents line of Dragonlance novels for Wizards of the Coast, while Weis is in the midst of her own, popular, solo Dark Disciple series for Wizards. Weis is also the President of Margaret Weis Productions, which publishes Dragonlance game material as well as many other game products.
Cheers,
Cam
The setting wars may be over! We have confirmation that WotC's Book Publishing Department is going to be doing Dark Sun books.
It should be noted that there is no Dragonlance editor mentioned(kudos to Belorin in the other thread for pointing out this passage). Incidently it appears we might be getting a new setting for 2011.
Wow, nice find, Ranadiel (ETA: or rather, Belorin)! That is one significant piece of info right there. They're re-opening the Dark Sun fiction section, and already have an editor assigned to it? Awesome! That bodes very well indeed for DS in 2010.
I take Cam at his word that there are no new novels for Dragonlance slated for 2010. The 2009 books are far more likely to be tied into the 25th anniversery, which could be precisely WHY they might try to pump out seven new novels in quick succession.
It seems to me that suddenly starting to publish a line of fiction for a setting that's been dead for at least the past decade is a good sign that that setting is about to get resurrected. Go Dark Sun!
Yup cant wait to see what the books are like, and the setting
I take Cam at his word that there are no new novels for Dragonlance slated for 2010. The 2009 books are far more likely to be tied into the 25th anniversery, which could be precisely WHY they might try to pump out seven new novels in quick succession.
Well, there have been a lot of Dragonlance novels published in the past five years. It isn't just this year.
Cheers,
Cam
The 1st novels that led into the changes we saw in 4th edition in Forgotten realms came out a year previous to 4th editions release and the campaigns release. There are no DS books on the 2009 schedule at all but there are 7 new DL novels this year. I have not read any of them to be able to tell you if there is anything in there to hint at a transition as we saw in the FR novels.
With this information just coming to light it seems more likely that Darksun would be the 2011 setting. And the sentence you are quoting itself even mentions the new stuff for 2011. We will likely see DS novels coming out next year prepping us for the DS setting in 2011.
We will know next month but I have said for many months now its DL (or Greyhawk) in 2010 and Darksun in 2011.
The sentence he quoted mentioned Magic: The Gathering and Dark Sun. Now Magic has stuff being released every year and Dark Sun is not confirmed for 2011, so how exactly do you think he was dragged away from something to work on stuff for 2011 when the stuff mentioned in the sentence he quoted is stuff that is not necessarily related to 2011?
If anything, this is a big indicator that Dark Sun is 2010.
Well, there have been a lot of Dragonlance novels published in the past five years. It isn't just this year.
Cheers,
Cam
Havent there always been a lot of DL novels published? Im pretty sure at this point that DL has more novels than any other dnd setting including realms though I have no hard numbers on that.
That said, I'm in the group that thinks the Cataclysm was pretty lousy. I mean, let's look at the scenario: in the name of the Gods of Good, the Kingpriest and his followers are committing massacres and planning to demand that the Kingpriest be given, not just godhood, but godhood and the right to remake the world as he sees fit. Not surprising that they and their corrupt city get a meteor dumped on their heads; beyond cheesing off the Gods of Evil, they're basically committing the ultimate blasphemy against the Gods of Good. So far, understandable, but the way the gods carried out the Cataclysm...
Let's see, they remove all true Clerics from the land- not keeping them from getting hurt with the intention of returning them to the world once the disasters are over, but remove them permanently. So, in the wake of the unimaginable suffering they've unleashed, there's nobody with the knowledge or inclination to step up, help the people recover, and tell them "you people were misled, you must return to the true ways of the gods". Because it's not like the corrupt clerics who survived are gonna just admit "oh, we were wrong, we weren't preaching what the gods wanted after all", now is it?
The so-called warnings they sent do seem obvious in retrospect, but at the time, they were ambiguous as all hell. They were unnerving, yes, but they were merely displays of divine power- how was the average person supposed to know what they were saying? As far as anyone without a direct tap to the gods could tell, the dieties could have been throwing a party and this was the equivalent of some drunken god telling a joke.
And let's not forget that the true details of the Kingpriest's ascension weren't known to even the average citizen in his own city- how the hell was some mundane farmer a thousand miles away supposed to know that the leader of the Church of Paladine had become utterly corrupt and swollen on his own hubris? Hell, the average person had no idea that any "Balance" was upset; they saw a time of peace and happiness, where people were free of the ravages of dark priests, evil wizards and wandering monsters. Sure, there were the occasional disturbing stories, but as far as most knew, those were just rumors.
Not to mention that, free will or not, would it really have been that big a deal for one of the Good Gods to give the deific equivalent of a friendly "hey, guys, I think you need to relax a bit"?
So, basically, the Gods picked up all of their cherished ones, made no attempts to explain simply why they were getting edgy, threw a flaming mountain at the world, then turned their backs on the mortal races and waited for them to come crawling back to them, making no explanation as to why they weren't speaking to them. Is it any wonder that, until the Heroes of the Lance, the average person assumed the Gods had thrown a temper tantrum and declared that they had turned against their followers? What were they supposed to think?
No the kingpriest was evil. He thought he was doing good. There is a difference.
Wait....(keep in mind that the extent of my Dragonlance knowledge is from this thread)I thought the Cataclysm was caused by an imbalance between good and evil, most specifically too much good. If it was actually caused by kingpriest doing evil and it was meant to restore balance, shouldn't it have been an explosion of fluffy bunnies raining from the sky rather than death, destruction, and flaming mountains falling from the sky?
Wait....(keep in mind that the extent of my Dragonlance knowledge is from this thread)I thought the Cataclysm was caused by an imbalance between good and evil, most specifically too much good. If it was actually caused by kingpriest doing evil and it was meant to restore balance, shouldn't it have been an explosion of fluffy bunnies raining from the sky rather than death, destruction, and flaming mountains falling from the sky?
In the name of Paladine and the other Gods of Good, the Kingpriest committed things like crusades against the faiths of the Gods of Evil, witch-hunts against the Towers of High Sorcery, massacres of Evil races (goblins, ogres, minotaurs, etc), inquisitions, wasting money on glorifying the church in general and himself specifically that could have been spent on helping those in need. This culminated in his infamous demand to Paladine to elevate him to godhood so that he could personally destroy all traces of evil in the world, slaying and purging all who didn't fit into his idea of "good".
In the name of Paladine and the other Gods of Good, the Kingpriest committed things like crusades against the faiths of the Gods of Evil, witch-hunts against the Towers of High Sorcery, massacres of Evil races (goblins, ogres, minotaurs, etc), inquisitions, wasting money on glorifying the church in general and himself specifically that could have been spent on helping those in need. This culminated in his infamous demand to Paladine to elevate him to godhood so that he could personally destroy all traces of evil in the world, slaying and purging all who didn't fit into his idea of "good".
yep, it was more a godly smackdown on someone who got too big for his own britches. You know it happened in FR too and destroyed the Netherese culture other than the few who escaped into the plane of shadow and became the Shades that now plague FR with a new evil (even post spellplague). People were already stopping worship of the true gods to worship the Kingpriest so he wasn't the only one to be punished.
In the name of Paladine and the other Gods of Good, the Kingpriest committed things like crusades against the faiths of the Gods of Evil, witch-hunts against the Towers of High Sorcery, massacres of Evil races (goblins, ogres, minotaurs, etc), inquisitions, wasting money on glorifying the church in general and himself specifically that could have been spent on helping those in need. This culminated in his infamous demand to Paladine to elevate him to godhood so that he could personally destroy all traces of evil in the world, slaying and purging all who didn't fit into his idea of "good".
So there was no element of balnce involved in the cataclysm then? You would think if the gods could punish a guy for doing all of that, they would do it before it became a major problem, but that's just me.
yep, it was more a godly smackdown on someone who got too big for his own britches. You know it happened in FR too and destroyed the Netherese culture other than the few who escaped into the plane of shadow and became the Shades that now plague FR with a new evil (even post spellplague). People were already stopping worship of the true gods to worship the Kingpriest so he wasn't the only one to be punished.
What happened in Netheril wasn't really someone getting too big for his britches.....well okay maybe, but it wasn't divine punishment. Netheril was a civilization built on flying mountains, then someone tried to merge with the goddess of magic, but instead he killed her for a few min. As a result all magic stopped working for a few min.....long enough for the flying mountains to stop flying and well you can guess the rest.
...Or could just be the authors trying to justify the Gods' action and explain why the people were wrong to stop believing in them and why bringing them back to the world was a Good Thing (outside of the fact that one of them had already snuck back and tried to mess things up).
And, as I've already brought up, they really didn't make it easy for the bewildered survivors to come to the conclusion that the gods hadn't thrown a temper tantrum and abandoned them all, even when the truth about the Kingpriest being corrupt finally surfaced once the world had recovered from the destruction, famine, plague and war unleashed by the Cataclysm.
So there was no element of balnce involved in the cataclysm then? You would think if the gods could punish a guy for doing all of that, they would do it before it became a major problem, but that's just me.
The Evil gods wouldn't have let one of their own go too long without punishing them, but Paladine gave the Kingpriest a long rope to hang himself with. The gods of Light promise redemption, but not everybody accepts that outcome.
Tracy and Margaret frequently give the analogy of the gods as parents and mortals as children. The Kingpriest was, in effect, a rebellious teenager who felt he could do the parents' job better than they could. He felt he had a better grasp of what was righteous and "good." Even in the end, he shook his fist at the heavens as if to say, "don't you get it?"
Cheers,
Cam
No the kingpriest was evil. He thought he was doing good. There is a difference.
You know, there is one huge problem with that statement.
In the Dragonlance Legends novels, Paladine himself remarks to Tasslehoff that the Kingpriest was "a good man". That the reason for the Cataclysm was to "preserve the Balance" (with a capital B), and that the Kingpriest's biggest sin was "being proud in asking for what Huma received in humility" or something like that.
Basically, if the chief god of good in the Dragonlance setting says, in one of the most defining books discussing the Kingpriest, that the Kingpriest was actually a good person, it is rather hard to argue that he was actually evil.
Those comments also cast the whole "demanding to be a god" thing in doubt, since Huma was never a god, but the Kingpriest mostly wished to be put on the same level as Huma.
Honestly, I don't see why the gods didn't just flat out tell the Kingpriest "no" and move on... The cataclysm seems a bit extreme for one man's arrogance.
Yes he started out as a very pious and good priest. As he decended into "madness" he slowly slipped from good to evil.
If that's what the novels said, I wouldn't object. That's more in line with what I would expect. However, it explicitly says that it was a Balance issue. The Kingpriest thought Balance was unnecessary, tried to tip it in favor of Good once and for all, and was succeeding. He just wasn't allowed the last step. It's a rather central theme of the setting - neither extreme can be allowed to grow too strong, or Bad Things happen. The Kingpriest and the near-triumph of Good is used as an example, as well as justification for the neglect of the gods.
I think the stuff about it "upsetting the balance" is because Good and Evil are subjective in the Dragonlance setting
Except that they're not. They're really, really not. The authors go to a lot of effort to explain how this isn't the case. It just doesn't mesh in all places with the subjective views of Good and Evil held by many readers. The actions taken by the Kingpriest are considered by many readers to be evil, but in the Dragonlance setting we're told that they're just too Good, because the Kingpriest is wearing a Team Light jersey, apparently, and this makes a real, objective difference somehow.
a) In many D&D settings you CANNOT have the so much of the moral relativism we have here: Good and Evil are literal forces with Capitol Letters and with gods who may walk the worlds!
So that forces a different "world view" than we have in 21st century Earth.
However, in D&D worlds, there is more general levels of ignorance of wider issues, as education etc has to be largely earned the hard way:
no internet, no books for anyone but the wealthy etc, so you have to learn by experience.
We 21st century Westerners can call on knowledge of say, the Holocaust, and Hitler, the British abolition of slavery and Ghandi, as examples of evil/good events done by many and individuals.
But what of the folk in D&D worlds?
They NEED honest, pious, stout-hearted, kind, wise, learned priests, lords, bards, heroes etc as drect exmaples to meet or know about. And Gods.
b) The King Priest did start out good, but like many, his own fear and/or arrogance, twisted him.
It's very common for people to go insane due to the fear power brings, Hitler may have been insane to begin with but he sure was out of his tree near the end! See many of our world's other despots. Fear = paranoia = insanity and horror.
They go mad Which is still no excuse for having started their actiosn while sane, or for the many sane folk who follow the ratbags (thus that also goes for the folk of Krynn who followed the Priest King rather than the true clerics warnings)
So, the Kind Priest wasn't trying to "Purge the world of evil", he was trying to purge the world of EVERYTHING he feared, which he called "evil", irregardless of the reality. Again real world examples of that exist.
A classic example of a churchman's zeal leading to madness and horror, is Martin Luther, his intial moral stance, abhorrence of violence etc was a vital and good thing....yet eventually he became a bitter anti-Semite and thus set in turn events that would culminate 500 years later under the Nazis.
Also, while his split with the church had good grounds, and he didn't want violence, it ignited centuries of appalling war and violence which has only recently died away (almost). Nobody came out of that mess with clean hands.
You can look at more current events, like drugs, copyright issues, terrorism etc, where there may well be just cause for things ot be done, by over reacting, or doing it badly, you set off a chain of events that unleashes worse stuff later on.
Look at the irony of the UK/US being in the Opium Wars a century ago, and how that's unfolded into the heroin trade today...then banning many drugs pushed their prices up, making them lucrative for criminals, and now terrorists who uses those funds ot kill our military perosnnel and our civilians.
Same thing with the King Priest, but worse, he was wanting a genocidal action that woul consume the entire world as he'd NEVER be satisfied...each action he'd take would cause more harm, which he'd blame on "evil doers"..so more actions etc, and as his acts were fuelled by paranoia, he'd always see more enemies anyway!
His acts against the Tower of High sorcery prevented the great good the wizards could do. Even many evil wizards have no interest in anarchy running rampant, undead taking over etc, see Dalamarr as prime example of this.
You do not kill 100 innocents, to get 1 evil doer.
thus the Priest King and his people, needed a boot up the backside, because an ugly fact is, that is the ONLY way many people will learn important lessons
er, sorry if that was too much history etc
You may think you like Dragonlance's morality, but you don't understand it at all.
Ok?
The "Balance" is not about "Neutrality for Neutrality's sake", IMHO. Takhisis actions make that obviously a non-starter. It seems more a "balance to avoid things goign out of control, and that Mortals ain't that smart t know WTH they are doing in the long run!" ;)
And if we're talking about morality, etc, we have to remember we are 21st century Humans, thus, in such debates, especially when you are considering the author's posisble reasons/meanings etc, it is important!
Ok?
The "Balance" is not about "Neutrality for Neutrality's sake", IMHO. Takhisis actions make that obviously a non-starter. It seems more a "balance to avoid things goign out of control, and that Mortals ain't that smart t know WTH they are doing in the long run!" ;)
It's not open for interpretation. The event and its moral implications were spelled out explicitly.
It's not open for interpretation. The event and its moral implications were spelled out explicitly.
Perhaps the kicker here is that while the Kingpriest feels he is pursuing Good, his actions are in fact wicked and hateful. On the face of it, he believes he is ridding the world of impure races, bad people, those that are not righteous, and so forth. He leads a crusade against all the evil cults and eventually even the neutral ones. His followers steadily lose access to their divine powers as they fail to see that their "good" actions are nothing of the sort.
The gods deliver them warnings, omens, portents, and even offer several chances for them to turn things around and embrace redemption. They don't, and the Kingpriest eventually decides that the Gods of Light have no clue what they're doing and that his version of Good is clearly better. He's wrong, and he and the nation of Istar are wiped off the map.
Tracy describes it as the world "needing to break before it could heal." It's a rough sort of thing, and not something you'd typically go for in a peaceful sort of universe, but I don't think Paladine is a peaceful god. He's slow to anger but doesn't take rebellious upstarts like Beldinas lightly when they steadfastly refuse to pursue Good.
Cheers,
Cam
Perhaps the kicker here is that while the Kingpriest feels he is pursuing Good, his actions are in fact wicked and hateful. On the face of it, he believes he is ridding the world of impure races, bad people, those that are not righteous, and so forth. He leads a crusade against all the evil cults and eventually even the neutral ones. His followers steadily lose access to their divine powers as they fail to see that their "good" actions are nothing of the sort.
The gods deliver them warnings, omens, portents, and even offer several chances for them to turn things around and embrace redemption. They don't, and the Kingpriest eventually decides that the Gods of Light have no clue what they're doing and that his version of Good is clearly better. He's wrong, and he and the nation of Istar are wiped off the map.
Tracy describes it as the world "needing to break before it could heal." It's a rough sort of thing, and not something you'd typically go for in a peaceful sort of universe, but I don't think Paladine is a peaceful god. He's slow to anger but doesn't take rebellious upstarts like Beldinas lightly when they steadfastly refuse to pursue Good.
Cheers,
Cam
It's been a while, Cam, but I'm pretty sure when I read it that the books explicitly said that the Kingpriest did in fact upset the balance in favor of Good. It stuck with me, because it reinforced a very common theme in Dragonlance, that the Balance must be maintained at all costs, and it's not good for either side - even Good - to gain the upper hand. Not because it results in an upswing of Evil, but because excessive Good can be just as harmful.
Are you telling me I'm mistaken?
It's been a while, Cam, but I'm pretty sure when I read it that the books explicitly said that the Kingpriest did in fact upset the balance in favor of Good. It stuck with me, because it reinforced a very common theme in Dragonlance, that the Balance must be maintained at all costs, and it's not good for either side - even Good - to gain the upper hand. Not because it results in an upswing of Evil, but because excessive Good can be just as harmful.
Are you telling me I'm mistaken?
I'm saying your interpretation of that might be different from what we have. "Excessive Good" is here a stand-in for Beldinas' myopic view of the universe and the means by which he was trying to achieve what was, to him, the best possible outcome for the world. As it happens, the universe can't abide when either side exterminates the other, for unchecked "good" is just as tyrannical and fascist as unchecked "evil" is thoughtless and cruel.
In a sense, the world hangs in Balance because Evil is in contrast to Good and vice versa. If all the evil were wiped out forever, Good would no longer be what it is. Both sides must, of course, struggle against each other, and Neutrality works to keep them in that eternal struggle. It teeters and totters back and forth but never reaches either side fully.
Not that this necessarily makes any of the Kingpriest business easier to swallow or even make sense to you, but that's pretty much where we are at.
Again, I really encourage you to read the Kingpriest Trilogy if you haven't already. Not only is it a great account of this whole issue, it's a wonderful tragedy of friendships, redemption, and hope. Chris really outdid himself.
Cheers,
Cam
Of course he upset the balance in favor of good - because he was going on genocidal campaigns to wipe out Evil followers, worshippers, and races! He's just one dumbass sliding into darkness compared to several thousands of evil guys getting killed - I'd say that constitutes a shift in balance.
I'm pretty sure that's not how it works. Unless he was committing genocide single-handedly, without assistance of any other people.
I'm pretty sure that's not how it works. Unless he was committing genocide single-handedly, without assistance of any other people.
No, that's pretty much exactly how it works. Far greater numbers of Evil were being wiped out or driven underground than were the numbers of Good being tainted.
No, that's pretty much exactly how it works. Far greater numbers of Evil were being wiped out or driven underground than were the numbers of Good being tainted.
I'm pretty sure that's not what was implied in the books. Simple numerical superiority? Ugh.
He may have been a 'good man' but even in the real world many 'good men' have done some very 'evil' things. In the first DL rule book they represent this with a sliding alignment system that can actually change your characters alignment based on your actions. It wouldn't neccessarily be needed in 4e as they've tried to push alignment into a metagame thing not an in-game thing. That's why we have fewer alignments and all 'alignment detecting/protection' type spells are gone.
Alignment on the char sheet is now more about your outlook on life, not your actions (though consisently going against the outlook with actions should warrant an alignement change) and why unaligned exists. Unaligned isn't "Neutral", though it could be for those trying to maintain a 'Balance' between law/chaos and/or good/evil. Most unaligned just means you're not overly worried about such abstracts and want to survive.
Under 4e the KingPriest would likely be Lawful Good, despite his individual actions often being quite evil. The key here is that while the actions themselves are evil he's doing them with the intent of good. Think of the saying: The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. It's a warning that just because you intend good it doesn't mean that you can do whatever you want and have it not be evil/bad.
The kingpriest instituted thought police that would arrest someone as evil if they even had a single 'evil' thought in a moment of anger. It didn't matter that they would never act on it in any way.
Yes his actions disrupted Balance, and did push the overall scale towards the side of Good. But he did it by performing Evil acts. He also demanded the favor of the Gods of Good and the 'utlimate weapon' to eradicate Evil out of arrogance (not that he neccessarily wanted to become a god himself though it seems a likely progression of his actions). Huma was granted a powerful (not ultimate) weapon against evil out of his humility and his truly good actions.
Grazel, thank you for illustrating why alignment in D&D has always been a confusing problem element that should be excised for the good of the game. Because wow, that is a logical and philosophical nightmare.
In all honesty, I did not want to give him an alignment in Legends of the Twins, our sourcebook that covered him and Istar. I didn't want to give an alignment to Raistlin, either, or Steel Brightblade. Lots of flawed people, with good intentions, doing horrible things. Or, ambitious and ruthless people doing things that, intentionally or not, help lots of other people.
Cheers,
Cam
In all honesty, I did not want to give him an alignment in Legends of the Twins, our sourcebook that covered him and Istar. I didn't want to give an alignment to Raistlin, either, or Steel Brightblade. Lots of flawed people, with good intentions, doing horrible things. Or, ambitious and ruthless people doing things that, intentionally or not, help lots of other people.
Cheers,
Cam
Don't blame you. Isolated from various other concerns, these are fairly decent, complex characters, and trying to pin any of them down on a 3x3 morality grid in a way that your fanbase would accept is a fairly nasty project.
Don't blame you. Isolated from various other concerns, these are fairly decent, complex characters, and trying to pin any of them down on a 3x3 morality grid in a way that your fanbase would accept is a fairly nasty project.
That's a good summary of why I like what 4E has done to alignment -- the old system was only suitable for cardboard characters.
The new system has limits too, but at least it's a bit more dynamic, without giving up the objective component that fantasy RPGs seem to require.
That's a good summary of why I like what 4E has done to alignment -- the old system was only suitable for cardboard characters.
The new system has limits too, but at least it's a bit more dynamic, without giving up the objective component that fantasy RPGs seem to require.
+1 One of the biggest flaws with DL was how important alignment seemed to be in the setting the couple times I played in it.
Also Im not sure why wiping out evil races is bad. If you have a race that you cant make treaties with that will attack you no matter what then you have to wipe them out. Heck humans used to do it to other humans out of fear or what not. Rome became an empire by responding to threats. The logical solution to a problem of orcs goblins or what have you is to exterminate them before they exterminate you.
The logical solution to a problem of orcs goblins or what have you is to exterminate them before they exterminate you.
The Kingpriest didn't stop there. He essentially figured that Neutral churches and non-human races were also highly suspect and should be controlled or eliminated.
Cheers,
Cam
The Kingpriest didn't stop there. He essentially figured that Neutral churches and non-human races were also highly suspect and should be controlled or eliminated.
Cheers,
Cam
Thats logical from a human perspective really this is how id expect humans to react to other groups and peoples. Most human cultures have not been good at dealing with those of different cultures. I mean catholics couldnt even handle not being the only christians in western europe and started a number of wars just to keep their supremacy. Its a very wrong philosophy but is much more likely to have happened then humans and elves getting along.
And now, it appears that wotc want to (again) put DL line in hold.
I've tried to get directly answers http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=19058400 but until now, there is no reply by the book publishing department of wotc. Apparently, they do not frequent this forum.
If the statement in the article are right, there will be no DL line editor for the novels, so goodbye to any dragonlance 4th.
What can be said about this it's that someone in the office quarter's of wotc are really have good time laughing at members of this forum debating about the setting for the years to come. And, if the above statments are true, the 25th anniversary of DL will have tons of dragonlance fans in gen con to celebrate Dragons of the Hourglass Mage and to ear to the annoucement of the new setting (that will not be Dragonlance)... and that there will be no new novels to DL. This is soooo hilarious. Haha.
Can I hear the shout to "broke that designer's leg, don't let them escape"* from the angry dl-mob in the gen con hall? :D
*this is a joke, please, don't take it in any way seriously.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4spot/20090717
And now, it appears that wotc want to (again) put DL line in hold.
I've tried to get directly answers http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=19058400 but until now, there is no reply by the book publishing department of wotc. Apparently, they do not frequent this forum.
If the statement in the article are right, there will be no DL line editor for the novels, so goodbye to any dragonlance 4th.
What can be said about this it's that someone in the office quarter's of wotc are really have good time laughing at members of this forum debating about the setting for the years to come. And, if the above statments are true, the 25th anniversary of DL will have tons of dragonlance fans in gen con to celebrate Dragons of the Hourglass Mage and to ear to the annoucement of the new setting (that will not be Dragonlance)... and that there will be no new novels to DL. This is soooo hilarious. Haha.
Can I hear the shout to "broke that designer's leg, don't let them escape"* from the angry dl-mob in the gen con hall? :D
*this is a joke, please, don't take it in any way seriously.
Well, we probably wouldn't break any legs, but if Phil Athans is anywhere near the stage at the 25th Anniversary celebration, I would have to make sure he was boo'd off the stage considering the bold-faced lie he told us last year.
Well, we probably wouldn't break any legs, but if Phil Athans is anywhere near the stage at the 25th Anniversary celebration, I would have to make sure he was boo'd off the stage considering the bold-faced lie he told us last year.
Im confused what lie was this?
Im confused what lie was this?
Guessing here...
"There is not going to be a 4th edition anytime soon..."
Guessing here...
"There is not going to be a 4th edition anytime soon..."
That would've been hard to pull off last year.
Guessing here...
"There is not going to be a 4th edition anytime soon..."
Actually, it would be when he said "Dragonlance is alive and well and will remain that way for the next 25 years" Kinda hard to do without having any Dragonlance product for a while.
Actually, it would be when he said "Dragonlance is alive and well and will remain that way for the next 25 years" Kinda hard to do without having any Dragonlance product for a while.
I have to say I completely missed the Dragonlance implications, if any, because I was focusing on that "something new for 2011".
Here's a toast to all you lot who wanted a brand spanking new setting for 2011 - looks like you're getting your wish! Cheers!
I have to say I completely missed the Dragonlance implications, if any, because I was focusing on that "something new for 2011".
Here's a toast to all you lot who wanted a brand spanking new setting for 2011 - looks like you're getting your wish! Cheers!
Keep in mind that this was an interview with the book editor about book lines. The something new is most likely novel line and thus may or may not portend a new setting for '11.
Keep in mind that this was an interview with the book editor about book lines. The something new is most likely novel line and thus may or may not portend a new setting for '11.
Novels support games at WotC/Hasbro. They will not be producing new novels without game product for it to support. The Planeswalker books support Magic the Gathering, for instance. If there's a new line of novels in 2011 it's because there's a new setting for D&D in 2011 or some other game that might be supported by fiction.
Cheers,
Cam
and will be working on some new stuff we’re cooking up for 2011.
It doesn't say new novel line or setting. It says "stuff". That could be anything. Including relaunching the Dragonlance novel line which by that point will have ended. "Stuff" means: "I can't tell you anything about the next game universe till next year."
So yeah it looks like Dark Sun for 2010 but I still contend 2011 is Dragonlance's year. By that point we'll have already had the very different settings of Eberron and Dark Sun that stray from the norm. By 2011 I think a lot of people will be in the mood for traditional fantasy again.
Novels support games at WotC/Hasbro. They will not be producing new novels without game product for it to support.
This is true. It is also incredibly silly as the Dragonlance novels have to sell better than the Player's Guide, Campaign Guide, and Adventure to ANY setting.
It doesn't say new novel line or setting. It says "stuff". That could be anything. Including relaunching the Dragonlance novel line which by that point will have ended. "Stuff" means: "I can't tell you anything about the next game universe till next year."
So yeah it looks like Dark Sun for 2010 but I still contend 2011 is Dragonlance's year. By that point we'll have already had the very different settings of Eberron and Dark Sun that stray from the norm. By 2011 I think a lot of people will be in the mood for traditional fantasy again.
This is true. It is also incredibly silly as the Dragonlance novels have to sell better than the Player's Guide, Campaign Guide, and Adventure to ANY setting.
UNFORTUNATLEY I have to agree. I'd prefer not to have to wait for 2012 for something really new but oh well. Im sick of the same crap over and over again. Even most of the races released for 4e are races that apeared in earlier edditions same with most of the classes Id like something orignal please.
As I've said, leave black powder to third parties so that it's up to the individual DM whether to allow it or not. It does not belong in the core material.
So anyway, what would you consider "original" enough?
We have humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, half-dragons (dragonborn,) semi-giants (goliaths,) semi-angels (devas,) semi-were-creatures (shifters,) dopplegangers (changelings,) undead (revenants,) and the ability to turn pretty much any humanoid monster into a PC race. You also know that we're getting a plant creature next year.
We have all manner of classes, from the front-line sword swingers, to the stand back and char broil arcanists. We have stealthy characters, brave leaders, etc. We know we're getting monks and assassins and even psions to replace traditional magic soon.
Sure, most, if not all, of this stuff was available in previous editions, but would be sufficiently "different" for you? Especially knowing that WotC is going to continue to pump out material every year in the core-3 as well as campaign settings.
Or is it world information you're looking for originality in? And if so, why can't you develop your own?
I'd really like to know where you're coming from. You keep repeating how everything everyone says is lame and you're not interested in it, which is fine as your own opinion, but I'd like to know what you're actually looking for. Then perhaps we can talk about material that more closely reflects your needs.
It's going to be funny if they do to Dragonlance and Darksun like they did to Abeir and Forgotten Realms.
Would that not just **** everyone and their mother off xatu?
Well, it would definitely **** off half the people.
If you drop the gods from Dragonlance, then it's really no longer Dragonlance. If you keep the gods, it would drive the people who want godlessness in Dark Sun batty.
It's an interesting idea though. I don't necessarily have a problem with things crossing over; for example, psionics on Krynn. You just have to be able to recognize a setting for the setting that it is. Minus the gods and their plotting, it's really is more of a Forgotten Realms clone (though there would still be differences, so let's not rehash that argument ;) )
Anyway, I think it more likely that we get neither setting than the two combined. What would be really awesome is WotC just releasing both, though I highly doubt that would happen. It would be really cool if no matter what setting they are coming out with next year they announced the next few in the pipeline though. At least let those who are disappointed know whether they'll be getting what they want at some point or not.
William, out of curiosity, what would you like to see? I know you want black powder, and I can tell you right now, if WotC puts black powder weapons in a core setting in 4e they'll lose me forever. The last thing I want to see is a ranger marksman who picks off every monster from 500 feet. Or even better a Pallygun who walks into combat with an automatic rifle strapped to his back.
As I've said, leave black powder to third parties so that it's up to the individual DM whether to allow it or not. It does not belong in the core material.
So anyway, what would you consider "original" enough?
We have humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, half-dragons (dragonborn,) semi-giants (goliaths,) semi-angels (devas,) semi-were-creatures (shifters,) dopplegangers (changelings,) undead (revenants,) and the ability to turn pretty much any humanoid monster into a PC race. You also know that we're getting a plant creature next year.
We have all manner of classes, from the front-line sword swingers, to the stand back and char broil arcanists. We have stealthy characters, brave leaders, etc. We know we're getting monks and assassins and even psions to replace traditional magic soon.
Sure, most, if not all, of this stuff was available in previous editions, but would be sufficiently "different" for you? Especially knowing that WotC is going to continue to pump out material every year in the core-3 as well as campaign settings.
Or is it world information you're looking for originality in? And if so, why can't you develop your own?
I'd really like to know where you're coming from. You keep repeating how everything everyone says is lame and you're not interested in it, which is fine as your own opinion, but I'd like to know what you're actually looking for. Then perhaps we can talk about material that more closely reflects your needs.
More things like the invoker and avenger that havent been in an edition of dnd before. A race thats not completley humanoid in apperance might be interesting to see. Id love black powder weapons I have no idea why people dont like that idea. For setting wise something where the world is younger without lots of dungeons and old ruins but lots of new cities and societies springing up where exploration and discovery are some of the main themes. Seems that every dnd world is a really old one with lots of anchient empires a world where empires are first starting to appear and are threatened by barbarian tribes and other such things could be really interesting.
Could you explain why you dont want to see black powder weapons?
Novels support games at WotC/Hasbro. They will not be producing new novels without game product for it to support. The Planeswalker books support Magic the Gathering, for instance. If there's a new line of novels in 2011 it's because there's a new setting for D&D in 2011 or some other game that might be supported by fiction.
All I said it is that doesn't necessarily point to a new setting. Could be more Dragonlance books. Could be Transformers books. Could be Duel Masters books.
I know you want black powder, and I can tell you right now, if WotC puts black powder weapons in a core setting in 4e they'll lose me forever...
This is up there with the folks that said "They put dragonborn in the PHB! Now im quitting RPGs forever!" Its a ridiculously extremist and illogical attitude. If you don't like something, don't use it. This is a tabletop game.
As I've said, leave black powder to third parties so that it's up to the individual DM whether to allow it or not. It does not belong in the core material.
Its up to the DM to allow anything from elves to swords in a game. I think its sad that the mentality that you are displaying has determined how the developers approach 4E. It totally kills creativity when they have to worry about making everything just generic enough to fit with everything else just because some people see something in WotC books and think that they are forced to allow it in their game.
It's going to be funny if they do to Dragonlance and Darksun like they did to Abeir and Forgotten Realms.
Would that not just **** everyone and their mother off xatu?
Of course they will have to radically alter a lot of stuff to do either setting because of their "everything has to fit in every world" 4E design tenet.
Tieflings and goliaths and half-orcs and warforged and all kinds of other stuff are going to get jammed into Dark Sun, whether the fans want it or not. Luckily enough DnD isn't a video game though, and if you own the original boxed set its easy enough to exorcise all the superfluous additions and play it old school.
More things like the invoker and avenger that havent been in an edition of dnd before. A race thats not completley humanoid in apperance might be interesting to see. Id love black powder weapons I have no idea why people dont like that idea. For setting wise something where the world is younger without lots of dungeons and old ruins but lots of new cities and societies springing up where exploration and discovery are some of the main themes. Seems that every dnd world is a really old one with lots of anchient empires a world where empires are first starting to appear and are threatened by barbarian tribes and other such things could be really interesting.
Could you explain why you dont want to see black powder weapons?
Well, you can safely assume you'll continue to get more classes that have never been in D&D before, considering you're going to get a handful in every PHB which are coming out yearly, and at least one new one in every campaign setting.
Your race should be covered by Wilden. You can't really have a fully non-humanoid race. It's basically along the same lines as aliens. We generally can't conceptualize non-humanoids that can do things like hold weapons.
I definitely wouldn't mind alternative races if they could get around the weapon issue.
Your idea about a setting of cities and societies won't happen in 4e. It's completely counter to the Points of Light paradigm of the edition. Plus, one of the most popular things about D&D is the dungeon crawl. If you're looking for another experience, there are other games that would probably serve you better. (I'd think you'd probably enjoy a sci-fi based game more. Maybe even Star Wars if you prefer the d20 system.)
I already said why I don't like black powder. I don't want to see a Paladin with a shotgun walk up to a dragon. To me, that would be far more irritating than the most annoying kender-playing person. Imagine a rogue with a sneak attack with a pistol. Totally uncool.
This is up there with the folks that said "They put dragonborn in the PHB! Now im quitting RPGs forever!" Its a ridiculously extremist and illogical attitude. If you don't like something, don't use it. This is a tabletop game.
No it isn't. But thanks for playing.
I think its sad that the mentality that you are displaying has determined how the developers approach 4E. It totally kills creativity when they have to worry about making everything just generic enough to fit with everything else just because some people see something in WotC books and think that they are forced to allow it in their game.
And I could point you to a thread where fluff was discussed to death where the primary point on the side of "less fluff in the cores" was that it's harder for a DM to remove material in a core book than it is to add to the game.
Oh, and as far as the devs worrying about everything they do being viewed as "must include," perhaps that's a direct result of Wizards saying that everything is considered core once published?
Of course they will have to radically alter a lot of stuff to do either setting because of their "everything has to fit in every world" 4E design tenet.
Tieflings and goliaths and half-orcs and warforged and all kinds of other stuff are going to get jammed into Dark Sun, whether the fans want it or not. Luckily enough DnD isn't a video game though, and if you own the original boxed set its easy enough to exorcise all the superfluous additions and play it old school.
They might simply present the setting in its original state, and give advice on how to integrate elements that don't fit.
Forgotten Realms was always supposed to integrate everything the rules came up with. That was the point. Eberron is pretty inclusive too. At least, there's room in it for almost everything that's likely to be in 4E.
It will be interesting to see how WotC handles predefined settings that can't be easily shaped to fit the 4E mold.
"They put dragonborn in the PHB! Now im quitting RPGs forever!" Its a ridiculously extremist and illogical attitude.
No it isn't.
Quitting 4e altogether because they put one thing you don't like in a book is a perfectly logical and moderate position? Seriously? I'd really like to hear exactly what is logical and/or reasonable about that view because at first glance it just sounds like "I'm taking my ball and going home."And I could point you to a thread where fluff was discussed to death where the primary point on the side of "less fluff in the cores" was that it's harder for a DM to remove material in a core book than it is to add to the game.
The "less fluff in cores" advocates want less campaign-specific background for settings and monsters, not less mechanical weapon/vehicle/etc options.
Oh, and as far as the devs worrying about everything they do being viewed as "must include," perhaps that's a direct result of Wizards saying that everything is considered core once published?
Which is incredibly lame if it leads them to make everything as generic as possible in order not to offend people who erroneously believe that they are forced to use everything that exists in every book in their game. Their attitude means we are not going to see settings that are as unique, original or wildly different from each other as they other wise could be, because they all have to be kitchen sink settings that must be devoid of anything remotely dangerous to the sensibilities of the lowest common denominator of fantasy fans (no steampunk, for example). I can only hope there are enough high quality 3rd party developers after the licensing fiasco willing to put out interesting material for 4e to fill the huge gap that WotC has apparently chosen to leave wide open.
Well, you can safely assume you'll continue to get more classes that have never been in D&D before, considering you're going to get a handful in every PHB which are coming out yearly, and at least one new one in every campaign setting.
Your race should be covered by Wilden. You can't really have a fully non-humanoid race. It's basically along the same lines as aliens. We generally can't conceptualize non-humanoids that can do things like hold weapons.
I definitely wouldn't mind alternative races if they could get around the weapon issue.
That is the hard issue I was thinking something like naga from WOW race with serpentlike tail instead of legs could even use Yuan-Ti for it. I just want more races that are not just human with pointy ears and magic.
Your idea about a setting of cities and societies won't happen in 4e. It's completely counter to the Points of Light paradigm of the edition. Plus, one of the most popular things about D&D is the dungeon crawl. If you're looking for another experience, there are other games that would probably serve you better. (I'd think you'd probably enjoy a sci-fi based game more. Maybe even Star Wars if you prefer the d20 system.)
City states surrounded by howling wilderness and beset on all sides isnt points of light? I hate the current star wars system the races are unbalanced and it is still far too close to 3.5 rules for me because I hate free multi classing. I like sci fi but I also like fantasy.
I already said why I don't like black powder. I don't want to see a Paladin with a shotgun walk up to a dragon. To me, that would be far more irritating than the most annoying kender-playing person. Imagine a rogue with a sneak attack with a pistol. Totally uncool.
Rogue with black powder pistol=pirate how is that not made of awsome?
I didn't say I'd stop playing D&D or even 4e. I said they'd lose me (meaning as a customer) forever.
Sure, that's extreme, but not illogical. I firmly disagree with gunpowder in my fantasy. If it is introduced, I refuse to play in a setting that allows it. If my DM allowed it, I would "take my ball and go home." I would also never, ever, under any circumstances, allow gunpowder in my games.
As I've said, I can't stomach the thought of a rogue sneak attacking someone with a pistol, or a paladin walking around with a machine gun.
Thanks, but no thanks.
The "less fluff in cores" advocates want less campaign-specific background for settings and monsters, not less mechanical weapon/vehicle/etc options.
The same thing applies. The argument is that if things have to be removed it creates hardship for the DM. Of course, people will always try to manipulate an argument later to suit their needs. This time, it happens to work in favor of supporting my point, rather than against me.
Which is incredibly lame if it leads them to make everything as generic as possible in order not to offend people who erroneously believe that they are forced to use everything that exists in every book in their game. Their attitude means we are not going to see settings that are as unique, original or wildly different from each other as they other wise could be, because they all have to be kitchen sink settings that must be devoid of anything remotely dangerous to the sensibilities of the lowest common denominator of fantasy fans (no steampunk, for example). I can only hope there are enough high quality 3rd party developers after the licensing fiasco willing to put out interesting material for 4e to fill the huge gap that WotC has apparently chosen to leave wide open.
Well, this brings up a number of issues. Personally, I despise the idea of Points of Light. It is more restricting to DMs, rather than less.
The "everything is core" plus PoL does restrict WotC, and that's their own fault. These two paradigms were a mistake and I'd love for them to retconn them.
As for picking and choosing what you allow in a game, you and I agree. A DM has every right to restrict material in his campaign. Unfortunately, the players have to deal with whatever that decision is, whether they like it or not. Personally, if WotC put firearms in core and my DM allowed it, I'd just gather my books and dice, and walk out for good. Yes, it is "take my ball and go home" but gunpowder runs counter to every idea in fantasy I hold. Guns have their place in RPGs, but not this RPG. Don't even get me started on Eberron...
Rogue with black powder pistol=pirate how is that not made of awsome?
Ninja > Pirate.
That's why.
:D
That is the hard issue I was thinking something like naga from WOW race with serpentlike tail instead of legs could even use Yuan-Ti for it. I just want more races that are not just human with pointy ears and magic.
I don't know anything about WoW. Never played it.
City states surrounded by howling wilderness and beset on all sides isnt points of light? I hate the current star wars system the races are unbalanced and it is still far too close to 3.5 rules for me because I hate free multi classing. I like sci fi but I also like fantasy.
Okay, but that isn't what you originally made it sound like. Fair enough.
As for Star Wars, okay, but there are other systems out there.
Rogue with black powder pistol=pirate how is that not made of awsome?
Because it just isn't.
Ninja > Pirate.
That's why.
:D
Hahahahaha, WIN! ;)
I didn't say I'd stop playing D&D or even 4e. I said they'd lose me (meaning as a customer) forever.
Sure, that's extreme, but not illogical. I firmly disagree with gunpowder in my fantasy. If it is introduced, I refuse to play in a setting that allows it. If my DM allowed it, I would "take my ball and go home." I would also never, ever, under any circumstances, allow gunpowder in my games.
As I've said, I can't stomach the thought of a rogue sneak attacking someone with a pistol, or a paladin walking around with a machine gun.
Thanks, but no thanks.
Thats fine but why should the rest of us suffer because some people are fantasy purists?
The same thing applies. The argument is that if things have to be removed it creates hardship for the DM. Of course, people will always try to manipulate an argument later to suit their needs. This time, it happens to work in favor of supporting my point, rather than against me.
After years of seeing dms not move beyond the core fluff I agree fluff is hard to remove once you have too much of it.
Well, this brings up a number of issues. Personally, I despise the idea of Points of Light. It is more restricting to DMs, rather than less.
?? I happen to like points of light I hated old FR always seemed there were always better heros than the pcs running around.
The "everything is core" plus PoL does restrict WotC, and that's their own fault. These two paradigms were a mistake and I'd love for them to retconn them.
As for picking and choosing what you allow in a game, you and I agree. A DM has every right to restrict material in his campaign. Unfortunately, the players have to deal with whatever that decision is, whether they like it or not. Personally, if WotC put firearms in core and my DM allowed it, I'd just gather my books and dice, and walk out for good. Yes, it is "take my ball and go home" but gunpowder runs counter to every idea in fantasy I hold. Guns have their place in RPGs, but not this RPG. Don't even get me started on Eberron...
I dont think dms should restrict things. Personally Id love to see guns in fantasy far more than plate armour I despise heavy armour especially plate. It makes no sense that people in a fantasy game wouldnt develop some sort of fire arm. Then again one of my new favorite fantasy books is the first one in the Iron Elves series. It was a great read and they combined fantasy with gun powder very very well.
Most dms who restrict stuff are jerks and unless the dm can give me an in game logical reason for why he is restricting my choices I walk away from the table. Im a firm believer in players having options and that campaign worlds should be large enough to incorporate anything.
Hahahahaha, WIN! ;)
Um no pretty sure guy with pistol and sword beats guy with throwing knives.
I don't know anything about WoW. Never played it.
People with tails instead of feat in wow they are corrupted elves, oh and they can breathe water as well as air. Something like that could work for a semi aquatic race and a reptilian race thats not friggin draconic.
Okay, but that isn't what you originally made it sound like. Fair enough.
A young world with developing city states a few small empires lots of barbarian tribes and threats where the known world extends to maybe a hundred miles out from the individual cities. Where some are constantly at war with each other but most are too far away.
As for Star Wars, okay, but there are other systems out there.
True and Id love to get into a dark heresey game or a game of exalted
Because it just isn't.
Why not?
Um no pretty sure guy with pistol and sword beats guy with throwing knives.
Nah, he has to see the guy with the throwing knives. He;ll never see him coming because a Ninja's HiPS dont' lie.
:invasion: <-- Do you see the ninja? DEAD!
Thats fine but why should the rest of us suffer because some people are fantasy purists?
Why should purists suffer because you want guns? It's a circular argument.
The issue of black powder is best addressed by a third party publisher, as I've said repeatedly. Then anyone who wants it can have it, and those that don't aren't stuck with it.
After years of seeing dms not move beyond the core fluff I agree fluff is hard to remove once you have too much of it.
Which I can understand, and even partially agree with.
?? I happen to like points of light I hated old FR always seemed there were always better heros than the pcs running around.
I think it's safe for us to assume that we have vastly different different tastes. ;)
I dont think dms should restrict things. Personally Id love to see guns in fantasy far more than plate armour I despise heavy armour especially plate. It makes no sense that people in a fantasy game wouldnt develop some sort of fire arm. Then again one of my new favorite fantasy books is the first one in the Iron Elves series. It was a great read and they combined fantasy with gun powder very very well.
I don't know why you hate heavy armor, but again, it's personal taste. To me though, it makes perfect sense not to have developed guns.
Why should a wizard cast Magic Missile if he has an Ultimate Uzi?
Most dms who restrict stuff are jerks and unless the dm can give me an in game logical reason for why he is restricting my choices I walk away from the table. Im a firm believer in players having options and that campaign worlds should be large enough to incorporate anything.
Please stop insulting everyone who doesn't think exactly like you. Perhaps you've had a DM who was a jerk and also happened to restrict things in his campaign. That does not equate to "most" DMs being jerks because they restrict something.
Now I agree that on many issues a DM should have a valid reason for disallowing something. However, there will be situations, for example gunpowder, that a DM might simply say "No" to. That's a DM's prerogative. If you don't like it, it's fine to leave. However, in the case of something game-changing as gunpowder would be, it would still be available in the next guy's campaign, and possibly the next after that. In other words, it's something I might not be able to escape.
Again, a 3PP can handle the situation quite well.
Um no pretty sure guy with pistol and sword beats guy with throwing knives.
Well, you just made my point for me. A gun = autowin. Welcome back to the Nova Mage, except it's now everybody.
Anyway pirates are nowhere near as cool as ninjas.
People with tails instead of feat in wow they are corrupted elves, oh and they can breathe water as well as air. Something like that could work for a semi aquatic race and a reptilian race thats not friggin draconic.
Sounds interesting. Not something I'd personally play, but it might be interesting to see played by someone else.
A young world with developing city states a few small empires lots of barbarian tribes and threats where the known world extends to maybe a hundred miles out from the individual cities. Where some are constantly at war with each other but most are too far away.
Sounds a lot like current Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance. ;)
True and Id love to get into a dark heresey game or a game of exalted
Never played them, but cool. As I said, there is material out there that should fill your appetite for alternative gameplay.
Why not?
See above. :D
Purists don't suffer when they choose to exclude options. The people who want options suffer when options don't exist. It's not circular at all.
Huh?
So the option of being a god is missed by some?
Wow.
I didn't get that memo.
Why should purists suffer because you want guns? It's a circular argument.
The issue of black powder is best addressed by a third party publisher, as I've said repeatedly. Then anyone who wants it can have it, and those that don't aren't stuck with it.
See I dont trust 3rd party work to do it well. WOTC at least play tests 4e material. 3rd party stuff wont be as good.
I think it's safe for us to assume that we have vastly different different tastes. ;)
Probably
I don't know why you hate heavy armor, but again, it's personal taste. To me though, it makes perfect sense not to have developed guns.
Just do it restricts mobility on any kind of battle field lack of mobility will kill you dead. Real plate armour wasnt developed until it was impractical to use no one really used what we call full plate all that much.
Why should a wizard cast Magic Missile if he has an Ultimate Uzi?
At most we are talking flint locks not uzi Im pretty sure the bonus for it would be +1 with not that great a range.
Please stop insulting everyone who doesn't think exactly like you. Perhaps you've had a DM who was a jerk and also happened to restrict things in his campaign. That does not equate to "most" DMs being jerks because they restrict something.
Your right because most dms do not restrict things. The ones that do that ive seen are indeed jerks unless they have a specific world reason for it. Current dm disalowed eladrin at the begining due to them being unkown in the city we started in which was fine.
Now I agree that on many issues a DM should have a valid reason for disallowing something. However, there will be situations, for example gunpowder, that a DM might simply say "No" to. That's a DM's prerogative. If you don't like it, it's fine to leave. However, in the case of something game-changing as gunpowder would be, it would still be available in the next guy's campaign, and possibly the next after that. In other words, it's something I might not be able to escape.
Again, a 3PP can handle the situation quite well.
Again I dont trust 3rd parties. I dont see why wotc should not do it.
Well, you just made my point for me. A gun = autowin. Welcome back to the Nova Mage, except it's now everybody.
Anyway pirates are nowhere near as cool as ninjas.
Long bows trump sword magic would trump sword but its a game im sure they could balance guns.
Sounds interesting. Not something I'd personally play, but it might be interesting to see played by someone else.
Id like to see them.
Sounds a lot like current Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance. ;)
No because the key is YOUNG world. No previous empires no gods blowing up the planet a world that just began having civilization this isnt covered in any of the current settings or even previous settings for that matter.
Huh?
So the option of being a god is missed by some?
Wow.
I didn't get that memo.
Yeah, not many people are missing it, since it's in the PHB.
Yeah, not many people are missing it, since it's in the PHB.
It is a path that ends with the ascension, to which the character is no longer played.
ED's seem to be over extended to provide a defined end to the character's adventuring, shunting him into other forms of existence. To limit the top level was a mistake in the previous edition and Epic rules were patched on. Now I am waiting for what the next tiers will be.
Huh?
So the option of being a god is missed by some?
Wow.
I didn't get that memo.
Demi-God Epic Destiny FTW.
Not to mention those Avatar EDs in Divine Power.
Oh and Storm Sovereign ED in Dragon where you become a Primordial.
Demi-God Epic Destiny FTW.
Not to mention those Avatar EDs in Divine Power.
Oh and Storm Sovereign ED in Dragon where you become a Primordial.
Prince of hell in dragon where you become a devil lord.
Purists don't suffer when they choose to exclude options. The people who want options suffer when options don't exist. It's not circular at all.
Okay cool.
I want a lightsaber. Cuz slicin' and dicin' a dragon with a lightsaber would be awesome.
And I want an F-16 fighter jet, cuz a dogfight with a dragon would rule.
Yup, Wizards should make every possible option available to everyone because nothing should be off-limits.
-------------
As for someone using Warcraft to justify firearms, D&D isn't Warcraft. We really don't need to get into that argument, do we?
The fact is, I don't want firearms in D&D. If WotC came out with a supplement clearly labeled Optional I'd say "whatever, have fun with that." (As long as I didn't have to play in a game with it.) That isn't part of the 4e paradigm though. When the books come out, they're part of the entire game.
I don't want guns in D&D core. Period.
Okay cool.
I want a lightsaber. Cuz slicin' and dicin' a dragon with a lightsaber would be awesome.
And I want an F-16 fighter jet, cuz a dogfight with a dragon would rule.
Yup, Wizards should make every possible option available to everyone because nothing should be off-limits.
-------------
As for someone using Warcraft to justify firearms, D&D isn't Warcraft. We really don't need to get into that argument, do we?
The fact is, I don't want firearms in D&D. If WotC came out with a supplement clearly labeled Optional I'd say "whatever, have fun with that." (As long as I didn't have to play in a game with it.) That isn't part of the 4e paradigm though. When the books come out, they're part of the entire game.
I don't want guns in D&D core. Period.
To be fair, the likes of flintlock pistols wouldn't be totally out of line for the setting.
See, what's really helping set me against your position is the mention of things like uzi's and machine guns and lightsabers and F-16's. Those are all a VERY far cry from flintlock pistols.
In fact, I'd go as far as to say a bow and arrow would be more effective than a flintlock pistol.
I'm using two other fantasy systems (or did you gloss over Warhammer) to show that it is possible to have balanced firearms in a fantasy setting.Seriously. You're going on some crazy slippery slope argument that makes no logical sense. There's a reason fallacies don't hold up. You're basically using the equivalent of "legalizing gay marriage will inevitably lead to legalizing sex with animals" as your argument.
Also, I love the Warcraft Universe because it has awesome Trolls. I also like the magical evolution. I like how elves are troll-kin.
I don't want guns in D&D core. Period.
would you be OK if WotC put out a 'new' campaing setting with them???
I already have the tag line...welcome to the new millennium...
then have it be early rennasiance, flit locks, minor clock work...have it be that the main part of the setting is 'growing up' and that it is more 1600's setting.
having it that way is having your cake and eating it too, no need for it in FR or your homebrew, but also made by WotC as a balance mechanic...
The fact is, I don't want firearms in D&D. If WotC came out with a supplement clearly labeled Optional I'd say "whatever, have fun with that." (As long as I didn't have to play in a game with it.) That isn't part of the 4e paradigm though. When the books come out, they're part of the entire game.
Must be terrible being forced to use something in a game simply because WotC didn't say "you don't have to include this."
I thought everyone was old enough to realise on their own they don't have to include it in their game just because WotC publishes it. Guess I was wrong.
To the fire arm issue. Yes it would be cool to have black powder firearms, but it will never happen without a timeleap. For one, plate armor and the like will become useless as it would not be able to stop black powder rounds. If they kept firearms to a minimum, maybe it would work. But that would still present the problem of the players abusing them.
Then again the weapon write ups in dragon magazine has the damage very low on personal fire arms. So I see no real point in having them at all. Really, what point is there in spending hundreds if not thousands of gold on a firearm, loading supplies and iron slugs when a bow and arrow cost less and do the same damage.
Firearms would have to be buffed, but that would break the game as everyone would run a sniper build or quickdraw build and encounters would all end the same.
I have some houserules on gnomish/magecrafted firearms but they have buffed damage and have random backfire/malfunction charts. Parts break often and it takes the gnomes a long time to fix a weapon.
Using a feat, you can learn to fix your own weapon, make ammo and scale powder for firing caps(wads or w/e).
Dragonlance would have to move forward quite a bit in order to incorporate firearms, and working firearms that don't blow your hand off is a different story.
PS: To the idea of including more World of Warcraft flavor in 4e, eww.
To the fire arm issue. Yes it would be cool to have black powder firearms, but it will never happen without a timeleap. For one, plate armor and the like will become useless as it would not be able to stop black powder rounds.
what if we just had them as suppiur weapons...
something like:
Two handed ranged weapon
Flint Lock +2 1d10 10/20 30gp 5lbs Firearm Load Move, High crit, Brutal 1
So if WoTC was to say make the revolver a weapon in D&D. I would prefer them go and watch/read fiction that showcases it and see what the style and feel it gives across. Rather then reading books on how it is made, what effects it has on the body, etc.
This is how I have always done it in my own personal games and it has worked great. It even goes beyond just stuff like that, it allows balanced lasers, powered armour, etc. to sit side-by-side with plate armour, spears, sword, bows, etc.
I thought everyone was old enough to realise on their own they don't have to include it in their game just because WotC publishes it. Guess I was wrong.
That is only true if you are the DM. Players on the other hand make do with whatever games they can find. If firearms are core then as a player YOU WILL have to deal with it. All of the time.
You won't have any choice on the matter.
That is only true if you are the DM. Players on the other hand make do with whatever games they can find. If firearms are core then as a player YOU WILL have to deal with it. All of the time.
You won't have any choice on the matter.
Or you know the DM and the Players can sit down together and work out together what the game will be like. With the Players there is no game and it is through their eyes that the setting even exists in the first place. The Players can have just as much say as the DM as to what the setting is like, the style of gameplay is like, etc.
Heck as a DM I find this extremely helpful since it cuts down on my job of setting building, I know what my players want, and new ideas can be generated that I may not have thought of beforehand.
Firearms have never had much to do with D&D. You sorta knew that when you bought into the system. If you want them you go play another system. But you're not going to change what it is. You're in for a lot of disappointments if you try.
The reason? It ruins the feel of the setting. And since everything is core there is no room for something that will ruin every setting out there.
As such too firearms don't ruin any setting since well if those customers don't like firearms BAM it is gone. But for those that do, hey you have that as an official and supported option now (which is especially nice for those of us who use the Character Builder).
I'm a big time warhammer 40k fan, so firepower has always had great appeal to me. But when it comes to dragonlance, I tend to like the crossbow over the pistol.
We already have firearms actually.
Cross bows
Bows
Slings
wands
rods
staves
Enchanced magical ammunition along with enhanced weapons. You could have piercing ammo, exploding ammo, frag ammo, acid ammo and so on. Spell ammo is nothing new for crossbows and such. Plus wands are the original D&D firearm. Lightning bolt, magic missle, fireball and more types of wands.
The Artificer is a "gunslinger" of sorts. Everyone and anyone can have "boomsticks" now.
I just don't see the need for them to be core. Half the fun of including them in our games is designing them. Plus solamnia has bombards and black powder so its not impossible for the secret to get stolen and modified by others.
Pretty soon, Colt and Sherman, the gnome brothers will link up and build steam powered armored bombard wagons.;)
Another problem with making things core or "canon" is that the canon fans who stick to it religiously will not be willing to budge on the subject. DM's make the adventure, players play it. If a player asks a dm to not run an idea, thats like a DM asking the player not to run a certain character. It removes the enjoyment.
But dragonlance is not a gun setting, never has been. So if anyone wants guns in DL, house rule it. Thats a perfectly acceptable alternative to core.
If firearms are core then as a player YOU WILL have to deal with it. All of the time.
You won't have any choice on the matter.
Really? If its in the Adventurer's Vault 2 I'll have to deal with it but if Adventurer's Vault 2 was renamed "Really Cool Stuff for D&D - An Optional Setting Neutral Supplement by Wizards of the Coast" it becomes a non-issue? Seriously?
Perhaps your DMs follow this abritrary rule of "if its core it must be at my table but if its not core it won't be at my table", but it doesn't make for a good game. Personally I'd be looking for a DM that puts slightly more thought into the game.
Following the idea of core stuff must be present is not logical, it makes absolutely no sense and is simply baffling.
Yep! And what happens when 3 players want firearms and 2 players and a DM don't?
This is going to happen regardless of if its in Adventurer's Vault 2 or "Really Cool Stuff for D&D - An Optional Setting Neutral Supplement by Wizards of the Coast." Its just if its in the latter case you're saying a DM can pull out some arbitrary rule that doesn't make a lick of sense.
I'm not using Warcraft to justify firearms.
Seriously. You're going on some crazy slippery slope argument that makes no logical sense. There's a reason fallacies don't hold up. You're basically using the equivalent of "legalizing gay marriage will inevitably lead to legalizing sex with animals" as your argument.
No I'm not. You mentioned WoW to support your point. WoW has a bad history with 4e. Using WoW to make your point doesn't help support you.
Besides, you're responding to my post disputing the notion that it's better to include more options because players who want more options suffer when purists are happy. I'm illustrating why there has to be a line drawn somewhere in terms of options available.
It's not unreasonable to want a lightsaber in D&D. I truly would love to have one in D&D. I think a hybrid Swordmage|Psion next year might make for a decent Jedi-like option, and I plan on playing it. Having a lightsaber to match would be awesome.
I'd also love to dogfight a dragon from an F-16. Why is that ridiculous to "want?" I can't have it, which is fine, but I still want it.
Brilliant Energy = Lightsaber.
Also, I love the Warcraft Universe because it has awesome Trolls. I also like the magical evolution. I like how elves are troll-kin.
I'd truly love lightsabers in D&D, but they don't fit on any current world.
As for WoW, I know nothing about it, and have no opinion on it.
would you be OK if WotC put out a 'new' campaing setting with them???
I already have the tag line...welcome to the new millennium...
then have it be early rennasiance, flit locks, minor clock work...have it be that the main part of the setting is 'growing up' and that it is more 1600's setting.
having it that way is having your cake and eating it too, no need for it in FR or your homebrew, but also made by WotC as a balance mechanic...
Like I said, if it were clearly labeled "Optional" I'd have no problem with it, as long as my group refused to use it. I will not be a part of any group that uses firearms. I don't care how balanced it is.
That is only true if you are the DM. Players on the other hand make do with whatever games they can find. If firearms are core then as a player YOU WILL have to deal with it. All of the time.
You won't have any choice on the matter.
Exactly this.
Yep! And what happens when 3 players want firearms and 2 players and a DM don't?
Firearms have never had much to do with D&D. You sorta knew that when you bought into the system. If you want them you go play another system. But you're not going to change what it is. You're in for a lot of disappointments if you try.
The reason? It ruins the feel of the setting. And since everything is core there is no room for something that will ruin every setting out there.
And this.
And everything Duke5150 said.
Really? If its in the Adventurer's Vault 2 I'll have to deal with it but if Adventurer's Vault 2 was renamed "Really Cool Stuff for D&D - An Optional Setting Neutral Supplement by Wizards of the Coast" it becomes a non-issue? Seriously?
Perhaps your DMs follow this abritrary rule of "if its core it must be at my table but if its not core it won't be at my table", but it doesn't make for a good game. Personally I'd be looking for a DM that puts slightly more thought into the game.
Following the idea of core stuff must be present is not logical, it makes absolutely no sense and is simply baffling.
This is going to happen regardless of if its in Adventurer's Vault 2 or "Really Cool Stuff for D&D - An Optional Setting Neutral Supplement by Wizards of the Coast." Its just if its in the latter case you're saying a DM can pull out some arbitrary rule that doesn't make a lick of sense.
Again, if I were willing to waste the time looking for the thread, I could point you to one where the point was repeated over and over that if it appears in a core book it is more difficult than it's worth for a DM to have to remove from his setting.
Plus, you'll have players like william who (justifiably) do not want options in books taken away from them. So as a DM you have to choose whether to upset those players, or allow the option and alienate others.
Again, this is why firearms should be the domain of a 3PP. It's the best possible answer.
I could point you to one where the point was repeated over and over that if it appears in a core book it is more difficult than it's worth for a DM to have to remove from his setting.
How old are these people? Because if a DM says "this core item isn't allowed for reasons X, Y and Z" and the players then throw a tantrum until the DM gives in, I'd be wondering if these are friends you're playing with or if they're children? Also, why are these players willing to listen to reason if the item happened to be in a campaign specific book or a setting neutral book that had OPTIONAL plastered all over the cover?
Personally I'd be looking for more mature people to spend my time with.
Again, this is why firearms should be the domain of a 3PP. It's the best possible answer.
Except for those people who want:
- Firearms in Compendium/Character Builder (especially important for CB).
- Future support for Firearms.
- Not able to acquire 3PP products or aren't well versed in 3PP to know it is out.
- Have DMs who don't allow non-D&D products.
It also be an aspect of fantasy that WoTC decides to not expand on which in-turn limits the WIDE, WIDE range of fantasy there is and they could tap into. Not everything is just Swords & Sorcery in fantasy. You can't do Steampunk, can't do Renaissance-esque, can't do Science-Fantasy, etc. D&D should be about giving a wide-swath of options for various types of fantasy not one specific type.
When really all it comes down to, to solve the issue of firearms for those that dislike it. It to simply discuss with the group and come up with a compromise both on Player and DM side. Just like how compromises were made in my group regarding Divine PCs (allowed but the concept of Gods extremely reworked).
Except for those people who want:
- Firearms in Compendium/Character Builder (especially important for CB).
- Future support for Firearms.
- Not able to acquire 3PP products or aren't well versed in 3PP to know it is out.
- Have DMs who don't allow non-D&D products.
It also be an aspect of fantasy that WoTC decides to not expand on which in-turn limits the WIDE, WIDE range of fantasy there is and they could tap into. Not everything is just Swords & Sorcery in fantasy. You can't do Steampunk, can't do Renaissance-esque, can't do Science-Fantasy, etc.
When really all it comes down to, to solve the issue of firearms for those that dislike it. It to simply discuss with the group and come up with a compromise both on Player and DM side. Just like how compromises were made in my group regarding Divine PCs (allowed but the concept of Gods extremely reworked).
Not everything in fantasy is Sword and Sorcery. But fantasy and D&D are not synonymous. D&D's structure is mostly S&S.
If you include it in core, it is in everyone's campaign. There may be some exceptions, but the vast majority of groups will have at least one player who insists on being allowed to use what is in the books.
It's not a "simply discuss it" answer. No matter how many times you say it. This was proven in the fluff thread I've mentioned repeatedly.
The problem is the "everything is core" paradigm. That's why the only correct answer is to have it come from a 3PP, which is not considered core. Then those who like options can discuss including it with their DM.
The problem is the "everything is core" paradigm.
No the problem is players who demand to have fictional element X in a fictional game and will make their "friends" lives hell if they don't give in to his/her demands.
No the problem is players who demand to have fictional element X in a fictional game and will make their "friends" lives hell if they don't give in to his/her demands.
Well, if we want to get really technical the problem is really that it is impossible to make everyone happy all of the time. So someone has to win and someone has to lose.
Again, if I were willing to waste the time looking for the thread, I could point you to one where the point was repeated over and over that if it appears in a core book it is more difficult than it's worth for a DM to have to remove from his setting.
Plus, you'll have players like william who (justifiably) do not want options in books taken away from them. So as a DM you have to choose whether to upset those players, or allow the option and alienate others.
Again, this is why firearms should be the domain of a 3PP. It's the best possible answer.
Again most dms do not allow 3rd party supplements. Most 3rd parties cant make things worth crap anyway. I have no faith that a 3rd party would be able to do fire arms well. I do feel wotc could, and yes players should have access to all the options unless their is a world specific reason for it. If a dm bans something simply because he does not like it then I walk away because that person is a bad dm.
While Dragonlance as a setting does have bombards, this does not lead very quickly to flintlocks and muskets. Plate armor and bombards did exist at the same time historically (in our world, at least) so that's not so far fetched, but there's a hundred years or so of development needed.
My first 3rd edition D&D campaign was set in Eliabethan England, with players having access to wheellock pistols, matchlock muskets, and kegs of powder. It did not make it any easier for them to take out their Cthulhu-like opponents, especially since pistols had at most one round of usefulness before needing to be reloaded. They were more like encounter powers in 4E.
Cheers,
Cam
I have a feeling this thread has been completely derailed.
While Dragonlance as a setting does have bombards, this does not lead very quickly to flintlocks and muskets. Plate armor and bombards did exist at the same time historically (in our world, at least) so that's not so far fetched, but there's a hundred years or so of development needed.
My first 3rd edition D&D campaign was set in Eliabethan England, with players having access to wheellock pistols, matchlock muskets, and kegs of powder. It did not make it any easier for them to take out their Cthulhu-like opponents, especially since pistols had at most one round of usefulness before needing to be reloaded. They were more like encounter powers in 4E.
Cheers,
Cam
Which is exactly how I see doing them in 4e they are items that give an attack as an encounter power would be perfect way of doing fire arms in 4E. I dont see why people are opposed to them. Its not nearly as ridiculous as full plate armour which btw was also ineffective against crossbows, and longbows. By the time full plate was used in our world it was mostly useless.
Or certainly more balanced than most of Wizard's "I R BETTER SPEAR!" type garbage. (which really a Greatspear makes no sense period.. ever)
Again most dms do not allow 3rd party supplements. Most 3rd parties cant make things worth crap anyway. I have no faith that a 3rd party would be able to do fire arms well. I do feel wotc could, and yes players should have access to all the options unless their is a world specific reason for it. If a dm bans something simply because he does not like it then I walk away because that person is a bad dm.
Eh, matter of taste really. Personally, I like the stuff Goodman Games has produced for 4e.
As for the end of your post, if I am in a group with someone like you, and WotC introduces firearms, my two choices are:
1) Deal with the feeling that I am playing a game of total suck.
2) Walk away from the game.
And that's why I have such a problem with firearms in core products. You're not wrong to demand that anything core be allowed in a game. At the same time, I refuse to play in a game that includes firearms (at least a game of D&D. Personally, I like Star Wars, and denying firearms from that setting would be silly.)
Which is exactly how I see doing them in 4e they are items that give an attack as an encounter power would be perfect way of doing fire arms in 4E. I dont see why people are opposed to them. Its not nearly as ridiculous as full plate armour which btw was also ineffective against crossbows, and longbows. By the time full plate was used in our world it was mostly useless.
Because I don't play D&D to experience anything remotely like the real world. If I want the real world, I go outside.
Heavy armor works in D&D as it should in a fantasy setting. Beyond leather armor (and even really including leather armor) most of the things you can do in D&D with armor on are impossible.
I don't like the idea of firearms in my fantasy settings. There are more than enough settings that include firearms. Would you petition for the inclusion of dual-bladed swords, shields, and plate armor in a Wild Western setting?
None of the fantasy I've ever read has included guns. That's how I like it. I'm sure there is fiction available that contains it, but I'm completely disinterested in it. It's a personal choice, just as your wants are a personal choice to you. I'm not sitting here questioning why you would want what you want.
But Cam is right, this is a completely derailed thread now. So Long Live the Lance!
http://naegunfael.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=techii&action=display&thread=117 Balanced fire arms.
Or certainly more balanced than most of Wizard's "I R BETTER SPEAR!" type garbage. (which really a Greatspear makes no sense period.. ever)
I see the great spear as a lance really.
The Great Bow is equally stupid of course. If you want a Superior Ranged Weapon, just put frickin guns in.
My argument for why guns deserve a place in D&D... it keeps nonsensical crap like the Great Bow, and Great Spear out. People accept repeater crossbows (a tech that really doesn't work irl, and was invented around the same time guns were) readily and not firearms.
Hell, you are willing to accept a race of magical constructs.. and not firearms?
Firearms have every right to be in D&D, especially when you have Lame and Stupid things such as the Great Bow, or the Great Spear. Or you've included, Warforged.
Also Will: please do some research on Plate Armor, it worked wonders vs Bows and Crossbows. Hell it stops bullets. The only thing Plate sucks against is basically Cannons. And the reason we quit using it was because the technology was stupidly expensive to try and keep up with compared to cheap morons given a mass of guns and told to fire in a general area. Though in a way Plate has made a return over the last 20 years. Do you know what actually stops a bullet in modern body armor?
It's not that ****** kevlar. (that only stops Spalling, or shrapnel) It's the Steel or Ceramic Plate in the center that stops anything larger than a handgun.
And yet it's total and utter fail, because it's no longer than the longspear, and yet some how does more damage.
The Great Bow is equally stupid of course. If you want a Superior Ranged Weapon, just put frickin guns in.
My argument for why guns deserve a place in D&D... it keeps nonsensical crap like the Great Bow, and Great Spear out. People accept repeater crossbows (a tech that really doesn't work irl, and was invented around the same time guns were) readily and not firearms.
Hell, you are willing to accept a race of magical constructs.. and not firearms?
Firearms have every right to be in D&D, especially when you have Lame and Stupid things such as the Great Bow, or the Great Spear. Or you've included, Warforged.
Also Will: please do some research on Plate Armor, it worked wonders vs Bows and Crossbows. Hell it stops bullets. The only thing Plate sucks against is basically Cannons. And the reason we quit using it was because the technology was stupidly expensive to try and keep up with compared to cheap morons given a mass of guns and told to fire in a general area. Though in a way Plate has made a return over the last 20 years. Do you know what actually stops a bullet in modern body armor?
It's not that ****** kevlar. (that only stops Spalling, or shrapnel) It's the Steel or Ceramic Plate in the center that stops anything larger than a handgun.
Plate armour would work but not reliably crossbows could pierce any kind of armour that was used The french at Agincourt were using some of the heaviest armour mounted troops could wear and massed arrow fire took them down. Plate armour is effective but a expensive and b very hard to move around in. And yeah I know about the ceramic or metal plates in modern body armour. Though a high enough caliber bullet can still go through.
I agree on guns having a place in dnd.
High enough caliber, being more than most Rifle rounds can pack in the case of the ceramic plate.
The french at Agincourt....
Ohhhh no... once firearms and Agincourt are mentioned in a thread, you know its totally going downhill from there.
Actually terrain took them down along with several other factors. It wasn't Arrows going through Armor like it wasn't even there, it had everything to do with the fact that the battle was lost well before the fighting had actually began. The French were out Strategized on every level. Agincourt very much played to the English's strengths, and the French's weaknesses, as much so as the 300 Spartans at Thermopylae vs the Persians.
High enough caliber, being more than most Rifle rounds can pack in the case of the ceramic plate.
Most being key word. I know the desert eagle pistol has a 50cal version not sure if it can go through body armour though. And I know the terain at agincourt favoured the english but it would not have mattered if arrows could not pierce plate armour it may take a lot of arrows but arrows and guys who can use them were far cheaper than plate armour.
The pistol in question suffers from being a pistol still. It's not like a .50 cal rifle round etc.
I do have to ask though, how did the thread get from DL to guns?
Actually longbow men were expensive (due to how expensive the longbow is to make, and the training involved). Crossbowmen were cheap but longbow men were skilled and expensive over all. Not to mention this lovely invention called the Shield pretty much negates anything an arrow based weapon can do.
The pistol in question suffers from being a pistol still. It's not like a .50 cal rifle round etc.
I do have to ask though, how did the thread get from DL to guns?
Not really sure, but most heavy infantry to be effective against cavalry could not care a shield. Archers are not the be all end all but heavy armour isnt an answer for everything either. The shield also has to be facing the archer if you can catch them while flanked or by surprise you could rip heavy infantry or cavalry to shreds with right amount of archers. But hopefully your archers have some pikes to hide behind.
I do have to ask though, how did the thread get from DL to guns?
Through the almighty phenomena known as thread drift.
Through the almighty phenomena known as thread drift.
The bickering over gods in DL had long since run its course. The thread had to drift somewhere or die.
BTW, I think guns might be better off staying in other systems, D&D is about Swords and Sorcery, not Axes and Firearms.
I think the fact that it is likely Dark Sun that will be the next setting instead of Dragonlance might have had some posters wandering about with drifting useless subjects that have no bearing on the original subject.
BTW, I think guns might be better off staying in other systems, D&D is about Swords and Sorcery, not Axes and Firearms.
I disagree I think there is enough room in dnd for them.
I disagree I think there is enough room in dnd for them.
It doesn't fit the theme of the D&D backdrop. It isn't a part of fantasy trope. Magic takes the place of such modern weapons.
Someone should probably mention that in one of the old podcasts, they did discuss firearms for a moment. As I recall they said that if they were to do firearms, they wouldn't be your standard period pieces. Instead they would be "fantasy" guns. I also seem to recall them saying if they were to do it, they would probably be in a Dragon article.
Yeah which kinda sucks cause a swashbuckling campaign world could be a lot of fun.
Someone should probably mention that in one of the old podcasts, they did discuss firearms for a moment. As I recall they said that if they were to do firearms, they wouldn't be your standard period pieces. Instead they would be "fantasy" guns. I also seem to recall them saying if they were to do it, they would probably be in a Dragon article.
I makes me hopeful that with them not oriented on trying to replicate real guns they will focus on feel and style. You know have them go, "it wouldn't work like this in real-life, but it damn well feels like such and such a gun".
Also, I am glad I sent in the question that got that response :D
It doesn't fit the theme of the D&D backdrop. It isn't a part of fantasy trope. Magic takes the place of such modern weapons.
I utterly disagree with this.
Sword and Sorcery is fantasy, as is high fantasy, and much more.
You know what else is fantasy? Science fantasy (and to a degree, much of science fiction). You know what series falls under science fantasy? C'mon, guess. :D Dying Earth, by Jack Vance. As in Vancian magic. As in the inspiration for D&D magic.
Firearms are certainly compatible with fantasy elements. Sometimes, they go alongside the fantastical, like in steam fantasy, modern fantasy (gasp, yes, that totally exists), Victorian fantasy, et al. Sometimes, as with Eberron-like civilizations, they exist BECAUSE of the fantasy (i.e., guns exist, because magic made it possible to create a simple device that anyone can fire that shoots ice, or fire, of radiance, or death magics, or spirit essence, hurl a piece of steel or lead, or whatever else you wish...since it is fantasy).
In fact, just look at history in our world. Having a hand-held device that is simply point-and-shoot has been tried over, and over, and over again. Guns are nothing more than an extension of precisely the same basic design elements that gave us crossbows, the hand held cannons from ~1300s China, and so on.
In a world in which fire can be shot from a wand, or a staff, or a crystal, someone, somewhere, will come up with the ergonomic design of a gun, which fits smoothly in your palm, is comfortable to wield, and is simply point and shoot. You aim at your target, pull the trigger (or push the button, press the crystal, mutter the magic word, or whatever else), and behold the power. And thus, the gun is born, be it black powder, the magical ashes of powerful undead, the crystallized essence of a god, special runes that tap into the raw flow of magical quintessence, or whatever other actual mechanism is used. Sometimes, it'll project energy. Other times, it'll launch a projectile. Still others, it might simply alter reality.
There is absolutely nothing about firearms that puts it at odds with the basics of D&D. There is a reason firearms rules have existed in most every version of D&D. Heck, one of the most memorable adventures in 1E involves a crashed starship, laser guns, anti-grav devices (including an elevator), and more. Expedition to the Barrier Peaks. Great fun.
D&D is not Steam Punk or Final Fantasy, it is Dungeon & Dragons. You never saw a gun in the cartoon, various novels and such.
The Wand is a good replacement for the Gun, as well as the various spells that do basically the same thing (Magic Missile, Elrich blast and such) at will. Simply put, a gun that isn't a modern day revolver is ridiculous compared to the spells that are superior. Loading a musket may take three rounds.
I would have to say that the Crossbow is the closest thing that should be considered a gun in D&D.
Secondly, the reason this derailed into a discussion of firearms is because I asked william to present what he would consider something acceptably different.
Firstly, I am in full agreement with thaX on the gun subject.
Secondly, the reason this derailed into a discussion of firearms is because I asked william to present what he would consider something acceptably different.
Yup and a full on steam punk setting would be amazing for dnd. I'd like more settings like Ebaron and dark sun where the races act significantly different than they do in the core books. I think thats what campaign settings should be for iis exploring different concepts and ideas.
Yup and a full on steam punk setting would be amazing for dnd. I'd like more settings like Ebaron and dark sun where the races act significantly different than they do in the core books. I think thats what campaign settings should be for iis exploring different concepts and ideas.
I agree, it would be nice and refreshing to have new settings that differ from the norm. But not at the expense of the older settings. Get dragonlance and darksun published in 4e before releasing new settings. Let us get bored of the older settings in the new edition before we get a new setting. We already have eberron, which is still "new" for many, many people.
I agree, it would be nice and refreshing to have new settings that differ from the norm. But not at the expense of the older settings. Get dragonlance and darksun published in 4e before releasing new settings. Let us get bored of the older settings in the new edition before we get a new setting. We already have eberron, which is still "new" for many, many people.
It would be better to have a rotating cycle of old setting, new setting, old setting, new setting.
I'd like to see:
2008 - Forgotten Realms (old)
2009 - Eberron (the newest of the "old" settings)
2010 - Dark Sun (old)
2011 - ??? (new)
2012 - Dragonlance (old)
2013 - ??? (new)
2014 - Spelljammer (old)
2015 - ??? (new)
2016 - Greyhawk (old)
2017 - ??? (new)
2018 - Mystara (old)
etc...
etc...
etc...
This would keep the whole of the game far fresher for far longer than:
2008 - Forgotten Realms (old)
2009 - Eberron (the newest of the "old" settings)
2010 - Dark Sun (old)
2011 - Dragonlance (old)
2012 - Spelljammer (old)
2013 - Greyhawk (old)
2014 - Mystara (old)
2015 - ??? (new)
2016 - ??? (new)
2017 - ??? (new)
2018 - ??? (new)
etc...
etc...
etc...
Or any release schedule like that.
There is only one problem with that. I highly doubt 4th edition will be the last edition regardless of offical statements. (we've heard 3e was it, then 3.5 came out) and 4e already has balancing issues (single round death of orcus build). So I'd imagine that 4.5/5e will be out before most of those settings are even discussed.
It's not a problem in the least. There should be zero...absolutely NO expectations that all, most, or even a solid number of older settings should be released with each edition of the game. I do not expect to see every setting in 4E. Nor should you. Nor should anyone else. Most of the material in most older settings are easily simulated with 4E. The fluff for said settings already exists in abundance, therefore it needn't be a priority for inclusion.
Assuming a robust 8-10 years of releases for each edtion, with Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Dark Sun, Dragonlance, Greyhawk, Mystara, Birthright, Spelljammer, Planescape, Ravenloft, and more, no edition of the game would EVER get a new setting under such a schedule. One setting a year is a completely reasonable release schedule. Anything slower is too long, anything faster doesn't give a whole lot of time for one setting to be digested before another comes in.
Thus, it should always be assumed that some settings will not be published, some setting will be eaten by the core world of the edition, some will always be printed, and new settings will come and go from edition to edition.
With regards to your note of the balancing problems: 4E is NOT like previous editions in this regard either. 4E's fundamental design allows for complete errata of a problem mechanic to restore balance without totally rewriting the system itself. 3E, on the other hand, had fundamental problems with the system itself, not merely problematic powers and synergies.
A periodic reprinting of any book with errata where appropriate (plus Compendium and Character Generator updates), whenever said book sells out, can keep the game in check without requiring older players to re-purchase the old material. Rather, those older players need only print out the (free) errata WotC places on the site, and they are good to go. That is considerably better than tossing most of the old books away, and repurchasing the game from scratch. every decade or so.
This means the current version of D&D can exist in perpetuity if WotC so desires, in the same manner that Magic the Gathering does. I don't necessarily think they'll choose that route, but the option is there if the system proves itself resilient enough to keep. This means it is actually possible to see every older setting come about eventually, while still supplementing those settings with brand new, fresh material.
WotC also never said there wouldn't be a 5E, only that they'll never create a 4.5 edition. They were simply acknowledging that 3.5 was a mistake to market in such a manner.
yeah... don't forget the mages that cast spells...
Seriously, what's dragonlance's hook?
War. Forgotten Realms has no open conflict. Eberron their hundred year war is over. The Dragonlance world is constantly at War.
Ok then maybe not 4.5, but 5e will be around. So I hope that we get some of the older settings before they start on the newer stuff. Dragonlance and Darksun are two settings I would like to see, but who knows what they will do.
We will see at least two more presidents in office before we see 5th edition.
War. Forgotten Realms has no open conflict. Eberron their hundred year war is over. The Dragonlance world is constantly at War.
this could be acomplished with a new setting. I'd rather see darksun then knew then DL.
this could be acomplished with a new setting. I'd rather see darksun then knew then DL.
You should simply put this into your signature so you don't have to keep posting this. Sound good?
Cheers,
Cam
War. Forgotten Realms has no open conflict. Eberron their hundred year war is over. The Dragonlance world is constantly at War.
Eberron's Last War is over in the same sense that the terrible wars of Europe were over with the Treaty of Versailles at the end of World War 1... The idea that the peace governing modern Eberron is highly unstable, and that the war could resume at any time, is an extremely important part of the setting.
So no, I don't think war is a schtick that is unique to Dragonlance.
We will see at least two more presidents in office before we see 5th edition.
"wanna bet?"
I doubt 4e will last 8 years much less 16.;)
You should simply put this into your signature so you don't have to keep posting this. Sound good?
Cheers,
Cam
This is the best thing said in this thread. You sir, tempt me to steal this for a sig!:D
@Duke 5150, Lets just say that at the rate it is going I would not be surprised to see 4 Presidents in the next 16 years let alone two more Presidents each serving max terms. Obama is doing his impersonation of Jimmy Carter and you can see where that got him. 8 years sounds right for 4.0 give or take a couple of years to either side.
James: One of my favorite parts of the Campaign Guide is the first chapter, which lays out the key themes of the world and helps the reader put them together into a campaign. The section on the Last War in that chapter includes some of the ideas we put in The Forge of War, about using flashbacks, running a historical game, or even incorporating time travel to make the Last War a vivid part of the player experience. In the sample adventure that appears at the end of the book, I put the advice we've often given into practice: The adventure starts four years before the "present day," with a flashback to the Day of Mourning. That's something we've often suggested to DMs looking to make the Last War a significant factor in the campaign, and I was pleased to be able to pull it off.
As we all know by now, time travel is totally lame. So is playing adventures where the final outcome is already determined, making the characters' actions irrelevant. Not to mention that a massive war is at the center of the entire setting.
Also, I glanced a bit at the ECG while in the bookstore this weekend. Dragons meddle and manipulate the world behind the scenes? Also, there is a prophecy that dictates everything that will happen in the world? Do I understand this correctly?
You already know the outcome though, so really there's not much point in playing.
as far as Guns go.
If anyone had bothered to click the link I dropped, it's quite possible to have Fantastical Guns (hell one of my homebrewed firearms shoots bolts of magic at people rather than bullets) and still have them fit seamlessly into a setting like Eberron.
See that's the problem with DL in general, it's most awesome bits have already happened. The War of The Lance, the Cataclysm. (first one... Chaos war was just stupid... as is most of the content which came after)
You already know the outcome though, so really there's not much point in playing.
as far as Guns go.
If anyone had bothered to click the link I dropped, it's quite possible to have Fantastical Guns (hell one of my homebrewed firearms shoots bolts of magic at people rather than bullets) and still have them fit seamlessly into a setting like Eberron.
I did I thought it looked interesting, more intersting than yet another setting where all the races act exactly as they do in core.
Also, I glanced a bit at the ECG while in the bookstore this weekend.
Dragons meddle and manipulate the world behind the scenes?
They always do. It's a dragon thing.
Also, there is a prophecy that dictates everything that will happen in the world? Do I understand this correctly?
Yes, there is. Now if only there was somebody who understood the damn thing. Even the dragons, who tend to know more about the prophecy than anybody else constantly argue about how the prophecy is to be interpreted.
Edit: Just to clarify; There isn't actually a book of the future of eberron, the prophecy is a DM's tool to give mysterious hints to his players.
Dragons aren't the only one doing the manipulating either. Rakshasa and other immortals manipulate events to suit their purposes.
See that's the problem with DL in general, it's most awesome bits have already happened. The War of The Lance, the Cataclysm. (first one... Chaos war was just stupid... as is most of the content which came after)
You already know the outcome though, so really there's not much point in playing.
as far as Guns go.
If anyone had bothered to click the link I dropped, it's quite possible to have Fantastical Guns (hell one of my homebrewed firearms shoots bolts of magic at people rather than bullets) and still have them fit seamlessly into a setting like Eberron.
You keep approaching guns from a balance standpoint. I don't care if they're the most balanced tool ever conceptualized by Wizards, I don't want guns in D&D. Balance has nothing to do with it.
They always do. It's a dragon thing.
Yes, there is. Now if only there was somebody who understood the damn thing. Even the dragons, who tend to know more about the prophecy than anybody else constantly argue about how the prophecy is to be interpreted.
Edit: Just to clarify; There isn't actually a book of the future of eberron, the prophecy is a DM's tool to give mysterious hints to his players.
Not to mention the fact that the Draconic Prophecy is not a straightforward thing. It's not a case of "X then Y", but more a case of "If X then Y, if not then Z".
Dragons aren't the only one doing the manipulating either. Rakshasa and other immortals manipulate events to suit their purposes.
Which is all fine, since it makes it no different at all than "current era" Dragonlance, which was what I was getting at. It simply changes the identities of the ones behind the scenes manipulating things from gods to dragons, rakshasa, whoever.
FTR, I'm not trying to disparage Eberron. I just find it curious that it is pointed to as an example of being different from Dragonlance in specific ways, when it actually isn't.
I have to be honest too, if it weren't for airships and railroads and cyborgs, I'd probably really like Eberron. From what little I've seen of it, it looks really interesting.
As we all know by now, time travel is totally lame. So is playing adventures where the final outcome is already determined, making the characters' actions irrelevant. Not to mention that a massive war is at the center of the entire setting.
Yes, time travel is lame in certain cases. In Dragonlance it sort of is, simply because it is not a core conceit of the setting yet still manages to show up a lot in several important canonical places (from what I hear, I only saw it in the Legends trilogy and it seemed rather forced even then). Comparing that to a random suggestion for an adventure a DM could run in a campaign guide is rather mean-spirited.
Also, I don't see where you are getting "playing adventures where the outcome is already determined" in Eberron...
You know, I don't think it is a problem that Dragonlance is centered around massive war. It is a problem that Dragonlance is centered around a single war that was fought between the forces of good and evil and had a clear and unambiguous resolution. The Last War was none of those things, and ends up working much better as a general campaign hook, particularly since it isn't really over (it only stopped because everyone was too afraid of the Mourning to continue), and it has no clear way it will eventually end (in fact, there are hundreds of different ways for a possible "second Last War" to end, or even start for that matter).
Also, I glanced a bit at the ECG while in the bookstore this weekend. Dragons meddle and manipulate the world behind the scenes? Also, there is a prophecy that dictates everything that will happen in the world? Do I understand this correctly?
Yes, Eberron dragons are manipulators who hide behind the scenes, trying to guide the world towards a path they believe is laid out in the Prophecy. Of course, they are hardly alone in their manipulations, and their manipulations are limited. It is not like anyone is controlling the entire setting of Eberron from behind the scenes. Actually, the main dragons who manipulate Eberron are a small faction of young and impulsive dragons who are going against the more "wait and see" mentality of their elders...
And yes, there is a prophecy. No, no one has a clue what it says, not even the characters in the setting itself. The Prophecy doesn't exist to tell people how to run their game, it exists so that when a character in the game gets a Siberys dragonmark, he starts getting followed by enigmatic followers of mysterious societies who are trying to observe his importance and meaning within the greater Prophecy.
You keep approaching guns from a balance standpoint. I don't care if they're the most balanced tool ever conceptualized by Wizards, I don't want guns in D&D. Balance has nothing to do with it.
Which is all fine, since it makes it no different at all than "current era" Dragonlance, which was what I was getting at. It simply changes the identities of the ones behind the scenes manipulating things from gods to dragons, rakshasa, whoever.
FTR, I'm not trying to disparage Eberron. I just find it curious that it is pointed to as an example of being different from Dragonlance in specific ways, when it actually isn't.
I have to be honest too, if it weren't for airships and railroads and cyborgs, I'd probably really like Eberron. From what little I've seen of it, it looks really interesting.
So, you're trying to say you like pure medieval fantasy in D&D, and don't want anything else. Well, that's fine, for your table. But that's never been all that D&D is, and that's not going to change with 4E.
Eberron is extremely different from Dragonlance. Airships and railroads and sentient golems, just like you mentioned, for starters. There's a completely different feel. Gods that are remote and mysterious, yet still grant power to the clerics, is vastly different from Dragonlance's absent-or-extremely-involved pantheon. Halflings have a nomadic society with raptor cavalry. Gnomes are... different. The original races, the psionics, the whole different presentation and feel of magic... It's brilliant, really, and incredibly original.
Which is all fine, since it makes it no different at all than "current era" Dragonlance, which was what I was getting at. It simply changes the identities of the ones behind the scenes manipulating things from gods to dragons, rakshasa, whoever.
FTR, I'm not trying to disparage Eberron. I just find it curious that it is pointed to as an example of being different from Dragonlance in specific ways, when it actually isn't.
So are you trying to argue for or against DL, cause this seems like an argument not to have it next year. Avoiding repetition and all.
Edit - Gahhh! Mathias beat me to it.
You keep approaching guns from a balance standpoint. I don't care if they're the most balanced tool ever conceptualized by Wizards, I don't want guns in D&D. Balance has nothing to do with it.
I'm not approaching it from Balance, I'm approaching it thematically. First is the theme, second is balance. It's easy to have a world where guns fit readily and willingly.
I do have to say though, if you like Full Plate in your D&D then if you were going for "period correct" there are guns too then. Full Plate was made to counter Guns.
I will point out in 1e, there was an adventure where the players got Disruptors and the like as treasure. (as in Future Tech energy weapons... ) Inside of a crashed Flying Saucer dungeon. So really Guns do have a place in D&D, at least according to the guy that you know.. made the game in the first place.
Also DL and Eberron are extremely different, I'd actually say they are opposites in alot of ways really. DL's pantheon seems all to eager to get involved, Eberron's? They give out christmas bonuses, and spending accounts (spells) but little else and do little if anything else.
That's just for starters of course.
That's not to say anything about it's Airships, Lightning Trains, Warforged, Halfings on Raptors... (I'm sorry... I have to go petition a campaign be started up in Eberron now in my group.....), Psionics, magical street lighting, running water and tons of other stuff which set it so far apart in terms of feel.
Yes, time travel is lame in certain cases. In Dragonlance it sort of is, simply because it is not a core conceit of the setting yet still manages to show up a lot in several important canonical places (from what I hear, I only saw it in the Legends trilogy and it seemed rather forced even then). Comparing that to a random suggestion for an adventure a DM could run in a campaign guide is rather mean-spirited.
Well, you're referring to the time travel that was a plot device in Dragonlance fiction, so it's not really fair to Dragonlance as a game setting. (Which is the same thing everyone does. And that's at least as mean-spirited as anything I said.)
As for it not being a core concept, in 3.5e, rules were presented to handle it. I still have yet to read it, but it's there, so it's accepted as a core concept.
Also, I don't see where you are getting "playing adventures where the outcome is already determined" in Eberron...
Except for playing during the original War of the Lance, playing Dragonlance doesn't have a predetermined outcome either. (And really, if you wanted, it's your own game, so you don't have to follow the predetermined outcome of the WotL at home.)
Krynn is one big world of open-ended adventure, and it's endured quite a bit of mudslinging in this thread, mostly fed by misinformation.
You know, I don't think it is a problem that Dragonlance is centered around massive war. It is a problem that Dragonlance is centered around a single war that was fought between the forces of good and evil and had a clear and unambiguous resolution. The Last War was none of those things, and ends up working much better as a general campaign hook, particularly since it isn't really over (it only stopped because everyone was too afraid of the Mourning to continue), and it has no clear way it will eventually end (in fact, there are hundreds of different ways for a possible "second Last War" to end, or even start for that matter).
One specific part of Dragonlance was centered around one specific war. The setting has a rich history, and a wide-open current and future era to adventure in. Anything else being said about it is a misconception.
Yes, Eberron dragons are manipulators who hide behind the scenes, trying to guide the world towards a path they believe is laid out in the Prophecy. Of course, they are hardly alone in their manipulations, and their manipulations are limited. It is not like anyone is controlling the entire setting of Eberron from behind the scenes. Actually, the main dragons who manipulate Eberron are a small faction of young and impulsive dragons who are going against the more "wait and see" mentality of their elders...
Which really isn't that much different than Dragonlance, which is really my point. ;)
And yes, there is a prophecy. No, no one has a clue what it says, not even the characters in the setting itself. The Prophecy doesn't exist to tell people how to run their game, it exists so that when a character in the game gets a Siberys dragonmark, he starts getting followed by enigmatic followers of mysterious societies who are trying to observe his importance and meaning within the greater Prophecy.
There is nothing in Dragonlance telling the players what has to happen when they adventure on Krynn either. Dragons meddle. Gods meddle. Different settings, same idea. Trust me, I don't find fault with either of them.
So, you're trying to say you like pure medieval fantasy in D&D, and don't want anything else. Well, that's fine, for your table. But that's never been all that D&D is, and that's not going to change with 4E.
Eberron is extremely different from Dragonlance. Airships and railroads and sentient golems, just like you mentioned, for starters. There's a completely different feel. Gods that are remote and mysterious, yet still grant power to the clerics, is vastly different from Dragonlance's absent-or-extremely-involved pantheon. Halflings have a nomadic society with raptor cavalry. Gnomes are... different. The original races, the psionics, the whole different presentation and feel of magic... It's brilliant, really, and incredibly original.
It's quite different. Well, except where I can draw parallels and all.
I'm not approaching it from Balance, I'm approaching it thematically. First is the theme, second is balance. It's easy to have a world where guns fit readily and willingly.
I do have to say though, if you like Full Plate in your D&D then if you were going for "period correct" there are guns too then. Full Plate was made to counter Guns.
I will point out in 1e, there was an adventure where the players got Disruptors and the like as treasure. (as in Future Tech energy weapons... ) Inside of a crashed Flying Saucer dungeon. So really Guns do have a place in D&D, at least according to the guy that you know.. made the game in the first place.
Who is talking about "period correct?"
I. Don't. Want. Guns. In. Core. D. &. D.
I'm not sure how much more clearly I can state that. (One adventure in a previous edition doesn't change that. Hell, Spelljammer as a setting doesn't change that. They had guns in that didn't they?)
Also DL and Eberron are extremely different, I'd actually say they are opposites in alot of ways really. DL's pantheon seems all to eager to get involved, Eberron's? They give out christmas bonuses, and spending accounts (spells) but little else and do little if anything else.
Except those pesky dragons who are pulling strings behind the scenes. I compared the DL gods to Eberron dragons. Don't use straw man arguments.
That's just for starters of course.
That's not to say anything about it's Airships, Lightning Trains, Warforged, Halfings on Raptors... (I'm sorry... I have to go petition a campaign be started up in Eberron now in my group.....), Psionics, magical street lighting, running water and tons of other stuff which set it so far apart in terms of feel.
Is there a romanesque minotaur nation? A displaced nation of elves? A nation of draconians? Gnomes living in a mountain building steam-powered machines that tend to blow up? Sea-elves? An order of mages directly dependent on the cycles of the three moons? Kender?
I'm well aware that Dragonlance is different in many ways from Eberron. My point from this morning was that things that have been pointed to as "lame" have pretty clear parallels in Eberron, which has been brought up many times as an example of being so much different from those same things.
So anytime you want to give up the straw man arguments and have a dialog, just let me know.
I. Don't. Want. Guns. In. Core. D. &. D.
Well, everything is core. So, that = you never want to see guns in D&D. At. All. Doesn't matter if the introduce a high seas adventure campaign, regardless of how compelling a setting it is, or how many players it draws in. Doesn't matter if they use magical guns like multiple folks have specifically pointed out, 100% blackpowder free. Doesn't matter if they reprint Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, no matter how classic, exciting, fun and unique that adventure happened to be for us old timers who played it way back in AD&D.
You are certainly welcome to that opinion, but it is unrealistic to expect your view to prevail in this regard. How many folks are *****ing and moaning about psionics, based purely on theme? How many folks don't want to see Dark Sun simply because they don't want to see post-apocalyptic anything? How many folks dislike Eberron by simple virtue of it being pulp adventure? Yet, with the exception of Dark Sun (so far), ALL of that and more is core. Because everything is core. How many folks hate that drow are a core race now, as are gnolls, minotaurs, with more "monster" races undoubtedly coming?
I'd say it is highly likely we will get guns in a setting at some point in 4E. Just like EVERYTHING else in core (which is everything), it is 100% optional, and up to the DM and players to come to a consensus with regards to the inclusion of firearms in their campaign.
Well, everything is core. So, that = you never want to see guns in D&D. At. All. Doesn't matter if the introduce a high seas adventure campaign, regardless of how compelling a setting it is, or how many players it draws in. Doesn't matter if they use magical guns like multiple folks have specifically pointed out, 100% blackpowder free.
Correct.
Doesn't matter if they reprint Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, no matter how classic, exciting, fun and unique that adventure happened to be for us old timers who played it way back in AD&D.
An adventure is considered core? I'm not sure about that, but if so, then yeah. I don't think it is, but I could be wrong.
If it's not, then that would be a great way to "get guns into D&D" for those who really want them. Then they wouldn't be core, but you'd have them created and playtested by Wizards. I wouldn't play the adventure, but I don't play every single adventure released by WotC in the first place.
You are certainly welcome to that opinion, but it is unrealistic to expect your view to prevail in this regard.
Yes, it's my opinion, which is what I've said all along. The topic shouldn't even really be discussed any further at this point, but the implication was made that a link posted to show off some form of balance would change people's arguments. I simply stated that I don't care about any balance issues, I simply don't want guns in core.
How many folks are *****ing and moaning about psionics, based purely on theme? How many folks don't want to see Dark Sun simply because they don't want to see post-apocalyptic anything? How many folks dislike Eberron by simple virtue of it being pulp adventure? Yet, with the exception of Dark Sun (so far), ALL of that and more is core. Because everything is core. How many folks hate that drow are a core race now, as are gnolls, minotaurs, with more "monster" races undoubtedly coming?
I don't know who is complaining about that stuff, but it sure isn't me. I'm a little scared psionics will outshine arcane magic, but it's still a pretty cool concept. (And I've never once voiced my concerns over psionics until now.) I don't have a problem with Eberron either, except the airships, railroads, and warforged; otherwise, it looks like a pretty cool setting.
I'd say it is highly likely we will get guns in a setting at some point in 4E.
You might be right. In which case, as I said pages ago, I'll just stop purchasing WotC D&D products. I'll speak with my wallet, no biggie. You'll get what you want, I won't have to deal with it.
Just like EVERYTHING else in core (which is everything), it is 100% optional, and up to the DM and players to come to a consensus with regards to the inclusion of firearms in their campaign.
And as I also said pages ago, if I'm at a table, and guns are part of the game, I'll kindly excuse myself from the group. No arguments. No fits. I just won't partake in the game.
And as I also said pages ago, if I'm at a table, and guns are part of the game, I'll kindly excuse myself from the group. No arguments. No fits. I just won't partake in the game.
And you are welcome to that opinion. Keep in mind, however, that is comes across as extraordinarily unreasonable. WotC providing OPTIONS for players to partake in or no is reasonable. Boycotting a game based around including those options you wish to for a specific campaign, however, really isn't.
Boycotting D&D because of Shadow, or Psionics, or alchemy, or monster racial write-ups, or swordmages, or avengers, or not including druids in the very first PHB, or including Dragonlance, or including Dark Sun, or including Mystara, or including Ravenloft, or including Spelljammer, or including the city of Sigil, or the City of Brass, or angels and demons and devils and the heavens and hells, or gods at all, or a lack thereof, and much, much more, is a rather unreasonable stance.
If you like certain tropes, certain conventions, if you prop up certain sacred cows while gladly smashing down others, you simply include them. You don't boycott the entire game, you boycott the product specifically that you don't like, and purchase that which you do like. If you dislike pulp, yet love high fantasy, you don't purchase Eberron, and you purchase Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance and Greyhawk. If you dislike divine content, yet love nature-focused, you purchase the latter, and refuse to purchase the former.
Boycotting the entire line, however, when the bulk of the game brings you enjoyment, yet specific items are not to your particular liking, part of your favored genre? Again, it comes across as strikingly unreasonable.
The whole point of having so much disparate information, so many settings, so many options, is not to lump them all together, but to pick and choose that which you like. Would you honestly say that someone who hates, say, the Forgotten Realms, or even merely drow, should boycott the entire game once the FRPG and FRCG and SToSG are released? Because that is remarkably silly, IMHO.
1) Guns really are completely off-topic for this thread, and I'd rather not keep discussing them. We all know my position on them at this point anyway.
2) I really don't care if people don't think I'm being reasonable about it. I don't like elves, but I don't quit playing because there are elves, half-elves, and eladrin. I'm not too keen on the demonic aspects of tieflings, sorcerers, and warlocks, but I don't protest those. Guns, however, are where I draw the line of things I cannot stomach in D&D.
As far as D&D being my "favorite" game, I can't say that. I really enjoy playing. Honestly, I think about D&D more than its fair share if time. However, I could give it up in a heartbeat. I've got more to do each day than time to do it. If it's not an experience I want to have, I won't bother. My history with D&D is...complicated. I go back to the BECMI sets, but I've spent a lot of the past 25 years inactive.
As I've said, if guns get into D&D, I'll stop buying product. It's not a threat, it's just my stance. I'll continue to play with my group as long as no one uses a gun. I'll also continue to run an infrequent game at home with my wife and kids. I've got more than enough material between 2 PHBs, the FR sourcebooks, 2 MMs, a DMG, MotP, OG, Dungeon Delve, Arcane Power, Blackdirge's Dungeon Denizens, Quintessential Wizard, and even a Eberron Player's Guide (I wanted the Artificer.) Those books, plus a ton of 3e books that have never been opened, plus all the material in DDi, and 1200+ minis and counting, is more than enough to play without ever needing to purchase another product.
So now let's either try to steer this conversation back to Dragonlance, or let it rest.
House rule out all core "crap" you don't like. Its what I do.;)
On topic. More dragonlance passed the 5th age please. Don't cut anything out because thats WRONG and its FAIL to do so. I wanna know what happens to solamnia with the "markham child". I wanna see what happens with the sorcerers and the mages, the mystics and the draconians (NOT dragonborn, but draconians). Did the storm dragon die or not? What happens with valthonis? Is it really butter? These questions need to be answered in future products and we need to have NEW ideas for the game. Not old ideas with a new coat of paint.
Forgotten realms and (IIRC) eberron have both progressed. Darksun will probably take place AFTER the second fall of Rajaat (or is that the third fall.:D ). Dragonlance needs to move forward, not backward and to not move at all would be horrible.
"Oh look, I get to play 4e's version of the war of the lance"! We've been playing that same adventure for ever, but hey! Its 4e! NO! Its been done to death, the heroes of the lance are dead, move forward and bring us new heroes just as interesting! Bring us a NEW dragonlance. With or without guns, IDC, just something new beyond the 5th age.
PS: So much happened from the chaos war to the return of the gods to the rise of solamnia that to remove that would be criminal.
These are the official D&D Miniatures stat cards for the PHB Heroes Series 2 miniatures set. If you notice, there are stats for the Dragon Highlord (Male Human Paladin from Divine Heroes 2) and Qualinesti Defender (Female Human Fighter from Martial Heroes 3).
I believe it will be Darksun in 2010 or another setting, not DragonLance. I wouldn't be surprised if Wizards ends up having a 3PP doing the setting instead, again.
Dragonlance is the greatest fantasy setting out there! Eberron and the Forgotten Realms are fine, but Dragonlance has the meat still on the bone.
All of this is of course my opinion. I don't mean to ruffle any feathers.
Hlethvagi
I really want to see the Dragonlance setting get the treatment next. I love the world, and after the War of Souls, the setting has so much to offer. The elves in the Vale of Silence, the Rise of Solamnia, Samoval and the evil in Qualinesti, the Minotaurs in Silvanesti. I could go on, but you should get the idea.
Dragonlance is the greatest fantasy setting out there! Eberron and the Forgotten Realms are fine, but Dragonlance has the meat still on the bone.
All of this is of course my opinion. I don't mean to ruffle any feathers.
Hlethvagi
I agree with you on the post WoS era. The age of mortals is a great period to play in. It includes everything from the history of DL along with new content, new races and new threats. I'd like to see what happens with the scarecrow and the new goblin nation. I'd like to see how the minotaurs handle the future as I do not believe they will ever be expelled from silvanesti. I'd like to see the new age of solamnia, after jaymes markham passes the mantle to his child. I'd like to see what happens to the desolation and the affliction of the kender. So much potential!
As for the eberron on FR comment.:D I'm not a FR gamer. I'v got everything from FR (all editions) but have never had the motivation to run it, so I don't know how it plays in its current state. As for eberron, Well I personally feel that in many ways (atleast in gaming context) its stronger than dragonlance because its not as restrictive.
I'v never been one to stick with the guidelines of a setting so its not a big issue to me, but if we were to play it out of the box, eberron offers more choices to begin with. I'm not saying eberron is better, I'm saying they are equal in the respect of gaming. Both are fun, both are unique and both offer very different things.
I didn't say I'd stop playing D&D or even 4e. I said they'd lose me (meaning as a customer) forever.
Sure, that's extreme, but not illogical. I firmly disagree with gunpowder in my fantasy. If it is introduced, I refuse to play in a setting that allows it. If my DM allowed it, I would "take my ball and go home." I would also never, ever, under any circumstances, allow gunpowder in my games.
As I've said, I can't stomach the thought of a rogue sneak attacking someone with a pistol, or a paladin walking around with a machine gun.
Thanks, but no thanks.
The same thing applies. The argument is that if things have to be removed it creates hardship for the DM. Of course, people will always try to manipulate an argument later to suit their needs. This time, it happens to work in favor of supporting my point, rather than against me.
Well, this brings up a number of issues. Personally, I despise the idea of Points of Light. It is more restricting to DMs, rather than less.
The "everything is core" plus PoL does restrict WotC, and that's their own fault. These two paradigms were a mistake and I'd love for them to retconn them.
As for picking and choosing what you allow in a game, you and I agree. A DM has every right to restrict material in his campaign. Unfortunately, the players have to deal with whatever that decision is, whether they like it or not. Personally, if WotC put firearms in core and my DM allowed it, I'd just gather my books and dice, and walk out for good. Yes, it is "take my ball and go home" but gunpowder runs counter to every idea in fantasy I hold. Guns have their place in RPGs, but not this RPG. Don't even get me started on Eberron...
I'm just going to point out that gunpowder has been around in europe (being used in the cannon) since 1248, at least, and used even earlier in other parts of the world (China, mainly). Considering that DnD, and many fantasy settings, use material that comes from far far ahead of those points in time. Even the longbow only came into real use in Europe about 100 years after the Cannon was being used, and Full Plate armor has a similar fate, but even farther in time than the longbow.
I agree that pistols, muskets, and (god forbid) rifles or automatic weapons have little place in DnD, or most fantasy settings. But gun powder and explosives have been used for a long time, and I don't think that it's at all unreasonable to expect a cannon in DnD.
Go here for the stat cards. http://www.ddmguild.com/downloads/revised/cards/PHH-02.pdf
Originally Posted by AlioTheFool
One specific part of Dragonlance was centered around one specific war. The setting has a rich history, and a wide-open current and future era to adventure in. Anything else being said about it is a misconception.
I have to say that Dragonlance is a very war-heavy setting. The war of the lance was only a single war. We have many other wars to consider. Going AFTER the WotL, we have the chaos war, the blue ladies war (when kit was the major threat to ansalon), the war of souls, the solamnia war, the short lived elven war against the khur tribes (not really a war, but basically).
Point is, dragonlance is conflict heavy. Large scale conflict. One of the things I enjoy about the setting.
Originally Posted by AlioTheFool
I don't have a problem with Eberron either, except the airships, railroads, and warforged; otherwise, it looks like a pretty cool setting.
Thats one thing where you and I differ. The entire reason eberron appeals to me is because its different. It has a more advanced world than DL so I can enjoy newer concepts. I'v been playing sword and spell D&D for a long time and I completely enjoy being able to hop on the lightning rail, fly in an airship or play as a warforged.
Originally Posted by AlioTheFool
Guns have their place in RPGs, but not this RPG. Don't even get me started on Eberron...
I agree with this to a point. Gnomish fire-arms can be a lot of fun and very dangerous. Also, Eberron doesn't have guns as far as I know. It's got wands, but so does every D&D setting. Wands are the D&D version of fire arms.
Originally Posted by thaX
I believe it will be Darksun in 2010 or another setting, not DragonLance. I wouldn't be surprised if Wizards ends up having a 3PP doing the setting instead, again.
I gotta disagree here. There are strong hints of Dragonlance being the next setting just like Darksun. Although I would love for a third party to design the 4e Dragonlance. I know the perfect company to do it too. MWP.:D
Originally Posted by BurningRose
But gun powder and explosives have been used for a long time, and I don't think that it's at all unreasonable to expect a cannon in DnD.
Ground artillery bombards, sea-ship cannons, castle wall cannons. None of that is unreasonable for D&D. Even single shot, blackpowder pistols and rifles are not unreasonable. 2e included a rifle in its PHB. The Arquebus, a primitive musket. Although even the phb said a DM might not allow it, so ask before buying it for 500gp.
But its all about flavor really. Guns don't seem to do anymore damage than bows or crossbows, but cost a lot more. I house ruled them into Dragonlance for my players who wanted them. But those players soon understood the serious pain of maintaining them and lugging them around. One of my player spend 4,000 steel on a longbarrel diamond shot rifle (enchanted diamond bullets) and it got taken from him and melted down to make armor when his party was captured. He was angry the first day, but after he made his money back, he was actually happy to be rid of it.
I'm really hoping for Dark Sun since it was one of my top three favorite campaign settings. I used to love Dragonlance and it was my favorite of all the settings, until Dragons of Summer Flame ruined the whole setting for me. Now I just mourn the loss of a great campaign world and cherish my memories of everything before Dragons of Summer Flame.
Why did summer flame ruin it for you?
Please return discussion to the topic of the thread, or it may need to be closed.
Why did summer flame ruin it for you?
Can't speak for Bigguy, but the second generation characters weren't resonant, the setting changes didn't seem to understand what had made the setting exciting to begin with, and the major character deaths were abrupt, largely meaningless, and felt intended to accomplish little more than shock value.
Can't speak for Bigguy, but the second generation characters weren't resonant, the setting changes didn't seem to understand what had made the setting exciting to begin with, and the major character deaths were abrupt, largely meaningless, and felt intended to accomplish little more than shock value.
Well I felt that the character deaths meaning was clear. Not ever death is heroic or expected. Sometimes good people die before their time and its hard to accept the loss. It also helped shape and develope Palin's character.
I'm curious as to know what made the setting exciting for YOU that the second generation failed to accomplish.
Well I felt that the character deaths meaning was clear. Not ever death is heroic or expected. Sometimes good people die before their time and its hard to accept the loss. It also helped shape and develope Palin's character.
I'm curious as to know what made the setting exciting for YOU that the second generation failed to accomplish.
In a novel every death of a major character should have some kind of resonance or heroic end.
In a novel every death of a major character should have some kind of resonance or heroic end.
The only way the death of Flint couldn't resonate within you is if you are emotionally detached from the character. If you're emotionally detached from any character, you won't feel the pain of the loss.
The first time I read Chronicles, I felt nothing for Sturm. His death was simply a soldier's death. After later reading of his interaction with Steel post-mortem, his character became more real to me, and therefore, on subsequent readings of Dragons of Winter Night, his death affected me far more profoundly.
The first time I read Chronicles I was moved by the death of Flint. There was nothing "heroic" about it. Hell, it wasn't even a "noble" death. He was simply "too tired" to continue on. It affected me, perhaps more than someone else my age at the time, because I had just suffered a major loss in my life that no one that age should have to suffer.
Just because you didn't have an emotional connection doesn't make the character's death less moving to anyone else.
In case anyone missed it, it was about the PHB Miniatures Series 2 featuring two Dragonlance miniatures, the one we already knew about was the Male Human Paladin, which was officially made into the Dragon Highlord for DDM play. The second was the Female Elf Fighter, which officially is the Qualinesti Defender.
Go here for the stat cards. http://www.ddmguild.com/downloads/revised/cards/PHH-02.pdf
You do know that those names are created by the DDM Guild and not WotC, right?
As for gunpowder I can accept that up to a level as seen in the Lord of the Rings movies. That's about it. But if I recall correctly this is a moot point because hasn't WotC already straight out said no firearms in D&D?
You do know that those names are created by the DDM Guild and not WotC, right?
Yes, and I do know that the DDM stuff is officially sanctioned, can be used in DCI tournaments, and is written by WotC employees.
I think it's pretty hard to conceive of them putting out Dark Sun novels if Dark Sun is not the next campaign world. And they are. So Dark Sun it is.QUOTE]
I know this might be seen as wishful thinking, but might they be putting out Dark Sun novels to get people ready for the 2011 setting. I know they have put out a ton a DL books in the last few years, and didn't support the setting in any RPG way. Maybe they want to test the waters.
Dragons of Summer Flame and all the books after it killed everything that made Dragonlance what it was, at least in my opinion.
Yeah basically what was already said, I was looking forward to the adventures of the next generation of heroes. Instead I get a bunch of people I loved getting killed off with less thought than it takes to sneeze and the world I had come to love being turned into some warped version of it's self I could have never in my wildest dreams imagined.
Dragons of Summer Flame and all the books after it killed everything that made Dragonlance what it was, at least in my opinion.
Yeah, even when I still loved Dragonlance, I vowed to never use the setting from the Second Generation book or after. Before that point only.
The only way the death of Flint couldn't resonate within you is if you are emotionally detached from the character. If you're emotionally detached from any character, you won't feel the pain of the loss.
The first time I read Chronicles, I felt nothing for Sturm. His death was simply a soldier's death. After later reading of his interaction with Steel post-mortem, his character became more real to me, and therefore, on subsequent readings of Dragons of Winter Night, his death affected me far more profoundly.
The first time I read Chronicles I was moved by the death of Flint. There was nothing "heroic" about it. Hell, it wasn't even a "noble" death. He was simply "too tired" to continue on. It affected me, perhaps more than someone else my age at the time, because I had just suffered a major loss in my life that no one that age should have to suffer.
Just because you didn't have an emotional connection doesn't make the character's death less moving to anyone else.
I dont really rember the books too well but I was responding to the poster above who said not every death is heroic. In a fantasy novel the deaths of every character should be heroic.
Though this thread does make me want to reread the original three novels then find the ones between them and summer flame so I can understand whats going on. Though I imagine the time hoping will still make me want to gag, who knows though I may be pleasantly surprised.
As for fire arms DnD is a very broad genre and if you can fit in airships and warforged you can fit fire arms.
Without amazing stories and books to give it a deep history for many gamers, I know tons of people who would have wished they axed the dang setting once 4.0 started.
What makes Eberron so special anyhow...Ooh big cities and intrigue..?
Woohoo.. any good DM had intrigue and mystery as part of their campaign...how bout those flying ships.. hmmn.. that sounds like Spelljammer....which I believe also had its connections to Dragonlance. Besides who wants to play Dungeons & Dragons in a world where Dragons are not around much to confront (Eberron) bleh...
Dragonlance is the CLASSIC setting for D&D for many people. Its novels sold better than just about every other D&D based novel series without counting the Drizzt series. Their characters are more than just that, people identify with them, they have a real connection to more than just one character (ie Drizzt) I would say most gamers could rattle off more about the Dragonlance setting than any other setting out there.
They have more fans and more fans = more money. It is really the smartest bet to redo the series. It hasnt had Wizards support since 2nd edition which also means many people would be dying to see what they do to reinvent it.
Ravenloft was a direct spin-off of Dragonlance and I would place bets on it being a great way to connect it back as well. The Horror aspect is missing in most D&D games and worlds.
So says the Chaotic Evil Elven Bard/Ranger who's point buy is in the 60s!!!
I think is all respects to those people who jumped on the Eberron bandwagon...no offense to those who love it, but I find it pretty lame.
Its one of the greatest settings ever released.
What makes Eberron so special anyhow...Ooh big cities and intrigue..?
Lots of things make it great: A fresh spin on old ideas (the undying worshiping elves, the predatory dinosaur riding halflings, and so on and so forth) ; some of the neatest new setting specific races to enter the game in a very long time; a setting that actually FOSTERS intrigue (as opposed to having intrigue artificially added in by the DM); an atmosphere that isn't a typical medieval European fantasy (the presence of magical items that act as allegories for trains, planes, and automobiles, among other things); really exciting/interesting plot hooks (the day of mourning, Vol, the dragonmarked prophesy, the cold war attitude of its populace, the intrigue intrinsic to the dragonmarked houses, and so on and so forth); and so on and so forth.
Woohoo.. any good DM had intrigue and mystery as part of their campaign...
Yea. A DM could add intrigue and mystery into any campaign. But, not all campaigns foster intrigue and mystery right out of the box. Thing is, when every orc is evil, every elf is good, and alignment comes hard coded in black and white, intrigue suffers.
how bout those flying ships.. hmmn.. that sounds like Spelljammer....which I believe also had its connections to Dragonlance.
1) The flying ships of Eberron are nothing like the flying ships of Spelljammer, except in a superficial aesthetic sense.
2) The connection between spelljammer and dragonlance is in and of itself fairly superficial, and practically non existent. The world of dragonlance isn't a place that feels like a world entering into the early years of the industrial revolution. Its populace doesn't regularly see magichnological innovations. Its capital cities are not major hubs for flying ships. It doesn't feature magical trains. Its a typical medieval European fantasy. It will not appeal to players who are not interested in playing a typical medieval European fantasy.
Besides who wants to play Dungeons & Dragons in a world where Dragons are not around much to confront (Eberron) bleh...
Me, for one.
Dragonlance is the CLASSIC setting for D&D for many people.
Classic doesn't mean good.
Its novels sold better than just about every other D&D based novel series without counting the Drizzt series.
Do you have the numbers and citation to back up that opinion as fact?
Their characters are more than just that, people identify with them, they have a real connection to more than just one character (ie Drizzt) I would say most gamers could rattle off more about the Dragonlance setting than any other setting out there.
1) I don't identify with any of the Dragonlance characters or fiction.
2) In my life I have only known 1 single player who identified with the Dragonlance characters and fiction.
3) Do you have the numbers and citation to prove that most gamers can rattle off more about Dragonlance than any other setting? Dragonlance has certainly never interested me...
They have more fans and more fans = more money. It is really the smartest bet to redo the series.
Can you prove it has more fans? I know I wouldn't spend a penny on Dragonlance sourcebooks...
It hasnt had Wizards support since 2nd edition which also means many people would be dying to see what they do to reinvent it.
The same could be said to be true of many other settings, including Dark Sun; a setting which gets a lot more internet traffic here in the WotC forums. Something which I think would suggest that Dark Sun is actually more popular than a setting. At the very least, it suggests that more people here on the WotC forums are interested in Dark Sun as a setting.
Ravenloft was a direct spin-off of Dragonlance and I would place bets on it being a great way to connect it back as well. The Horror aspect is missing in most D&D games and worlds.
Ravenloft would be an amazing setting for them to re-release. But a direct spin off of Dragonlance? What are you talking about? It had 1 dark lord in it which was from Dragonlance. But it also had characters that came from every campaign setting in it. Like Spelljammer/Planescape, it was multi-setting spanning in scope. All worlds are touched by the mists...
Sorry, but I really don't agree with your opinion...
Your complaints are not those of a person familiar with the setting, but someone who asked a few questions and decided it wasn't worth learning any more. This is a mistake.
Your complaints are not those of a person familiar with the setting, but someone who asked a few questions and decided it wasn't worth learning any more. This is a mistake.
In all fairness, his complaints might also be those of a person who really likes Medieval European fantasies, and doesn't care so much for settings that deviate from such fantasies.
Dragonlance is the CLASSIC setting for D&D for many people.
Actually, i think most people, even if they don't play the setting, would cite Greyhawk as the classic setting. It was, after all, the first published setting for D&D.
Its novels sold better than just about every other D&D based novel series without counting the Drizzt series.
I would disagree with this. The Forgotten Realms has had more novels written for it than Dragonlance. That's a good indicator of where more of the novel money is going. If Dragonlance was selling so much better WotC would devote more resources to its novels than FRs.
Their characters are more than just that, people identify with them, they have a real connection to more than just one character (ie Drizzt) I would say most gamers could rattle off more about the Dragonlance setting than any other setting out there.
Really? I have met a lot of gamers and more of them can rattle off more about Greyhawk and the FR than Dragonlance.
They have more fans and more fans = more money. It is really the smartest bet to redo the series. It hasnt had Wizards support since 2nd edition which also means many people would be dying to see what they do to reinvent it.
If this were the case, they would have done Dragonlance in house for 3rd edition.
In all fairness, his complaints might also be those of a person who really likes Medieval European fantasies, and doesn't care so much for settings that deviate from such fantasies.
I disagree. Among his complaints was that Eberron wasn't all that different, claiming that airships and intrigue were all that really made it unique. This, about a setting with jungle-dwelling drow, freaky undeath-crazy elves, and large criminal organizations made up of tiny people.
I disagree. Among his complaints was that Eberron wasn't all that different, claiming that airships and intrigue were all that really made it unique. This, about a setting with jungle-dwelling drow, freaky undeath-crazy elves, and large criminal organizations made up of tiny people.
They prefer the term "little people." :P
They prefer the term "little people." :P
"Little" is not an official size category in 4e. So they have to be tiny or small people. ;)
"Little" is not an official size category in 4e. So they have to be tiny or small people. ;)
I was actually not using rules terms, in this instance. But yeah, I think you get what I'm saying.
EDIT: I forgot to mention the halfling dinosaur cavalry.
I like how one persons thoughts are not as important as yours. All I was doing was saying my opinions as you clearly did after.
I regards to my postings, last I checked DarkSun novels have never been on the NY Times Best-seller list. (Dragonlance has).
As per Ravenloft, perhaps you should do some more history checking. It was created by the creators of Dragonlance and the character who spawned the ENTIRE setting and world was from Dragonlance. (and as a matter of point there were more than one overlords in Ravenloft from the Dragonlance setting). It later became an accessible place from other realms.
As per Eberron. I play/run campaigns in that world and for me Fantasy is fantasy and incorporating technology ruins it for me. But that is a personal opinion like all else I have voiced.
I still think Dragonlance is the best choice and we will see what happens. After all there are SO MANY elements in the new 4.0 game that truly reflect and emphasize key parts of the World of Krynn
I was not comparing Dragonlance to FR or Creyhawk, so I find all of your comments confused and out of place.
I play/run campaigns in that world and for me Fantasy is fantasy and incorporating technology ruins it for me.
I'm wondering when things stop counting as "normal" and start counting as "technology" (Oooooh! Scary!).
Is a catapult okay?
Is a cannon okay?
Is gunpowder okay?
Are pistols okay?
Is a longbow okay?
What about suits of full plate?
You may find the last two odd. But they both came into any real use two hundred years after the cannon in Europe, and at the same time as personal firearms were also coming into use. Even things like the Rapier and common steel developed after that.
I'm not arguing with you about your opinion, or trying to change it. You like your fantasy a certain way, and that's cool. I'm just wondering, out of curiosity and confusion, where you and others like you draw the line, and why.
And Strahd is in Open Graves. Obviously Ravenloft is the next setting! :P
Oh, I really do wish this was true. Of all the campaign settings, Ravenloft at least was unique.
A land where the Undead are actual Rulers of realms of mortals. MMMmmm!!!!
Back to Cyber-Dave...
I like how one persons thoughts are not as important as yours. All I was doing was saying my opinions as you clearly did after.
Part of your opinion relates to the opinions of others. For that aspect of your opinion to have any validity, you need to back it up with evidence, numbers, and citation. If you can't do that, you shouldn't make claims as to the opinions of others. You should stick to only voicing your own. As for your own opinion, like I said, I strongly disagree with it. Considering how many people jumped up in defense of Eberron as a response to your opinion, its fairly obvious that (some) others do as well.
I regards to my postings, last I checked DarkSun novels have never been on the NY Times Best-seller list. (Dragonlance has).
Sorry, care to give the date that the last time a Dragonlance book was on the best sellers list? Just because something was popular in the days of TSR doesn't mean it still is.
As per Ravenloft, perhaps you should do some more history checking. It was created by the creators of Dragonlance and the character who spawned the ENTIRE setting and world was from Dragonlance. (and as a matter of point there were more than one overlords in Ravenloft from the Dragonlance setting). It later became an accessible place from other realms.
I'm sorry, but Ravenloft was written by Tracy & Laura Hickman. Now, Tracy and Laura Hickman did work on Dragonlance. But, just because they were writers both on the Dragonlance project, and for the original Ravenloft quest, doesn't mean that the quest took place in the world of Dragonlance, nor does it mean its fiction is intrinsically tied to Dragonlance. Saying that is like saying that is like saying that the Points of Light world is in fact Eberron because James Wyatt has a writing credit both for the original Ebberon Campaign Setting and for the 4e PHB. Ravenloft was originally published as a stand alone Advanced Dungeons & Dragons adventure without any ties to ANY key world. It was a stand alone quest. Count Strahd is not (as far as I know) a dragonlance character. The character never existed until the Ravenloft quest was written. If you are going to claim otherwise, I would like you to provide evidence and citation.
As per Eberron. I play/run campaigns in that world and for me Fantasy is fantasy and incorporating technology ruins it for me. But that is a personal opinion like all else I have voiced.
And I like campaign settings with internal consistency. In a world where magic as prevalent as it seems to be per the standard D&D rules, it would seem to make sense that cultures would begin turning magic towards the end of making their personal lives easier (ala magical technology). Our opinions differ. I think Eberron is a breath of fresh air.
I still think Dragonlance is the best choice and we will see what happens. After all there are SO MANY elements in the new 4.0 game that truly reflect and emphasize key parts of the World of Krynn
Personally, I think Dark Sun espouses more of the elements of 4e than Dragonlance ever did.
Oh, I really do wish this was true. Of all the campaign settings, Ravenloft at least was unique.
A land where the Undead are actual Rulers of realms of mortals. MMMmmm!!!!
In my opinion, Open Grave WAS the campaign setting. It basically spells out all you need to run in a Ravenloft inspired campaign. If you want actual maps get the old modules.
Ditto for Al-Qaeda or whatever the Arabian Nights setting was called: it is just a Middle Eastern corner of the Forgotten Realms: plunk in a map and a module and there ya go.
EDIT: oops .. Al Qadim ...
I think it's pretty hard to conceive of them putting out Dark Sun novels if Dark Sun is not the next campaign world. And they are. So Dark Sun it is.
I would think that the books themselves would dissuade any choice of using Dark Sun as a campaign setting.
Behold the Amazon Sales rankings for "The Verdant Passage", which as far as I could tell is the introductory novel to Dark Sun: #301,852
Now lets take any Dragonlance book at random — how about Sanctuary, which is the first book in the Elven Exile trilogy — not exactly a trilogy anyone but a Dragonlance fan would read: #244,716
As for Dragons of Autumn Twilight: #46,660
If WOTC publishes Dark Sun before Dragonlance, every designer in on that decision should be immediately fired for failing the investors and shareholders of Hasbro.
It would be an easy bet to say a Dragonlance CS would sell more copies in the first week then Darksun would sell during its entire run.
As we all know, however, game designers aren't always the best businessmen, so this isn't exactly evidence.
Sorry, care to give the date that the last time a Dragonlance book was on the best sellers list? Just because something was popular in the days of TSR doesn't mean it still is.
2003. Dragons of Vanished Moon by MWTH. TSR was long dead at that point. There may have even been more since. There have also been almost as many Dragonlance NY Times Bestsellers as there have been Dark Sun novels.
I would think that the books themselves would dissuade any choice of using Dark Sun as a campaign setting.
If the majority of Dark Sun's fans didn't/don't like the Dark Sun novels, then your evidence is worthless. The sales of the novels would not indicate that the setting is any less popular than Dragonlance. Considering the fact that the Dark Sun boards here get more activity than the Dragonlance boards do, and yet most of the posters on the Dark Sun boards adamantly complain about the quality of the Dark Sun novel line (regularly stating that the setting was amazing, but the novels by far and large only harmed the setting), I would suggest that evidence suggests that this is exactly the case.
I don't purchase D&D novels ever. I wouldn't spend a penny on Dragonlance. I would happily buy every Dark Sun product released.
2003. Dragons of Vanished Moon by MWTH. TSR was long dead at that point. There may have even been more since. There have also been almost as many Dragonlance NY Times Bestsellers as there have been Dark Sun novels.
Interesting. I didn't know Dragonlance novels were still doing well.
Interesting. I didn't know Dragonlance novels were still doing well.
They have always done well. The current novels are doing well too. Which makes the idea of them not continuing in 2010 (probably not permanent) very odd.
They have always done well. The current novels are doing well too. Which makes the idea of them not continuing in 2010 (probably not permanent) very odd.
An editor mentioned that he was taken of editing on Magic The Gathering novels in order to work on Dark Sun products in 2010. Perhaps they are putting Dragonlance novels on hold for 2010 to focus on the 2010 setting released, and then will pick up on releasing new Dragonlance novels during the year that Dragonlance is released as a setting.
*shrug*
If people are buying them, I certainly think WotC should release them. Doesn't interest me at all, but that is neither here nor there. I hope you see more of the books you like soon.
An editor mentioned that he was taken of editing on Magic The Gathering novels in order to work on Dark Sun products in 2010. Perhaps they are putting Dragonlance novels on hold for 2010 to focus on the 2010 setting released, and then will pick up on releasing new Dragonlance novels during the year that Dragonlance is released as a setting.
*shrug*
If people are buying them, I certainly think WotC should release them. Doesn't interest me at all, but that is neither here nor there. I hope you see more of the books you like soon.
There are still plenty of Dragonlance novels that will still be in print, as well as a few announced first quarter novels (one is an omnibus). It isn't like they will be absent from the shelves, by any means. Who knows what they are planning at this point. We don't even know if the Dark Sun novels are linked to it coming out as a setting next year, just that it WILL come out as a setting some time.
If the majority of Dark Sun's fans didn't/don't like the Dark Sun novels, then your evidence is worthless. The sales of the novels would not indicate that the setting is any less popular than Dragonlance. Considering the fact that the Dark Sun boards here get more activity than the Dragonlance boards do, and yet most of the posters on the Dark Sun boards adamantly complain about the quality of the Dark Sun novel line (regularly stating that the setting was amazing, but the novels by far and large only harmed the setting), I would suggest that evidence suggests that this is exactly the case.
I don't purchase D&D novels ever. I wouldn't spend a penny on Dragonlance. I would happily buy every Dark Sun product released.
Wow, you almost proved me wrong.
How about this— Athas.org, the largest Dark Sun site I could find outside of WOTC, has their own forums. Add the measly 2,690 posts there to the 5,561 here at the Wizards forums and you have 8,251 posts.
Now head over to the Forums at the Dragonlance Nexus: add the 410,501 posts you find their to the 1,322 here at these forums and compare.
Let em help: 411,823 > 8,251 by nearly 50 to 1.
But of course you would gladly buy every Dark Sun product ever released, and wouldn't touch Dragonlance. That should matter to WOTC how?
Now back to you Cyber-Dave.
I back up all my support of my opinion and those other opinions I dont think I could get a citation for you, but... I have worked and attended over fifty conventions in the last few years and that is the consensus of information I have heard. I run games with a local RPG group of over 90 members and many have the same sentiments as me.
I dont know how old you are or what your deal is, but you ask for proof yet you have none yourself.
As per your Ravenloft comment.
[I'm sorry, but Ravenloft was written by Tracy & Laura Hickman. Now, Tracy and Laura Hickman did work on Dragonlance. But, just because they were writers both on the Dragonlance project, and for the original Ravenloft quest, doesn't mean that the quest took place in the world of Dragonlance, nor does it mean its fiction is intrinsically tied to Dragonlance. Saying that is like saying that is like saying that the Points of Light world is in fact Eberron because James Wyatt has a writing credit both for the original Ebberon Campaign Setting and for the 4e PHB. Ravenloft was originally published as a stand alone Advanced Dungeons & Dragons adventure without any ties to ANY key world. It was a stand alone quest. Count Strahd is not (as far as I know) a dragonlance character. The character never existed until the Ravenloft quest was written. If you are going to claim otherwise, I would like you to provide evidence and citation.]
Go back to the original Dragonlance setting and take a look in it, you will find a character card the has the name "Strahd" on it. He IS AND WILL ALWAYS be a Dragonlance character that the Hickmans created and brought over to a new world that he fostered and created. You can also go back and look at Lord Soth who was a former Knight turned Death Night whom also had a part in Ravenloft. And if you have ever met the Hickman's like I have at the conventions they can set you straight as well.
So lets end this nerd fight now that all the facts are on the table.
We can all prefer what we want and we can all venture as many guesses as we want, but Ill find out at Gencon in about 13 days and let ya know. ;)
In a novel every death of a major character should have some kind of resonance or heroic end.
Sturm and Tanin Majere were not really "major" characters. Only their names were.;)
Also, the only reason the dragonlance forum here on the wotc boards are not as active is because everyone uses the dragonlance nexus which is a super-fan-site. Dragonlance novels have been on the NY times best seller lists, including new ones. They dominate books stores in the RP section. Every borders or barns and noble I go to have 1 shelf of FR and 3-5 shelves of DL.
I'm a fan of DS, DL and EB. None are better than the others. Each offers something different and nothing is wrong with any of them.
[edit] Ravenloft is not part of the offical dragonlance universe. Its a seperate setting with no canon connection. Just as Krynnspace for spelljammer has no canon connection. That being said, ravenloft is connected to every single setting in one way or another but its not a part of those settings. Oh, and as for Strahd von Zarovich, No hes not a dragonlance character. He was created for the AD&D ravenloft adventure module.
Oh, and as for Strahd von Zarovich, No hes not a dragonlance character. He was created for the AD&D ravenloft adventure module.
Strahd was referenced in the original chronicles books. It was a very nice touch on a villain's background (I forget her name atm)
That said, Dragonlance has been a consistently successful and bestselling novel series. Just because you or your group have not kept up to date with it, care about it, like it, or whatever does not itself translate to a broad truth of the property.
In other words, "nobody I know likes Dragonlance" doesn't counter millions of copies of novels sold in the past 25 years and a brand that WotC recognizes is important, even if it doesn't know what to do with it yet.
Cheers,
Cam
That said, Dragonlance has been a consistently successful and bestselling novel series. Just because you or your group have not kept up to date with it, care about it, like it, or whatever does not itself translate to a broad truth of the property.
In other words, "nobody I know likes Dragonlance" doesn't counter millions of copies of novels sold in the past 25 years and a brand that WotC recognizes is important, even if it doesn't know what to do with it yet.
Cheers,
Cam
Cam, I already stated:
Interesting. I didn't know Dragonlance novels were still doing well.
And
If people are buying them, I certainly think WotC should release them. Doesn't interest me at all, but that is neither here nor there. I hope you see more of the books you like soon.
I didn't even state "nobody I know likes Dragonlance." I stated "only one person I know likes Dragonlance," and I admitted that that really doesn't mean much of anything. The scope of my experience is limited.
I hate Dragonlance. That is my personal taste. It doesn't appeal to my sensibilities. But that doesn't mean I think its a bad product, or that I don't want WotC to release it. If its popular, it should be released. End of story. I just hope they release Dark Sun first, because I happen to like Dark Sun quite a bit.
Strahd was referenced in the original chronicles books. It was a very nice touch on a villain's background (I forget her name atm)
Hmm, I only have the annotated trilogy and I'v never seen anything about Strahd. If you could provide the exact quote from the book, that would be great! Not to prove you're correct, but because I'm curious to know what it says. Or a page number if its in the annotated version and I happened to have missed it.
Note, however, that FR was basically gutted in order to make it more game-oriented and less novel-oriented. The old novels were rendered largely moot by an apocalyptic event and 100 years. Eberron, the most recent setting, has always been extremely game-oriented. The novels aren't considered canon, and the CG contains deliberate encouragement for DMs to come up with their own explanations for the key mysteries of the setting (no official explanation is provided).
WotC seems to be more interested in settings that play well than they are in settings that read well. In fact, this is a major theme of the whole edition, the idea that playing well is more important than reading well (read this article). For this reason, I feel like Dark Sun is both more likely and more appropriate as a setting choice than Dragonlance. This is not because Dragonlance is bad, but because it doesn't fit the current view of what a CS is supposed to do.
In regards to DRAGON9
I was not comparing Dragonlance to FR or Creyhawk, so I find all of your comments confused and out of place.
When you make broad sweeping statements like "it's the CLASSIC setting" or "It's novels have sold better than any other series" or "most gamers could rattle off more about the Dragonlance setting than any other setting out there," you most certainly are comparing it to pretty much every other setting.
Now, I'm not saying DL is a bad setting (although it'd be better if Kender genocide happened IMNSHO :D) only that you're making some pretty bold statements.
I didn't even state "nobody I know likes Dragonlance." I stated "only one person I know likes Dragonlance," and I admitted that that really doesn't mean much of anything. The scope of my experience is limited.
That part of my post was aimed generally at the several other people who chimed in to also say "nobody I know likes it." I get frustrated by people who use their immediate circle of gamer friends as a representative sample of the greater audience. It's like saying nobody you know lives in Alaska, therefore nobody lives in Alaska.
Cheers,
Cam
That part of my post was aimed generally at the several other people who chimed in to also say "nobody I know likes it." I get frustrated by people who use their immediate circle of gamer friends as a representative sample of the greater audience. It's like saying nobody you know lives in Alaska, therefore nobody lives in Alaska.
Cheers,
Cam
Not a particularly fair comparison. I can't exactly look at my circle of friends that I get together with for a rousing good time of living-in-places, and observe that no one is particularly interested in an evening's residence in Alaska.
But yes, one small sample group isn't going to give you particularly good data.
(not really following Ampersand and such...)
Wild idea here - I know some will yell about it being too WoW-like, and others will say "no monster PCs in my game!!!!" ... but what if a 4e update had death knights as a race, class, PP, or even Epic destiny?
That would fall inline with the evil aligned playable options in another thread. We need many options, not just one or two. Deathknights, vampires, liches, werethings, mummies, zombies, demons, devils, abominations and more!
so, it's August! anyone knows when there will be an official statement about the new Campaign?
(not really following Ampersand and such...)
Probably not until around christmas or after. (I'm just being cranky. lol)
so, it's August! anyone knows when there will be an official statement about the new Campaign?
(not really following Ampersand and such...)
Gencon....which is the weekend after next.
*Important stuff*
I think you have some good points there.
Hmmm. Whatever the next campaign is, it doesn't seem to have a space in the name, if one goes by Ampersand. Of course, it is just a big blank, so the space could be included in it. But it certainly is a big box for something like Dark Sun.
Bill was definitely being wily, one large blank instead of the several smaller ones used later in the paragraph.
Bel
Bill was definitely being wily, one large blank instead of the several smaller ones used later in the paragraph.
*Nods* Damn him!!! :P
Hmmm. Whatever the next campaign is, it doesn't seem to have a space in the name, if one goes by Ampersand. Of course, it is just a big blank, so the space could be included in it. But it certainly is a big box for something like Dark Sun.
It is 18-19 characters long, which makes it nearly(three characters short) twice the size neccesary for Dragonlance.:P
It is 18-19 characters long, which makes it nearly(three characters short) twice the size neccesary for Dragonlance.:P
*Thinks for a second* Oh no, oh no, oh no! We are going to have 20+ page threads now on how many characters that blank space is and what could fit in there. Damn you WoTC! Damn you, you have have doomed us!
It is 18-19 characters long, which makes it nearly(three characters short) twice the size neccesary for Dragonlance.:P
Yeah, but all of the other blanks are about twice the size of a normal character, so it is still possible. I was being facetious (on the internet :P) this isn't a clue by any means. Like I said, the lack of a space doesn't even rule Dark Sun out.
It is 18-19 characters long, which makes it nearly(three characters short) twice the size neccesary for Dragonlance.:P
why do I see it was spaced for...
Yanking_Your _Chain 18 characters long
There is also an emphasis : "Hot Hot" :P
Ok, I get out of here -----> [ ]
The title of the ampersand is "Hot Hot Days of Summer", strange coincidence. The Blank space is a lure, maybe.
There is also an emphasis : "Hot Hot" :P
Ok, I get out of here -----> [ ]
So...the next campaign setting will be....
Bikini Ninja Island Paradise Adventures?
The title of the ampersand is "Hot Hot Days of Summer", strange coincidence. The Blank space is a lure, maybe.
There is also an emphasis : "Hot Hot" :P
Ok, I get out of here -----> [ ]
If we're going to speculate ridiculously...
The image of the blank image is "blackdot.jpg".
Black Dot. Dark Sun. :P
OR. The Black Dot will refer to a BRAND NEW campaign setting.
If we're going to speculate ridiculously...
The image of the blank image is "blackdot.jpg".
Black Dot. Dark Sun. :P
OR. The Black Dot will refer to a BRAND NEW campaign setting.
If that was the case, the sentence would read as follows:
For example, I’m going to reveal that our next campaign setting, following on the heels of Forgotten Realms and Eberron, is going to be BLACK DOT. Then, I might just talk about a special D&D BLACK DOT that Mike Mearls and I are designing for release next year. Should I also talk about BLACK DOT, BLACK DOT, and BLACK DOT of BLACK DOT?
Weird that they took away the original images though.
If that was the case, the sentence would read as follows:
For example, I’m going to reveal that our next campaign setting, following on the heels of Forgotten Realms and Eberron, is going to be BLACK DOT. Then, I might just talk about a special D&D BLACK DOT that Mike Mearls and I are designing for release next year. Should I also talk about BLACK DOT, BLACK DOT, and BLACK DOT of BLACK DOT?
Weird that they took away the original images though.
As opposed to: For example, I’m going to reveal that our next campaign setting, following on the heels of Forgotten Realms and Eberron, is going to be . Then, I might just talk about a special D&D that Mike Mearls and I are designing for release next year. Should I also talk about , , and of ?
I don't think there were original images. They did it purposefully to make us squirm.
I don't think there were original images. They did it purposefully to make us squirm.
I was actually talking about how earlier today the images were white squares that indicated each letter of the second part (not the setting one though, that would have made things WAY to easy on us). However, if you highlight the black boxes, you can still count the characters.
I was actually talking about how earlier today the images were white squares that indicated each letter of the second part (not the setting one though, that would have made things WAY to easy on us). However, if you highlight the black boxes, you can still count the characters.
Oh! I see.
I hadn't looked at the article since this morning before work. Huh.So...the next campaign setting will be....
Bikini Ninja Island Paradise Adventures?
don't tease me...a sequal to the Elvin Ninga School Girl Academy deaigned for there spring break would rock
I think the dev may have felt like this when that hint was posted:
It is 18-19 characters long, which makes it nearly(three characters short) twice the size neccesary for Dragonlance.:P
Maybe Oriental Adventures? It have 18 characters :D
Maybe Oriental Adventures? It have 18 characters :D
Has an A in the name and would be a surprise. Doubt it though the newest Legend of the Five rings does Rokugan better than dnd could.
Has an A in the name and would be a surprise. Doubt it though the newest Legend of the Five rings does Rokugan better than dnd could.
Why would it have to be Rokugan? Only one iteration of OA was set there. They could do something like Mahasarpa (spelling?) by James Wyatt, and do southeast asian themes. I would play that setting (I ran a few games set there in 3E days). I would also like a Mayan/Inca/Aztec themed setting too, but I have a harder time thinking of how to fit the classes there.
If it's DragonLance my guess is somethign realted to the Mystics.
If it's Dark Sun my guess is something related to the Defilers.
If it's Ravenloft my guess is something related to the mists themselves.
Bth settings so far have introduced one new class. I don't see the next setting being any different.
If it's DragonLance my guess is somethign realted to the Mystics.
If it's Dark Sun my guess is something related to the Defilers.
If it's Ravenloft my guess is something related to the mists themselves.
darksun could be gladiator as a class, or templar as well as something psionic. Darksun has a lot of options.
defilers will be a monster or a monster template
Or a multi-class feat chain like Spellscars or Heritages, or a Paragon Path. If Defilers are in, they will be a player option. Just like Dragons, Avangions, and the rest will be EDs. Believing otherwise is pure foolishness.
darksun could be gladiator as a class, or templar as well as something psionic. Darksun has a lot of options.
It had better have a lot of options since it renders a good portion of the PHB1, PHB2, MM, and MM2 useless.
It had better have a lot of options since it renders a good portion of the PHB1, PHB2, MM, and MM2 useless.
Not if they redo it right. I expect them to retcon most of the races,classes into the setting while still keeping its flavour unique.
And from what we know, the power source appearing in 2010 is psionics, not elemental. Since Dark Sun would require both, it would seem that Dark Sun will be released in 2011 rather than 2010. Furthermore, maybe they will wait for the release of the Psionic Power sourcebook to release Dark Sun.
But since Psionic power source is the one released in 2010, what other setting than Dark Sun does rely heavily on psionics?
Quite confusing...
Wouldn't the Dark Sun setting require the Elemental power source to function? I remember that clerics commune with the elements to receive their powers. The elementals are patrons rather than deities so it would imply that clerics in dark sun do not use the Divine power source.
And from what we know, the power source appearing in 2010 is psionics, not elemental. Since Dark Sun would require both, it would seem that Dark Sun will be released in 2011 rather than 2010. Furthermore, maybe they will wait for the release of the Psionic Power sourcebook to release Dark Sun.
But since Psionic power source is the one released in 2010, what other setting than Dark Sun does rely heavily on psionics?
Quite confusing...
Could just have channel divinity feats for elemental clerics and other divine characters, or maybe the gods have returned to athas. Its been a long time since the setting was published they can change a lot to it.
Wouldn't the Dark Sun setting require the Elemental power source to function? I remember that clerics commune with the elements to receive their powers. The elementals are patrons rather than deities so it would imply that clerics in dark sun do not use the Divine power source.
And from what we know, the power source appearing in 2010 is psionics, not elemental. Since Dark Sun would require both, it would seem that Dark Sun will be released in 2011 rather than 2010. Furthermore, maybe they will wait for the release of the Psionic Power sourcebook to release Dark Sun.
But since Psionic power source is the one released in 2010, what other setting than Dark Sun does rely heavily on psionics?
Quite confusing...
Not at all. Dark Sun only needs the Psionic source. Elemental clerics can easily be covered by domains, feats, or just making a single new class for the Elemental source in the DSPG. After all, we're getting the Assassin - a Shadow source class - a good year and a half to 2 years before the PHB with the Shadow source.
On a side note, Dark Sun doesn't even have a section on the Novels page.
Has anyone seen the Dragonlance Novel guide over at the Wizards Novels website? I don't know how long it has been up, but it seems they put some effort into it.
On a side note, Dark Sun doesn't even have a section on the Novels page.
Yet it does have a dedicated editor, unlike Dragonlance.
Yet it does have a dedicated editor, unlike Dragonlance.
Well, someone put together the guide, which is fully illustrated along with some nifty maps (though the maps are more stylized, not the sort you would find in a campaign guide. Someone is putting together all this Dragonlance stuff.
You have an article that lists a person as an editor for a novel line that has never been popular. Whoop-de-doo! Wether Dark Sun is a better setting than Dragonlance is entirely a matter of opinion, but don't fool yourself into thinking they are any where near equal when it comes to sheer numbers of fans. The fan base for Dragonlance literally dwarfs Dark Sun, and always has.
Maybe the game designers do like Dark Sun more, and maybe they decided they want to do something "different" for 2010. Just maybe. I'll give you the possibility. If they were looking to sell books, however, then they chose Dragonlance.
Someone is putting together all this Dragonlance stuff.
yes they are
You have an article that lists a person as an editor for a novel line that has never been popular. Whoop-de-doo!
It means that it has something coming up...witch shows signs of a rivaval...
Wether Dark Sun is a better setting than Dragonlance is entirely a matter of opinion, but don't fool yourself into thinking they are any where near equal when it comes to sheer numbers of fans.
oh boy here we go...The fan base for Dragonlance literally dwarfs Dark Sun, and always has.
prove it...oh wait we can't becuse we only have guess work... my guess is that DL has more novel readers...that doesn't in anyway show the CS is anymore or less liked...infact I point out that TSR had equal success with both, and that WotC farmed it out rather then do it in 3e...so we have no way of knoing...
Maybe the game designers do like Dark Sun more, and maybe they decided they want to do something "different" for 2010. Just maybe. I'll give you the possibility. If they were looking to sell books, however, then they chose Dragonlance.
BS...pure BS... If they want to sell books??? what type of dumb qualfier is that??
If they want to sell books...might as well say If the are in buisness to make money...
and BOTH will sell books, and BOTH will make money...
Infact something 'diffrent' might just sell better then more standard fantasy...but I guess it doesn't count becuse it is still not going to sell right???
yes they are
It means that it has something coming up...witch shows signs of a rivaval...
prove it...oh wait we can't becuse we only have guess work... my guess is that DL has more novel readers...that doesn't in anyway show the CS is anymore or less liked...infact I point out that TSR had equal success with both, and that WotC farmed it out rather then do it in 3e...so we have no way of knoing...
BS...pure BS... If they want to sell books??? what type of dumb qualfier is that??
If they want to sell books...might as well say If the are in buisness to make money...
and BOTH will sell books, and BOTH will make money...
Infact something 'diffrent' might just sell better then more standard fantasy...but I guess it doesn't count becuse it is still not going to sell right???
Take a look at my earlier posts where I compared the amazon rankings for Dragonlance and Dark Sun. I also compared internet presence for the two fandoms. I don' have access to insider sales info, so it's the best I can do.
The Dark Sun novels have never been popular, so expecting new stuff to be sign of some big revival is a bit premature. Some good novels actually have to be written first. Some advertising would be good, too. When they reprinted some Dark Sun books not so long ago, I don't recall seeing much promotion for it.
And yes, when I said "sell books, I meant "make money". If you want to make money, you create a product you know people will want to buy. It's a fact that there are thousands of Dragonlance fan who would be interested in DL4e. Any sort of Dark Sun fandom is mostly just conjecture.
It's a fact that books about Dragons and Wizards sell well. We can only guess whether deserts and psions will be as popular.
Take a look at my earlier posts where I compared the amazon rankings for Dragonlance and Dark Sun. I also compared internet presence for the two fandoms. I don' have access to insider sales info, so it's the best I can do.
so nothing about RPGs at all...novels do not = RPG
The Dark Sun novels have never been popular, so expecting new stuff to be sign of some big revival is a bit premature. Some good novels actually have to be written first.
why would good ones need to be written, I was in highschool reading the last good DL ones (Twins triligy)
Some advertising would be good, too. When they reprinted some Dark Sun books not so long ago, I don't recall seeing much promotion for it.
right...becuse after gen con we don't expect any ads for the new setting...
And yes, when I said "sell books, I meant "make money". If you want to make money, you create a product you know people will want to buy.
and we have only small self samping groups so no baisis to judge...
It's a fact that there are thousands of Dragonlance fan who would be interested in DL4e.
objection assuming facts not in evadiance...
Any sort of Dark Sun fandom is mostly just conjecture.
of cource it is...the same conjecture as:
of Dragonlance fan who would be interested in DL4e.
It's a fact that books about Dragons and Wizards sell well. We can only guess whether deserts and psions will be as popular.
there is atleast 1 dragon on athus...and dragon kings...and there are wizards on athus...
so what does this have to do with anything???
Or a multi-class feat chain like Spellscars or Heritages, or a Paragon Path. If Defilers are in, they will be a player option. Just like Dragons, Avangions, and the rest will be EDs. Believing otherwise is pure foolishness.
I tend to think that getting ones power from destroying the environment would not work well as a player option in this new edition, or in the last one if truth be known. It works better as a plot point and the rare encounter. If it is a player option it might be an infliction that one would need to be rid of, like Lycinthropy or Vamperism.
It is easy enough to write fluff that would explain the Wizard (needs to use latent magic around us and is re-inquanted with Ley Lines), Warlock (More thought to search for power elsewhere rather than defile the enviroment), Sorcerer (Magic from within oneself) and any other magic using class.
On the size of the Dark Sun fandom: One thing to remember is that the Dark Sun fandom is more spread out. They aren't all on one forum or board. Secondly, during a forum change the various OOP setting forums were merged and this skews the numbers a bit. Third, these forums remove old threads into an archive after a certain period, this has an effect on the numbers.
So basically what you are saying is that all of the support for Dark Sun is hidden? Of course, Dragonlance is immune to all these issues. Every Dragonlance fan is on one site, and that site never removes old threads or changed their forums.
so nothing about RPGs at all...novels do not = RPG
why would good ones need to be written, I was in highschool reading the last good DL ones (Twins triligy)
right...becuse after gen con we don't expect any ads for the new setting...
and we have only small self samping groups so no baisis to judge...
objection assuming facts not in evadiance...
of cource it is...the same conjecture as:
there is atleast 1 dragon on athus...and dragon kings...and there are wizards on athus...
so what does this have to do with anything???
Do you even believe the stuff you're saying? The fans are readily apparent due to their presence on message boards and good novel sales. There was also a line of 3ed DL products that sold well enough for a publisher to create a full line of game products.
No one bothered with Dark Sun.
Of course, if you want to delude yourself go right ahead. Just don't use phrases like "objection assuming facts not in evadiance[sic]..." while trying to argue against common sense.
You have an article that lists a person as an editor for a novel line that has never been popular. Whoop-de-doo! Wether Dark Sun is a better setting than Dragonlance is entirely a matter of opinion, but don't fool yourself into thinking they are any where near equal when it comes to sheer numbers of fans. The fan base for Dragonlance literally dwarfs Dark Sun, and always has.
When did I ever mention number of fans? I just pointed out that Dark Sun had a dedicated novel editor and Dragonlance doesn't. You don't have a dedicated editor for a line if you don't plan on making books for the line, and I can't imagine putting out a large number of books for a line without hiring a dedicated editor. So at the moment it appears they are more interested in making new Dark Sun novels than they are Dragonlance ones. Now which one is more popular? It doesn't really matter because only one of them will be getting immediate support.
Unfortunately, all the editor being put on Dark Sun pretty much guarantees is that we will see it some time in the future, though maybe not in 2010. We also have an author for MTG, which would certainly surprise the heck out of me as well as be very delightful. Mirrorstone, which pretty much deals exclusively with semi-DL related stuff (everything is "written" by Sindri Suncatcher, a kender), but it is young-readers so it is probably out (who really knows though).
The problem biggest problem any of the settings face is that there are no announced novels for Dragonlance, Dark Sun, or anything else besides Forgotten Realms and Eberron. If they haven't been written yet or even contracted yet, that could easily put us into fourth quarter 2010 before we see a novel from something other than FR and Eberron (can we come up with a two-letter abbreviation for that setting, please?).
But tying the novels only to the game line still makes no sense to me when the novels far outsell any campaign book.
The Dark Sun editor clenches it though in my eyes. It seems way to early to be releasing Dark Sun books for a 2011 setting when we have no word on Dragonlance novels beyond 1Q next year.
Well, someone put together the guide, which is fully illustrated along with some nifty maps (though the maps are more stylized, not the sort you would find in a campaign guide. Someone is putting together all this Dragonlance stuff.
They did this guide for the 25th anniversary. Unfortunately, most of the books it mentions are out of print.
Cheers,
Cam
I don't know what the setting will be next year. I like Dragonlance, and would buy the new books if they came out, but don't really care that much. I gave up on 4e recently and am now playing Castles and Crusades, which works well with all of my old DL stuff.
I personally want them to put out something totally new—something desinged around the 4e mechanic. Some of the designers seem pretty creative and I'd like to see the best they've got.
As for Dark Sun, I'm not really into it, for a few reasons. One, I hate psionics. Two, it's a pretty homogenous setting. Three, Wizards are my favorite class, and while the whole Defiler mechanic is interesting, I don't want to have play incognito all of the time.
Anyways, it would just seem stupid to me to resurrect the dead. Dark Sun couldn't drum up the public support to become a published setting for the past decade, I don't see why they think that would change now.
Anyways, it would just seem stupid to me to resurrect the dead. Dark Sun couldn't drum up the public support to become a published setting for the past decade, I don't see why they think that would change now.
are you kidding me???
DS has had a huge fan base calling for it for the last 8 years...
infact it is the 2nd most used board for the settings here on WotC... DL would need about 4x the posts it does to equal Darksun...
It may not have been pritned but lets not forget Athes .org that worked as hard at keeping DS runing as wiess publishing did with DL...
Unfortunately, all the editor being put on Dark Sun pretty much guarantees is that we will see it some time in the future, though maybe not in 2010.
Unfortunately? Easy there champ. There is nothing unfortunate about a sizable portion of the D&D consumer population being given a product they really want to purchase.
are you kidding me???
DS has had a huge fan base calling for it for the last 8 years...
infact it is the 2nd most used board for the settings here on WotC... DL would need about 4x the posts it does to equal Darksun...
It may not have been pritned but lets not forget Athes .org that worked as hard at keeping DS runing as wiess publishing did with DL...
I've already done the math when it comes to the boards here and athas.org.
It was 50 to 1 in favor of Dragonlance.
Dark Sun rated a write-up in an issue of Dragon. Dragonlance fans don't need to come to the boards here, as they congregate elsewhere.
Do you really want to compare Athas.org to the Dragonlance Nexus?
Unfortunately? Easy there champ. There is nothing unfortunate about a sizable portion of the D&D consumer population being given a product they really want to purchase.
Sizable? Where are they?
You can close your eyes to the existence of Dark Sun fans all you like, but there wouldn't be 2 threads calling for Dark Sun 2010 in this forum (both regularly visited by a large number of posters), and the Dark Sun forums would not be the most popular currently non-supported setting forum on the WotC boards, if Dark Sun didn't have a fairly sizable number of fans.
Furthermore, you haven't "done the math" on anything. All you have is a couple of facts which you have twisted to your desired conclusion. Those facts are far from an extensive survey of the field. You took one very popular Dragonlance website, supported by Dragonlances primary creator, and compared it to one semi-popular Dark Sun website, and tried to use that comparison to your advantage.
People like me love Dark Sun, but don't visit Athas.org very often. I don't have a reason to. Is there fresh Brom artwork there? Is there any 4e Dark Sun material there? No.
The dragonlance website you keep referring to is the internets bastion for a popular novel line. There is a reason for people that visit it. But a popular novel line doesn't indicate the presence of a lack of customer appeal for Dark Sun role-playing game products (not novels. I could care less about novels. I wouldn't buy novels for any setting).
Your numbers don't prove anything, except that more people have a reason to visit Wiess website than Athas.org. That does not mean that Dark Sun doesn't have a very large number of fans who would REALLY like to see contemporary RPG support from the company that owns the D&D brand.
I've already done the math when it comes to the boards here and athas.org.
It was 50 to 1 in favor of Dragonlance.
let me show you may math...
I went and clicked on other published settings... and found these numbers:
DL 1,327
DS 5,596
when I subtract the bigger fromt he small I get 4,269 more posts for Dark sun...
Dragonlance fans don't need to come to the boards here, as they congregate elsewhere.
yes, DL fans that are not major WotC fans, including fans of the novels and fans of another company...
Do you really want to compare Athas.org to the Dragonlance Nexus?
sure just make sure to only count people who would buy the setting, but not just read novels...good luck with that...
Your math is flawed...
Your math says that the really popular Novels= RP sales...it does not...
that is why WotC only made 1 book for DL...then out sourced it.
You like compairing apples to oranges...we have NO way to tell witch would sell better...
both are equaly likely to be the new setting...
Unfortunately? Easy there champ. There is nothing unfortunate about a sizable portion of the D&D consumer population being given a product they really want to purchase.
The unfortunately is because it doesn't tell us Dark Sun 2010. It tells us Dark sun 201X.
BTW, The gaming section on the Dragonlance Nexus boards is full of 4e DL stuff, and has 102,149 posts. It also has over 30,000 more posts than the novel section. Seriously, you guys need to lay off the "its a novel setting, not a gaming setting" it is pretty embarrassing for you.
Sizable? Where are they?
HERE! :P
And guess who has two thumbs and doesn't give a crap about DL *points at self with thumbs* ;)
But seriously, both sides can ***** and moan as much as they like, that's not gonna change their setting into the end all setting. To each their own.
The unfortunately is because it doesn't tell us Dark Sun 2010. It tells us Dark sun 201X.
Oh. Pardon me then.
BTW, The gaming section on the Dragonlance Nexus boards is full of 4e DL stuff, and has 102,149 posts. It also has over 30,000 more posts than the novel section. Seriously, you guys need to lay off the "its a novel setting, not a gaming setting" it is pretty embarrassing for you.
1) Reread what I wrote. I never said that DL would not appeal to some gamers as a setting as well. I simply said that Nexus had a reason to appeal to more players, its an internet bastion for a popular line of books (you people informed me of that). Its appeal does not indicate a lack of desire amongst fans for a DS setting.
2) I didn't know Nexus has 4e stuff in it. That only further elucidates why more people are visiting it than Athas.org. Athas.org is still pretty much stuck in the 3e phase of things from what I hear. That still doesn't indicate that there are not a lot of fans who would like to see a WotC released 4e Dark Sun setting.
Dark Sun is one of the most active non-supported campaign setting boards here on the WotC forums.
You can close your eyes to the existence of Dark Sun fans all you like, but there wouldn't be 2 threads calling for Dark Sun 2010 in this forum (both regularly visited by a large number of posters), and the Dark Sun forums would not be the most popular currently non-supported setting forum on the WotC boards, if Dark Sun didn't have a fairly sizable number of fans.
Furthermore, you haven't "done the math" on anything. All you have is a couple of facts which you have twisted to your desired conclusion. Those facts are far from an extensive survey of the field. You took one very popular Dragonlance website, supported by Dragonlances primary creator, and compared it to one semi-popular Dark Sun website, and tried to use that comparison to your advantage.
People like me love Dark Sun, but don't visit Athas.org very often. I don't have a reason to. Is there fresh Brom artwork there? Is there any 4e Dark Sun material there? No.
The dragonlance website you keep referring to is the internets bastion for a popular novel line. There is a reason for people that visit it. But a popular novel line doesn't indicate the presence of a lack of customer appeal for Dark Sun role-playing game products (not novels. I could care less about novels. I wouldn't buy novels for any setting).
Your numbers don't prove anything, except that more people have a reason to visit Wiess website than Athas.org. That does not mean that Dark Sun doesn't have a very large number of fans who would REALLY like to see contemporary RPG support from the company that owns the D&D brand.
I searched the interwebz for other Dark Sun fans, and couldn't find any. I compared the "official" Dragonlance page with the "official" Dark Sun page. You've shown me one forum with posts in the low thousand. I've shown you a forum with posts in the hundreds of thousands.
The worse part is you tell me I have no evidence, and you're probably doing it with a straight face. Yes, novel fans doesn't equal rpg fans, but it is a fan base, a products often (smartly) market across platforms to a particular fandom.
I guess no 3PP publisher thought it was worth their time to publish Dark Sun, like Sovereign Press did for Dragonlance, and (I can't remember their name) did for Ravenloft.
Of course it doesn't matter that their are twice as many threads at DL Nexus than their are Posts at Athas.org and the Wizards DS forum combined.
Not good enough for you?
Dark Sun: Campaign Setting (Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, 2nd Edition) [BOX SET] (Hardcover): Amazon ranking: #901,785
Dragonlance Adventures (Advanced Dungeons and Dragons) (Hardcover) Amazon Ranking: #435,545
What are you going to say next? Dark Sun fans use Amazon less than Dragonlance fans?
Do you want to keep embarrassing yourself?
Oh. Pardon me then.
No problem, I am just getting a little ticked that they won't just go ahead and tell us.
Also, I haven't been trying to say that there aren't a lot of people that would like to see a 4e Dark Sun. What I am saying is that I can assure you that as much or more want a 4e Dragonlance. This thread has over 1000 replies. That is more than both Dark Sun threads combined (I assume this second thread you guys speak of is the dead thread on page two). There are more threads on 4e Dragonlance on the Nexus forums than there are threads on athas.org and the WotC boards, COMBINED.
DL has a crutch right now, it is called the 5th Age. This, more than anything else, needs to never have existed for DL in this new edition to work. Time lines won't be a factor here, Dragon Lance is gonna have to be a reboot or worked out so that the 5th Age never happened.
Dark Sun, on the other hand, has so much potential. Tame down the Dragon Kings, put the Defilers on the MM side, and go to town. A lot of things from the original setting can be ported right over.
So the question should not be which is more popular (they are about the same) but which would be easier to do.
It is Dark Sun. 2010. Mark my words.
Do you want to keep embarrassing yourself?
Um, I never said one was currently more or less popular than the other. I don't know which one is more popular. The truth is, neither do you. You don't have any solid evidence which PROVES (beyond a shadow of a doubt) anything besides what you want to see. That is because that's all the evidence you have looked for.
But, one way or another, within your own posts you have not disproved the existence of strong fan support for Dark Sun. It remains a fact that Dark Sun is the most popular non-supported forum on these boards. It remains a fact that there are two fairly frequently threads in this forum calling for a 4e Dark Sun in 2010. It remains a fact that four out of five major 4e developers are huge fans of Dark Sun. It remains a fact that many people in this thread are telling you that they are huge fans of Dark Sun. It remains a fact that Dark Sun has a sizable number of fans who would be very happy with the release of a 4e Dark Sun campaign setting. Telling those fans that it would be unfortunate if a Dark Sun campaign setting were to be released is rude (though it turns out that that is not what Silver_Blaze was saying).
So the real question is, are you going to continue to embarrass yourself FraterChoronzon?
No problem, I am just getting a little ticked that they won't just go ahead and tell us.
Agreed.
Also, I haven't been trying to say that there aren't a lot of people that would like to see a 4e Dark Sun. What I am saying is that I can assure you that as much or more want a 4e Dragonlance. This thread has over 1000 replies. That is more than both Dark Sun threads combined (I assume this second thread you guys speak of is the dead thread on page two). There are more threads on 4e Dragonlance on the Nexus forums than there are threads on athas.org and the WotC boards, COMBINED.
A lot of responses here are by people saying how much they don't want Dragonlance to be released. :P Or, oddly enough, how much they would rather that Dark Sun be released. ;)
That being said, I'm not saying that Dragonlance does not have more fans. Truth is, I wouldn't know. Neither would anyone else on these boards. They might have an opinion. They might have some decent evidence on which to form that opinion. But nobody here has enough empirical data to say for sure.
And I am not saying Dragonlance should not be released either. You guys proved that the novel line is still selling well. And apparently DL still does have a lot of fans! It should be released as a setting. It won't be a setting I will spend money on, but consumers should get what they want. I'm just saying I want to see Dark Sun a whole lot more. ;) :P :D
Um, I never said one was currently more or less popular than the other. I don't know which one is more popular. The truth is, neither do you. You don't have any solid evidence which PROVES (beyond a shadow of a doubt) anything besides what you want to see. That is because that's all the evidence you have looked for.
But, one way or another, within your own posts you have not disproved the existence of strong fan support for Dark Sun. It remains a fact that Dark Sun is the most popular non-supported forum on these boards. It remains a fact that there are two fairly frequently threads in this forum calling for a 4e Dark Sun in 2010. It remains a fact that four out of five major 4e developers are huge fans of Dark Sun. It remains a fact that many people in this thread are telling you that they are huge fans of Dark Sun. It remains a fact that Dark Sun has a sizable number of fans who would be very happy with the release of a 4e Dark Sun campaign setting. Telling those fans that it would be unfortunate if a Dark Sun campaign setting were to be released is rude (though it turns out that that is not what Silver_Blaze was saying).
So the real question is, are you going to continue to embarrass yourself FraterChoronzon?
First of all, we only need to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt to send someone to prison. Beyond "a shadow of a doubt" is a ridiculous standard for this sort of discussion.
I gave the best evidence five minutes on google can find on the popularity of Dragonlance vs. Dark Sun. For the purpose of this discussion it's more than adequate to any reasonable person. A person thinking rational would know that a setting that has had numerous NYT bestsellers and has practically a whole section to itself in any major bookstore across the country has more fans than a setting that hasn't seen the light of day in nearly 20 years.
Strong is a relative word, and in this case we are using it in comparison to DL. So no, in comparison to DL, DS does not have a strong fan base.
http://www.google.com/trends?q=dragonlance%2C+dark+sun&ctab=0&geo=all&date=ytd&sort=0
It's a dead heat!
http://www.google.com/trends?q=dragonlance%2C+dark+sun&ctab=0&geo=all&date=ytd&sort=0
Well look at that. Looking at internet traffic as a whole, it seems Dark Sun is every bit as popular as Dragonlance.
So, seems my hunch that you were wrong is correct FraterChoronzon.
And yes, Dark Sun does have a strong fanbase.
Stop making claims that you can not PROVE as fact.
It's a dead heat!
http://www.google.com/trends?q=dragonlance%2C+dark+sun&ctab=0&geo=all&date=ytd&sort=0
I don't really want to take sides in this Dragonlance vs Dark Sun debate, but that google trends info has essentially zero relevance on whether one is more popular than the other. In fact, looking at google as an indicator simply pushes it even more in Dragonlance's favour.
The reason? Essentially every google search for Dragonlance is referring to the same Dragonlance that we are discussing here. That is not the case for Dark Sun. Not even close. Just take a look at what you find typing in the two, even just look at the first three pages of results. Every Dragonlance result is related to Dragonlance the Dungeons & Dragons property in some way. Dark Sun brings up a couple of different bands, a freeware game company, a software development company, a guild, an astronomy site, a short film, a book about atomic bombs, random swiss/greek blogs, a tattoo studio...and more...in the first three pages.
So, while the number of searches for those particular words may be close to even, the number of searches for those particular Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings are not necessarily even. In fact, looking over the evidence, I would assume it means that Dragonlance is considerably more popular in the general public. It seems that it is not considerably more popular amongst long time D&D players that frequent these forums, however.
Well look at that. Looking at internet traffic as a whole, it seems Dark Sun is every bit as popular as Dragonlance.
So, seems my hunch that you were wrong is correct FraterChoronzon.
And yes, Dark Sun does have a strong fanbase.
Stop making claims that you can not PROVE as fact.
Perhaps you need to look a little closer.
I was beat to the punch by Phenruss, but you need to be careful with Google Trends for the exact reason he outlined.
If you Google Dark Sun, on the very first page the game shares it's space with a book about the Hydrogen Bomb and some heavy metal band. Of the first 50 links, 28 of them have absolutely no links to the Dark Sun we are talking about. That's more than half, buddy.
But I guess my evidence can't argue with your "hunch."
Amazing that we are still passionate about Dark Sun when nothing new has been out for a while. That is about to change. See what is on the net after the first couple of novels hit the shelves for Dark Sun...
2010... Dark Sun and Dragonlance, mixed together.
Perhaps you need to look a little closer.
I was beat to the punch by Phenruss, but you need to be careful with Google Trends for the exact reason he outlined.
If you Google Dark Sun, on the very first page the game shares it's space with a book about the Hydrogen Bomb and some heavy metal band. Of the first 50 links, 28 of them have absolutely no links to the Dark Sun we are talking about. That's more than half, buddy.
But I guess my evidence can't argue with your "hunch."
Your right. It can't that's the neat thing about immaterial evidence with a number of potentially mitigating and contradictory factors.
All that matters is that Dark Sun has very vocal and active support here on the WotC boards. That, coupled with the developers interest in Dark Sun, is more than enough reason for a Dark Sun setting to be released. Add a nice advertisement campaign and official support, and as ThanX said, we will see what board traffic suggests then.
I'm not saying Dragonlance is not popular. But to suggest that Dark Sun does not have a large number of fans is ridiculous.
Your right. It can't that's the neat thing about immaterial evidence with a number of potentially mitigating and contradictory factors.
All that matters is that Dark Sun has very vocal and active support here on the WotC boards. That, coupled with the developers interest in Dark Sun, is more than enough reason for a Dark Sun setting to be released. Add a nice advertisement campaign and official support, and as ThanX said, we will see what board traffic suggests then.
I'm not saying Dragonlance is not popular. But to suggest that Dark Sun does not have a large number of fans is ridiculous.
Wow. Just wow. You were about to do a dance at the whole Google Trends when you thought it supported your "hunch", but once we flipped it around you went back to "immaterial evidence."
Let me put it in picture form for you.
There's me, on the right, trying to explain to you that the Earth revolves around the Sun.
You're there on the left, saying "nuhuh...the bible says..."
In other words, you need to accept reality.
Reality isn't something you have any grasp on.
AS I said earlier, you were willing to dance around with joy after topple's post, until it was pointed out to you that it didn't mean what you though it did.
Recall what Phenruss and I did after topple gave his evidence. We looked at it, did a little more research, and then declared that the data was unusable for this discussion.
When evidence doesn't support your point of view, you just declare it meaningless and keep going on with your delusion.
I'm not arguing that it would be "unfortunate" if they published Dark Sun. I would buy it, actually, even though I only have minimal interest in it. I bought the Eberron books, which I dislike, for the few ideas in it that I want to use. I'm sure there will be some gems in any possible future Dark Sun publications as well.
I was merely pointing out that if their goal is to sell as many books as they can, they would be foolish to publish Dark Sun instead of Dragonlance.
Edit—Oh, and I love how you say that there is "very empirical evidence to the contrary" for the existence of Dark Sun fans, but I use the exact same evidence to support my assertions and I'm using bad evidence. As I said... Wow.
Actually, I didn't say Dark Sun had no fans. I said the fan base was small. I understand "small" can mean different things, but we already have a standard of measurement — campaign settings. When you compare all of the campaign settings out there, Dark Sun does indeed have a "small" following.
Prove it. Quote me exact empirical data that proves more than just internet traffic. I want to see sales data. I want to see polls of the general gaming populace. I want contextualized data, that takes into account all of the various factors and trends. Do you have that? No? Right, then all you have is an opinion. Since you don't particularly like Eberron or Dark Sun, to me your opinion is worthless. You have already proven to me that you don't see things the way I do. Whatever you are basing your personal experiences off of, mine are different. Until this thread, I thought Dragonlance was a failed campaign setting that nobody liked. That is what my personal experience led me to believe, until I saw the numbers and sales rankings for the Dragonlance novel line.
AS I said earlier, you were willing to dance around with joy after topple's post, until it was pointed out to you that it didn't mean what you though it did.
When evidence doesn't support your point of view, you just declare it meaningless and keep going on with your delusion.
Dance for joy? I'm was just taking what was given to me. I don't have enough of a vested interest to do research on the topic one way or another. My research isn't going to change anything, so I am not willing to spend the time. And you, talking to me about standards of evidence? Rich. You don't exactly have an award winning documentary here. All you have is your own personal opinion, and a lack of any real valuable data.
Recall what Phenruss and I did after topple gave his evidence. We looked at it, did a little more research, and then declared that the data was unusable for this discussion.
You didn't do anything. Phenruss gave a fairly good breakdown of the data. You used his breakdown to your advantage (just like I had used another posters post to my advantage before that). Also, reread Phenruss's post. He admitted that amongst long time players of D&D, on these boards, it seems Dark Sun is more popular. Problem is, you don't want to admit anything that doesn't mesh with your personal views and tastes.
P.S. Just to get it out in the clear, based on the data in this thread, it would seem that Dragonlance is the more popular setting. I do admit that, looking at the numbers. But, I also know that those numbers don't mean very much. Dragonlance has gotten a lot more recent support than Dark Sun has. It is not surprising that it has therefore managed to maintain a larger fanbase. However, the fact that Dark Sun, with zero support, has managed to support the fanbae it has is very impressive. It suggests major gamer appeal. When it is released, we will see how it is received. Until then, you and me really don't know anything except for which setting we prefer, and that some gamers have similar preferences to us.
Tame down the Dragon Kings, put the Defilers on the MM side, and go to town.
WotC is too smart to do something stupid like that.
Why did summer flame ruin it for you?
I love the Dragonlance setting. I love the point after the War of the Lance where there were plenty of adventure hooks.
Dragonlance was ruined, IMO, when TSR tried to use it as the flagship for the SAGA system. Summer of Flame represents when they tried to fix what they ruined during the SAGA system.
I've read the series that Weis and Hickman wrote after the War of the Lance. I like the books. I just don't care what they did to the setting.
I hope Dragonlance is the setting but I would really like the books to cover the war of the lance era because I want to have a wide open slate to do anything I want as a DM after it.
I'm calling it right now.
2010... Dark Sun and Dragonlance, mixed together.
Would you call it the Darklance, Sunlance, Dark Dragon or Sun Dragon setting?
Aren't Dark Pact warlocks defilers already?
Kinda, but not really.
Prove it. Quote me exact empirical data that proves more than just internet traffic. I want to see sales data. I want to see polls of the general gaming populace. I want contextualized data, that takes into account all of the various factors and trends. Do you have that? No? Right, then all you have is an opinion. Since you don't particularly like Eberron or Dark Sun, to me your opinion is worthless. You have already proven to me that you don't see things the way I do. Whatever you are basing your personal experiences off of, mine are different. Until this thread, I thought Dragonlance was a failed campaign setting that nobody liked. That is what my personal experience led me to believe, until I saw the numbers and sales rankings for the Dragonlance novel line.
Dance for joy? I'm was just taking what was given to me. I don't have enough of a vested interest to do research on the topic one way or another. My research isn't going to change anything, so I am not willing to spend the time. And you, talking to me about standards of evidence? Rich. You don't exactly have an award winning documentary here. All you have is your own personal opinion, and a lack of any real valuable data.
You didn't do anything. Phenruss gave a fairly good breakdown of the data. You used his breakdown to your advantage (just like I had used another posters post to my advantage before that). Also, reread Phenruss's post. He admitted that amongst long time players of D&D, on these boards, it seems Dark Sun is more popular. Problem is, you don't want to admit anything that doesn't mesh with your personal views and tastes.
P.S. Just to get it out in the clear, based on the data in this thread, it would seem that Dragonlance is the more popular setting. I do admit that, looking at the numbers. But, I also know that those numbers don't mean very much. Dragonlance has gotten a lot more recent support than Dark Sun has. It is not surprising that it has therefore managed to maintain a larger fanbase. However, the fact that Dark Sun, with zero support, has managed to support the fanbae it has is very impressive. It suggests major gamer appeal. When it is released, we will see how it is received. Until then, you and me really don't know anything except for which setting we prefer, and that some gamers have similar preferences to us.
Do you even know what "empirical data" is? It would seem you don't.
I have offered plenty of evidence that is perfectly satisfactory for the discussion. You've offered exactly nothing. I gave amazon sales rankings for Dragonlance and Dark Sun, and I've pointed out the clear superiority of Dragonlance's online presence. You can go check all of these facts yourself — they exist and are not theoretical. That means they are empirical, genius.
How about you do me a favor and stop using words you don't understand to try and prove yourself right. You've basically admitted that I was right anyways, and are just trying to act like it's meaningless.
I'll agree with you that my personal opinion about the campaign settings are meaningless—exactly as meaningless as your own opinion. Your personal experience is also meaningless.
Your post script is telling. After a post denigrating my data, you go on to say that the data in this thread leads you to believe that Dragonlance is more popular. Maybe you're feeling some cognitive dissonance? Anyways, you go on to say that the fact that Dark Sun has been able to maintain it's fanbase with no support. I'll rebut that it is much more impressive that Dragonlance has been able to maintain support for it's product line for 25 years.
As for your last line, I do know stuff. I know Dragonlance sells more and has more fans than Dark Sun. Empirical evidence, you know.
I hate to keep feeding the measuring contest, but I'm kinda interested. ;)
Just out of curiosity, does anyone have any numbers on how many members either Nexus or Athas has? I would have to think that would have more bearing on online fan support. Really, post counts don't mean anything except for that people like to talk about the subject matter of the boards. One side could just have a very vocal minority. Given that Dragonlance has seen novel and game support in 3E, it would make sense that Nexus posters would have more to talk about.
I hate to keep feeding the measuring contest, but I'm kinda interested. ;)
The forums at the nexus have 1,674 members, 608 of them currently active.
I couldn't find the comparable info at athas.org, so I didn't include it.
IF you assume Athas.org has comparable numbers, that would mean each member posted a little over 1 1/2 times.
Contrary to either sides fervent belief that their game is the one coming based on entirely circumstantial evidence, both Dark Sun and Dragonlance have equal chances of being the 2010 campaign.
I agree that the evidence is circumstantial, but saying that each setting has an even chance to be coming out in 2010 is probably wrong, unless WOTC flipped a coin to decide.
Do you even know what "empirical data" is? It would seem you don't.
This is the line that just got you added to my ignore list. You are not as intelligent as you think.
I have offered plenty of evidence that is perfectly satisfactory for the discussion. You've offered exactly nothing. I gave amazon sales rankings for Dragonlance and Dark Sun, and I've pointed out the clear superiority of Dragonlance's online presence. You can go check all of these facts yourself — they exist and are not theoretical. That means they are empirical, genius.
Something is not satisfactory just because you say it is. I have named what I would consider satisfactory data for you to make the claims you are making. You have yet to provide data of that caliber.
How about you do me a favor and stop using words you don't understand to try and prove yourself right. You've basically admitted that I was right anyways, and are just trying to act like it's meaningless.
There you go again, trying to pretend you are intelligent. Its so cute coming from you.
Your post script is telling. After a post denigrating my data, you go on to say that the data in this thread leads you to believe that Dragonlance is more popular.
Your data is not strong enough to prove your case. It indicates that your case is potentially correct. However, you ignore all data that does not indicate that your case is correct, and make no attempt to provide data that bypasses the contextual elements that weaken your case.
For example, so Nexus gets more traffic right now... big whoop. Dragonlance has had more recent releases. Those releases did not happen because WotC wanted to put out the setting on its own dime, but because Weiss really wanted to continue to push the settings production. We don't see anything here that proves that WotC considered the setting a good seller. We do see something that indicates why Dragonlance websites would generally have more traffic than Dark Sun at the current moment in time. Dragonlance has had more recent releases.
So Dragonlance has had more recent releases... big whoop. This does not indicate that it is a good seller. Its releases were pushed by its original creator, who happens to have a vested interest in continuing support for the setting. The company that owns D&D, however, really didn't have an overwhelming show of support for Dragonlance. One would assume that if it was as much of a cash cow as you claim, they would have.
You do not take into account the many factors that potentially render your claims meaningless. I take into account that your data does suggest that your claim is true. I admit that it might be. But you have yet to actually PROVE your claim, so stop pretending that you have. All you have done is taken a few grains of evidence, which are largely meaningless to the big picture, at pretended that somehow makes your opinion fact.
You want to provide some evidence that is actually worth while, provide data of Dark Sun and Dragonlance's sales stats during the time these settings were actually selling, together, during the days of TSR, for example. When these settings were both released by TSR, what were their sales stats? Do you know? Can you provide me with an answer and citation to prove that your answer is fact?
Now, lets assume that Dark Sun did not sell as well during the days of TSR, can you provide market research which would suggest that this would still be the case? Forget internet traffic, can you provide market research which suggests that D&Ds current fan base is still a bigger fan of traditional fantasy settings as opposed to more specialized (what I would call interesting) settings (ala Eberron, Planescape, Ravenloft, or Dark Sun)?
You don't really have any data except that Nexus has more members than Athas. But, there are a lot of reasons why this would be expected. Keeping these reasons in mind, none of your data actually proves that Dark Sun would not sell as well as, or better, than Dragonlance. To make that claim you need to do the sort of research that WotC (hopefully) does before they release new settings.
So, stop pretending you know what you are talking about. You don't. Your just another interenet poster with an oversized ego, and an undersized presence of actual value.
Now peace. Your last post resorted to way to many insults. I have slung my barbs back at you, and I now have no more interest in continuing a conversation with you. You are not worth my time.
This is the line that just got you added to my ignore list. You are not as intelligent as you think.
Isn't that what I've been saying all along? Someone points out that you're wrong, so you just hide.
Something is not satisfactory just because you say it is. I have named what I would consider satisfactory data for you to make the claims you are making. You have yet to provide data of that caliber.
Of course you're asking for a ridiculous level of proof. We don't need to see dinosaurs transform into birds to know that evolution occurred. I think the fact that there is 50x the amount of Dragonlance v. Dark Sun stuff out there says something itself.
Your data is not strong enough to prove your case. It indicates that your case is potentially correct. However, you ignore all data that does not indicate that your case is correct, and make no attempt to provide data that bypasses the contextual elements that weaken your case.
I considered the exactly one piece of information offered, and refuted it... and explained why I refuted it. I didn't just deny it out of hand, as you're wont to do.
For example, so Nexus gets more traffic right now... big whoop. Dragonlance has had more recent releases. Those releases did not happen because WotC wanted to put out the setting on its own dime, but because Weiss really wanted to continue to push the settings production. We don't see anything here that proves that WotC considered the setting a good seller. We do see something that indicates why Dragonlance websites would generally have more traffic than Dark Sun at the current moment in time. Dragonlance has had more recent releases.
All of this is in itself evidence. WOTC did release the setting. THey published the campaign setting and licensed the rest. Obviously someone thought it would be worthwile to do, and made it work. WOTC also continued with the novel line. They even came out with a whole series of Dragonlance books for younger audiences. Someone even made a movie.
Where was all this for Dark Sun?
So Dragonlance has had more recent releases... big whoop. This does not indicate that it is a good seller. Its releases were pushed by its original creator, who happens to have a vested interest in continuing support for the setting. The company that owns D&D, however, really didn't have an overwhelming show of support for Dragonlance. One would assume that if it was as much of a cash cow as you claim, they would have.
Dragonlance released more than 20 full print products for 3e. Dark Sun had none.
You do not take into account the many factors that potentially render your claims meaningless. I take into account that your data does suggest that your claim is true. I admit that it might be. But you have yet to actually PROVE your claim, so stop pretending that you have. All you have done is taken a few grains of evidence, which are largely meaningless to the big picture, at pretended that somehow makes your opinion fact.
You want to provide some evidence that is actually worth while, provide data of Dark Sun and Dragonlance's sales stats during the time these settings were actually selling, together, during the days of TSR, for example. When these settings were both released by TSR, what were their sales stats? Do you know? Can you provide me with an answer and citation to prove that your answer is fact?
Even if I could, which I can't, those numbers wouldn't change the fact that the fan base from Dark Sun has been reduced to a small core of hard core fans who played the game nearly 20 years ago.
Now, lets assume that Dark Sun did not sell as well during the days of TSR, can you provide market research which would suggest that this would still be the case? Forget internet traffic, can you provide market research which suggests that D&Ds current fan base is still a bigger fan of traditional fantasy settings as opposed to more specialized (what I would call interesting) settings (ala Eberron, Planescape, Ravenloft, or Dark Sun)?
Foolishness. Settings are not grouped into traditional fantasy and different. Eberron is not "different"—it has a theme. Dark Sun is much the same. I do know that when D&D came out, people liked Knights and Magic and Dragons. I also know that people still like them. Recall when WOTC published Dragon Magic? That was because books that had those two words sell. I don't recall a "Cannibal Halfling Psion" splat book.
You don't really have any data except that Nexus has more members than Athas. But, there are a lot of reasons why this would be expected. Keeping these reasons in mind, none of your data actually proves that Dark Sun would not sell as well as, or better, than Dragonlance. To make that claim you need to do the sort of research that WotC (hopefully) does before they release new settings.
Yes, there are a lot of reasons why the Nexus would be bigger than Athas.org, and I have already explained how all of those reasons are in themselves evidence that Dragonlance is more popular!
So, stop pretending you know what you are talking about. You don't. Your just another interenet poster with an oversized ego, and an undersized presence of actual value.
Now peace. Your last post resorted to way to many insults. I have slung my barbs back at you, and I now have no more interest in continuing a conversation with you. You are not worth my time.
See ya. I'll try and survive without you spouting words you don't know the meaning of at me.
Contrary to either sides fervent belief that their game is the one coming based on entirely circumstantial evidence, both Dark Sun and Dragonlance have equal chances of being the 2010 campaign.
yes that is it in one...bith have equal chance and equal clues pointing to them...bith have pro and cons for being done, and for being next...
All of this is in itself evidence. WOTC did release the setting. THey published the campaign setting and licensed the rest.
see these two go togather...someone wanted to use the setting, so wotc let them... that is not points for being wanted, if the fan base was large enough WotC would want them for themselves...they gave it to a much smaller company for a reason..
Dragonlance released more than 20 full print products for 3e. Dark Sun had none.
but only 1 by a company with the size of WotC and we have no proof how well it did...we do see that shortly after that WotC made a change to there tacitcs...and only supported 2 settings....
you like to sput out that DL is more popular...but you refuse to admit that DS even has a sizable chucnk of fns....
we will wait and see. It could be eaither there is no more compelling reson to belive eaither is a sure thing...
yes that is it in one...bith have equal chance and equal clues pointing to them...bith have pro and cons for being done, and for being next...
see these two go togather...someone wanted to use the setting, so wotc let them... that is not points for being wanted, if the fan base was large enough WotC would want them for themselves...they gave it to a much smaller company for a reason..
but only 1 by a company with the size of WotC and we have no proof how well it did...we do see that shortly after that WotC made a change to there tacitcs...and only supported 2 settings....
you like to sput out that DL is more popular...but you refuse to admit that DS even has a sizable chucnk of fns....
we will wait and see. It could be eaither there is no more compelling reson to belive eaither is a sure thing...
What's a sizable chunk? I'm not claiming Dragonlance is more popular than Forgotten Realms or even Eberron, though those are two settings I dislike. I am merely saying that Dragonlance is the setting with the next largest fan base, and that it is much larger by far.
If it is right (and it seems it is), that Dragonlance wasn't popular enough for WOTC to give it more of a passing nod during 3ed, what does it say about the settings that were much less popular?
Thank you for listening.
Chaos
Online Response Crew
It deserves a place in 4e, and will likely get one. Possibly very very soon. Although, a less standard fantasy fare (Darksun) would be awesome. Either way, I'm sure the re-released setting will be popular with many players/DMs (and unpoplular with plenty more).
Dragonlance has done so much for DnD, it's a great setting ripe with history and a well deserved following.
It deserves a place in 4e, and will likely get one. Possibly very very soon. Although, a less standard fantasy fare (Darksun) would be awesome. Either way, I'm sure the re-released setting will be popular with many players/DMs (and unpoplular with plenty more).
Campaign settings don't get published due to the merits of what they "deserve" because of past glories. Of all the reasons to choose to publish one campaign setting over another, that's just not a viable one.
The first reason I think Dragonlance is unlikely to be the next campaign setting is because of all of the thematic elements that it emphasizes that 4E is moving away from. Alignment as such a central feature doesn't strike me as a great idea in a 4E environment.
The second reason is, TSR out-competed itself to death, and WotC says the lesson is learned. Dragonlance is a direct competitor with FR, and I don't think they're going to publish both. FR has already been published, so DL probably won't.
Third, no new Dragonlance material is coming out. If Dragonlance was being released within the next few years, there would already be work in progress, and we've been told there hasn't. To have something new and different to contribute to existing games, and thus a reason for players to buy the books beyond brand loyalty, there would have to be new developments, and that would probably mean novels and the like to support it. But Cam has told us that this isn't happening.
If Dragonlance is indeed our next setting, I'm going to be very surprised.
Campaign settings don't get published due to the merits of what they "deserve" because of past glories. Of all the reasons to choose to publish one campaign setting over another, that's just not a viable one.
The implication I made was, that because of those "past glories", there is a large fan base. If you make material that is "new to 4e", give the whole world a new spin (like the spell plague in FR) and wrap it up in a nice package with a cute little bow (or a picture of Huma lancing a really bad*ss dragon) on the cover... then you've likely got a product that will make a profit.
large fan(customer) base + new/useful product + pretty artwork/marketing = profit (hopefully)
And profitability *is* what gets campaign settings published.
The second reason is, TSR out-competed itself to death, and WotC says the lesson is learned. Dragonlance is a direct competitor with FR, and I don't think they're going to publish both. FR has already been published, so DL probably won't.
It was very sad, to see TSR go under. (I still load the DnD portion of WotC's site by typing in TSR.com... just to pay homage to the visionaries at TSR.) But, part (a big part) of that problem was incompatible material: accessories, compendiums, adventures, core books that were published but couldn't be used with a particular setting... I believe the WotC DnD people to be intelligent and to have learned those hard lessons, not to make those same mistakes. But, that being said, if the material in the (theoretical) DL books is compatible with FR and everything else for that matter... then why not expect to see the books eventually?
Third, no new Dragonlance material is coming out. If Dragonlance was being released within the next few years, there would already be work in progress, and we've been told there hasn't. ...
I wasn't aware of an announcement made regarding no new DL material... if you could provide a link, I'd appreciate it. a link like that could have saved a lot of speculation on these boards.
If Dragonlance is indeed our next setting, I'm going to be very surprised.
I would be a bit surprised too. I'm personally hoping for Darksun next, then some kind of new setting or DL.
However you look at the numbers, both products will do well for Wizards. I think it won't be DragonLance, but Dark Sun for 2010. We can only wait and see.
Oh, and CelticMutt, the worst thing would be to have players become Dragonlords. For one, it would mean that the best part of their character would be after it is retired, and for another, the balanced rules wouldn't have them be as Epically overpowered as the need to be for the story. Better to have them more in the background, like the three dragons that make up the world of Eberron. Defilers are not heroes, and should not be played like one. I didn't like the choice in the 2nd edition set.
If you want to discuss Dark Sun, feel free to do so in the multiple threads dedicated to that setting. You know, those threads about that wonderfully popular setting that keep dying out.
Amazing that since those threads keep failing the conversation has to be brought back to this one just to stay alive. But us Dragonlance fans don't post on WotC forums, so I guess we don't mind, right?
Regardless of what setting is actually the real one for 2010 (and personally, my guess is that it will be neither Dragonlance or Dark Sun, but rather something new and based on the Far Realm, something Lovecraftian,) this thread is about Dragonlance being the setting next year.
So there, go discuss Dark Sun there.
Show
DarkSun
In Ampersand, under the heading of GenCon Here We Come!, there's a sentence that tells us what the next setting is going to be. Whoops! It's been blacked out. However, look at the length of the blacked out word. Let's try an experiment:ShowDarkSun
I wasn't aware of an announcement made regarding no new DL material... if you could provide a link, I'd appreciate it. a link like that could have saved a lot of speculation on these boards.
I doubt it, as that happened earlier in this thread. Browse for Cam's posts.
Based on the number of characters in the word, even Dragonlance seems too short. But, it could be.
Agreed. While it's not very scientific, if you "count" the number of "characters" that would fit into the space alloted by the blank picture, factoring in that it's not a monospace font and therefore cannot line up perfectly, neither Dragonlance nor Dark Sun fit.
Another mark against Dragonlance (or at least MW & TH involvement in it) is the dedication in the new Raistlin book. It's cryptic, but it pretty clearly says "This is the end of the line."
Another mark against Dragonlance (or at least MW & TH involvement in it) is the dedication in the new Raistlin book. It's cryptic, but it pretty clearly says "This is the end of the line."
So, here is a question for Dragonlance fans: Cam has stated that he doesn't think that Dragonlance is going to be the 2010 setting. He certainly hasn't heard anything about it. Weiss, likewise, seems to be indicating that "This is the end of the line." Now, perhaps this is all part of a plot based around the dissemination of misinformation. Make sure they keep the surprise of the announcement alive and well. But, assuming its not such a plot, that the 2010 setting is Dragonlance, and that neither Weiss, Hickman, or Cam had anything to do with it, would you really be pleased? I would imagine this would upset Dragonlance fans, not please them.
Also Cam might not be working on it maybe because the liscence might of been revoked
Maybe they did a complete plot shift like with FR and due to that(or because of that) they left development/got forced out of it.
Also Cam might not be working on it maybe because the liscence might of been revoked
Would you really be happy with a huge plot shift?
Also, I HIGHLY doubt WotC will try that again. This is one of the reasons I don't think DL will be 2010. If it was, it would already be pretty much finished. Cam and Weiss would have worked on it. They would have known something about it.
A plot shift would explain why they don't, but after the fiasco that the FR plot shift caused, I really don't think WotC would make that mistake.
Personally, I also really don't think WotC would make the mistake of releasing a DL Campaign Guide without Weiss's name on the front cover. It would be sort of like releasing FR without Greenwood, or Eberron without Keith Baker. Its just a bad move...
So, here is a question for Dragonlance fans: Cam has stated that he doesn't think that Dragonlance is going to be the 2010 setting. He certainly hasn't heard anything about it. Weiss, likewise, seems to be indicating that "This is the end of the line." Now, perhaps this is all part of a plot based around the dissemination of misinformation. Make sure they keep the surprise of the announcement alive and well. But, assuming its not such a plot, that the 2010 setting is Dragonlance, and that neither Weiss, Hickman, or Cam had anything to do with it, would you really be pleased? I would imagine this would upset Dragonlance fans, not please them.
See, that's a tough call.
Obviously Dragonlance novels aren't the same without Weis and Hickman to most DL fans. Cam did some really awesome work on 3.5 material. I've not read his fiction though, sad to say. Someday, but I'm on a big FR kick right now, with a break to read Dragons of the Hourglass Mage. After that, I've got a Dragon Age (the video game) novel to read, the Kingmaker/Kingbreaker books, and then I'll finally get to the Ogre Titans (Dragonlance) toward the end of the year so I should be in time for the last book of that trilogy. I really enjoy Knaak's writing, and I hope that if they continue the DL line of fiction he's at least kept on board.
I've said before my preference is to have Weis and Hickman continue on, but it looks like that's not to be. I'd also like to have guys like Cam, Trampas and everyone else associated with the DL Nexus/MWP stay involved. However, Wizards pulled back the license. It's pretty clear WotC wants the material in-house, for whatever purpose they plan on using it.
It's a near-certainty that at some point DL will be converted to 4e. The only question is really "when?" I'd ask "who?" but again, it's pretty obvious that Wizards wants all of its worlds handled in-house.
Honestly, as much as I'd like MWP to lead the 4e charge on Krynn, I'll take it however I can get it. If that means solely through WotC, then so be it.
Of course, it would overjoy me if it turned out that all the things said by those such as MW, Cam, and Trampas turned out to be smokescreen tricks, and the announcement is that DL4e is going to be a joint production of MWP and WotC, I just don't see it happening.
What would be totally awesome would be if Bill stands up on stage and says, "Hey, you guys remember how I said in Ampersand that we've been working on multiple projects? Well, those projects are: a joint effort with MWP to produce DL4e, in addition to Dark Sun 4e, both of which will be released in 2010!"
That would make me
And I don't care about a Dark Sun 4e, at all. I'm not a fan, but I'd still love it if everyone got what they wanted.
Would you really be happy with a huge plot shift?
Also, I HIGHLY doubt WotC will try that again. This is one of the reasons I don't think DL will be 2010. If it was, it would already be pretty much finished. Cam and Weiss would have worked on it. They would have known something about it.
A plot shift would explain why they don't, but after the fiasco that the FR plot shift caused, I really don't think WotC would make that mistake.
Personally, I also really don't think WotC would make the mistake of releasing a DL Campaign Guide without Weiss's name on the front cover. It would be sort of like releasing FR without Greenwood, or Eberron without Keith Baker. Its just a bad move...
Just as an FYI, between the War of Souls and the Dark Disciple trilogies (and I assume the Minotaur Wars, Elven Exiles, Rise of Solamnia, and Ogre Titans trilogies) the world has undergone profound changes. The current age, as has been discussed in this thread, is truly a completely different world from the one known by those who stopped following Dragonlance previous to the War of Souls. It's much closer to a PoL setting than at any other time I know of.
But these changes where made by the novels in a logic manner that followed each other. Not a jump of x years so that the world fits the mechanics currently in play
I think you'll find that this is not, in fact, the case.
I think you'll find that this is not, in fact, the case.
The preceding message was brought to you today by the "Completely and Utterly False" department.
Now, had you wrote "I have found that, in my opinion, that is not the case" I'd have left it alone. However, since you continue to present your terribly biased opinion as fact, I will continue to call you out on it.
As I've said to william before in this thread, it's great to have your own opinion. Even better that you take advantage of the opportunity to share it with (potentially) the world, and especially the people of WotC. However, it remains your opinion and should be expressed as much.
Now as for what your opinion referred to, I completely dispute your opinion. Personally, had it not been specifically stated that Weis is not involved with 4e Dragonlance, I'd have believed that War of Souls and the Dark Disciple trilogies were specifically written to smoothly transition the world into the 4e age (which would mean they were in on the early 4e conversations and direction.)
In Ampersand, under the heading of GenCon Here We Come!, there's a sentence that tells us what the next setting is going to be. Whoops! It's been blacked out. However, look at the length of the blacked out word. Let's try an experiment:ShowDarkSun
What would be totally awesome would be if Bill stands up on stage and says, "Hey, you guys remember how I said in Ampersand that we've been working on multiple projects? Well, those projects are: a joint effort with MWP to produce DL4e, in addition to Dark Sun 4e, both of which will be released in 2010!"
One of the designers did say that they were interested in doing more than one campaign setting per year...
that might truly be the case, I kinda stopped reading DL after the war of souls to move onto different authors so it is possible that the following novels are just one big cluster****, but atleast I believe from what Ive read about them that it wasnt all for mechanic changes in the game. Which I think is what pisses so many people off, that this bad change wasnt made for the sake of the stories but for the game
I loved the changes to FR. Im currently looking at library for the books between war of lance and summer flame but dont know which are really relevant. I personally think it will be darksun because they arleady have a high fantasy world in FR.
The preceding message was brought to you today by the "Completely and Utterly False" department.
Now, had you wrote "I have found that, in my opinion, that is not the case" I'd have left it alone. However, since you continue to present your terribly biased opinion as fact, I will continue to call you out on it.
As I've said to william before in this thread, it's great to have your own opinion. Even better that you take advantage of the opportunity to share it with (potentially) the world, and especially the people of WotC. However, it remains your opinion and should be expressed as much.
Now as for what your opinion referred to, I completely dispute your opinion. Personally, had it not been specifically stated that Weis is not involved with 4e Dragonlance, I'd have believed that War of Souls and the Dark Disciple trilogies were specifically written to smoothly transition the world into the 4e age (which would mean they were in on the early 4e conversations and direction.)
It wasn't me that pointed out the connection between the novel's time progression and the game rules, Alio. See the reference to the SAGA rules on page 35 of this thread for details. That's not an opinion. That's history.
I loved the changes to FR. Im currently looking at library for the books between war of lance and summer flame but dont know which are really relevant. I personally think it will be darksun because they arleady have a high fantasy world in FR.
In the first book fo Dragons of a Fallen Sun it lists the following Dragon Lance books written by Weis and Hickman:
Chronicles
Dragons of Autumn Twilight
Dragons of Winter Night
Dragons of Spring Dawning
Legends
Time of the Twins
War of the Twins
Test of the Twins
----------------If I ever run in the Dragonlance setting I will ignore the canon below this line-----------------------
The Second Generation
Dragon of Summer Flame
The War of Souls
Draons of a Fallen Sun
Dragons of a Lost Star
Dragons of a Vanished Moon
It wasn't me that pointed out the connection between the novel's time progression and the game rules, Alio. See the reference to the SAGA rules on page 35 of this thread for details. That's not an opinion. That's history.
I pointed it out.
Second Generation came out in 1995.
The Fifth Age came out in 1996.
Dragons of Summerflame came out in 2002.
One of these products jacked up the magic system in Dragonlance, which was a rule change, the other products followed it. I don't have my Second Generation book or The Fifth Age Saga rules anymore. It has been 7 years since I read Dragons of Summerflame.
Either Summerflame or Second Generation details how Palin is attempting to rediscover magic since the old way didn't work anymore. I think it is Summerflame. The way Palin discovers magic works now is very, very close to the way it was done in The Fifth Age game.
Who cares if the changes were done for mechanical reasons or because Weis and Hickman got a wild hair up their arse? The end result ruined the Dragonlance setting, IMO.
I pointed it out.
Second Generation came out in 1995.
The Fifth Age came out in 1996.
Dragons of Summerflame came out in 2002.
One of these products jacked up the magic system in Dragonlance, which was a rule change, the other products followed it. I don't have my Second Generation book or The Fifth Age Saga rules anymore. It has been 7 years since I read Dragons of Summerflame.
Either Summerflame or Second Generation details how Palin is attempting to rediscover magic since the old way didn't work anymore. I think it is Summerflame. The way Palin discovers magic works now is very, very close to the way it was done in The Fifth Age game.
Who cares if the changes were done for mechanical reasons or because Weis and Hickman got a wild hair up their arse? The end result ruined the Dragonlance setting, IMO.
Well, the claim was made that there was no setting jump tied to system shenanigans, when there clearly was - Second Generation/SAGA. When I said that this claim was in error, Alio, being the enthusiastic go-getter that he is, jumped down my throat.
See, that's a tough call.
Obviously Dragonlance novels aren't the same without Weis and Hickman to most DL fans.
I guess I'm not most DL fans. IMO, those two screwed too much up for me to care if they are part of the design process or not for a DL 4E (if one comes out).
BAH! I was hoping the movie was going to be good. GAH!
Those two could screw up a perfectly good dream.
Well, the claim was made that there was no setting jump tied to system shenanigans, when there clearly was - Second Generation/SAGA. When I said that this claim was in error, Alio, being the enthusiastic go-getter that he is, jumped down my throat.
There are enthusiastic people all over the place. ;)
There is something similar about 2E AD&D Rangers being TWF and The Crystal Shard with Drizzt. I think The Crystal Shard came out in 1988 and 2E came out in 1989. IMO, both were being developed at the same time. I think (my opinion) the Rangers became TW Fighters because of Drizzt.
1. Does the evidence support it? Probably not.
2. Did a designer come out a say it? I don't think so.
I just have this itchy feeling if Drizzt didn't exist then Rangers wouldn't be TW Fighters. (Please do not derail the thread to discuss this)
Oh, and CelticMutt, the worst thing would be to have players become Dragonlords. For one, it would mean that the best part of their character would be after it is retired, and for another, the balanced rules wouldn't have them be as Epically overpowered as the need to be for the story. Better to have them more in the background, like the three dragons that make up the world of Eberron. Defilers are not heroes, and should not be played like one. I didn't like the choice in the 2nd edition set.
No. Just ... no. When there is an Epic Destiny to play a frickin Arch Devil Prince of Hell or a Dark Lord (as in the Ravenloft Dark Lords), you can damn sure bet that not only will Defilers be a PC option, but so will Dragon Kings as an Epic Destiny.
No. Just ... no. When there is an Epic Destiny to play a frickin Arch Devil Prince of Hell or a Dark Lord (as in the Ravenloft Dark Lords), you can damn sure bet that not only will Defilers be a PC option, but so will Dragon Kings as an Epic Destiny.
I agree with Celtic.
I guess I'm not most DL fans. IMO, those two screwed too much up for me to care if they are part of the design process or not for a DL 4E (if one comes out).
BAH! I was hoping the movie was going to be good. GAH!
Those two could screw up a perfectly good dream.
Well considering that this has been thier dream from the beginning and for the 25 years since they cant really screw it up, because they made their dream how they wanted it to be
No. Just ... no. When there is an Epic Destiny to play a frickin Arch Devil Prince of Hell or a Dark Lord (as in the Ravenloft Dark Lords), you can damn sure bet that not only will Defilers be a PC option, but so will Dragon Kings as an Epic Destiny.
Defilers are one of the main reasons that the world is a desert. The mechanics alone is a nightmare, having the Wizard go through an additional drawback to keep in theme with the setting? It is more of a plot point, an aberration for the PC's to meet and be disgusted with.
An ED for the Dragon Kings would fall woefully short on what they were in the original setting, and would retire the character short of actually playing the part. (30 level top off, right? )
Well considering that this has been thier dream from the beginning and for the 25 years since they cant really screw it up, because they made their dream how they wanted it to be
woa.... hold the phone.
being the creator does NOT make you immune to destroying your own product. As Mr Lucas...if he doesn't know what you ar talking about bring up the following key words...Jar Jar, Pod Race, Jango feit...
Defilers are one of the main reasons that the world is a desert. The mechanics alone is a nightmare, having the Wizard go through an additional drawback to keep in theme with the setting? It is more of a plot point, an aberration for the PC's to meet and be disgusted with.
An ED for the Dragon Kings would fall woefully short on what they were in the original setting, and would retire the character short of actually playing the part. (30 level top off, right? )
And yet the Defilers will still be a PC option. And no an ED Dragon King would not fall short of the original. Except for The Dragon, every single Dragon King was level 21 - 26, and one undead dragon at 29. That's perfectly in-line with an ED. You'd be a full dragon at 30, and then it's up to your DM how much longer you play. For any level 30 character.
In the first book fo Dragons of a Fallen Sun it lists the following Dragon Lance books written by Weis and Hickman:
Chronicles
Dragons of Autumn Twilight
Dragons of Winter Night
Dragons of Spring Dawning
Legends
Time of the Twins
War of the Twins
Test of the Twins
----------------If I ever run in the Dragonlance setting I will ignore the canon below this line-----------------------
The Second Generation
Dragon of Summer Flame
The War of Souls
Draons of a Fallen Sun
Dragons of a Lost Star
Dragons of a Vanished Moon
I would go a little further and include The Second Generation and come close to Summer Flame, just so I could include the Knights of Takhisis under Ariakan. During 3ed, I liked to play in the War of the Darklance alternate timeline from the Legends of the Twins sourcebook.
woa.... hold the phone.
being the creator does NOT make you immune to destroying your own product. As Mr Lucas...if he doesn't know what you ar talking about bring up the following key words...Jar Jar, Pod Race, Jango feit...
Jango Fett rocked ya mook.
But Phantom Menace was easily the worst SW movie. Even the Ewok movies were better.
And yet the Defilers will still be a PC option. And no an ED Dragon King would not fall short of the original. Except for The Dragon, every single Dragon King was level 21 - 26, and one undead dragon at 29. That's perfectly in-line with an ED. You'd be a full dragon at 30, and then it's up to your DM how much longer you play. For any level 30 character.
I bet there would be an ED along the simalar lines to demi god...where you end up being a dragon king, but that doesn't mean you will rule a kingdom...
Edit: Would the prequels have been considered by fans as Star Wars if Lucas wasnt involved?
the one difference though is that Lucas came back after 20 years of not really directly working on his own product. So it was a bigger difference, it wasnt the straw that broke the camels back, it was like a two by four. Weis and Hickman where gradually changing it in an organic way that proceded at a steady pace so that instead off doing it suddenly the change was able to slowly creep into its proper place
I am not saying they did, but I am saying that being the creator is not immune to making your own work jump the shark...once you hit a level of popularity you no longer are the main decider of what is good...just what happens...
And yet the Defilers will still be a PC option.
Along with other bad ideas like Assassins, large races with insane stats, and the ability to play sterile half-breeds.
And no an ED Dragon King would not fall short of the original. Except for The Dragon, every single Dragon King was level 21 - 26, and one undead dragon at 29. That's perfectly in-line with an ED. You'd be a full dragon at 30, and then it's up to your DM how much longer you play. For any level 30 character.
2nd edition levels 21 -26 is much like this new editions 31-36. Epic levels are really epic nears the end, at about 28 or so, in this new edition. The incentive to keep playing after level 30 is gone, no levels, no more powers, still somewhat poor with this Parcel System (Hope the DMG2 fixes this) and most ED has the character transcending to another form of existence.
Mostly, level 30 play is to tie up loose ends, having younger adventures start a whole new campaign.
Along with other bad ideas like Assassins, large races with insane stats, and the ability to play sterile half-breeds.
Large races?
Also... sterile half-breeds?
But to say that they ruined it? Thats going a little far i think, especially considering that the series is still a decent seller.
1st...the 'new' star wars movies made money...second I didn't say they did ruin it yet...I said they could...
I don't like the books after the twins trilogy...but I never said they destroyed it...but they could have or can...
It wasn't me that pointed out the connection between the novel's time progression and the game rules, Alio. See the reference to the SAGA rules on page 35 of this thread for details. That's not an opinion. That's history.
If that's the part you were referencing, then you should have either snipped out the rest, or bolded the part you were referring to. Instead, by quoting all of what was written, you appeared to be stating as fact that it was not the case that the progression was done smoothly, when that is nothing more than opinion.
Fair enough that I misunderstood your reference, but you should have been more clear. I won't dispute that timelines were manipulated to fit game mechanics, that much is obvious to those who know the parallel histories. Before learning of those parallel histories though, I had no problem with the jumps in the novels.
SAGA happened while I was away from gaming for an extended period, I was still reading though, so I read Summer Flame with zero knowledge of SAGA, and therefore, it didn't affect my opinion formation at all.
Well, the claim was made that there was no setting jump tied to system shenanigans, when there clearly was - Second Generation/SAGA. When I said that this claim was in error, Alio, being the enthusiastic go-getter that he is, jumped down my throat.
Really? This is how you want to act? Didn't we have enough of this earlier in the thread? As above, the burden is on you to be clear with your intended meaning. You weren't.
That's not me being an enthusiastic go-getter, that's me responding directly to something that you stated.
Along with other bad ideas like Assassins, large races with insane stats, and the ability to play sterile half-breeds.
Assassins are not a bad idea except to you, there will be no large race, and there has never been a sterile half-breed race other than the Mul. I have no idea what you're getting at, but if you're trying to say Defilers won't be in because of those, not only do you fail for mentioning Assassin, you fail for not using logic.
2nd edition levels 21 -26 is much like this new editions 31-36. Epic levels are really epic nears the end, at about 28 or so, in this new edition.
Wrong.
The incentive to keep playing after level 30 is gone, no levels, no more powers, still somewhat poor with this Parcel System (Hope the DMG2 fixes this) and most ED has the character transcending to another form of existence.
Mostly, level 30 play is to tie up loose ends, having younger adventures start a whole new campaign.
Also wrong, since people do actually play level 30.
Assassins are not a bad idea except to you, there will be no large race, and there has never been a sterile half-breed race other than the Mul. I have no idea what you're getting at, but if you're trying to say Defilers won't be in because of those, not only do you fail for mentioning Assassin, you fail for not using logic.
Wrong.
Also wrong, since people do actually play level 30.
Ok, someone asked in in another thread, and now I have to ask it... CleticMutt, are you Cyber-Dave? Because, I swear, you keep spouting my opinions!
Ok, someone asked in in another thread, and now I have to ask it... CleticMutt, are you Cyber-Dave? Because, I swear, you keep spouting my opinions!
Cyber-Dave and CelticMutt, I'm afraid I have to reveal your true orgins to you now. Both of you are actually sentient AIs that I dxeveloped to try and help me keep order in this place. You two just aren't aware of it because of some data corruption that occured during the time travel experiment that I performed on the two of you. Anytime the two of you disagree with me? Data corruption. Your memories of your real lives? Data corruption. The need to eat and sleep?.....well that was actually a design spec to make you two seem more realistic. Anyways in summation, I am your father! Join me!:P
I pointed it out.
Second Generation came out in 1995.
The Fifth Age came out in 1996.
Dragons of Summerflame came out in 2002.
This is not correct.
Dragons of Summer Flame was released in November 1995, following the Second Generation (which was essentially a collection of previously published novellas and short stories) in February 1995.
The Fifth Age Dramatic Adventure Game came out in September of 1996, the same month as Dawning of a New Age, the first of the Dragons of a New Age novels. Work had been done in the previous year to transition Summer Flame's plot into a revived brand, which was also paired with the SAGA System in order to distance it from AD&D. SAGA wasn't designed for Dragonlance originally, but it was being developed in-house and thus was co-opted for Fifth Age's narrative-driven model.
In 1999, with the SAGA version of the setting faring poorly in the market, the 15th anniversary of Dragonlance saw the release of a dual-stat revision of the original modules in one book.
Rise of the Titans, another dual-stat product, foreshadowed the War of Souls trilogy which welcomed Margaret and Tracy back to the setting as a writing duo (Margaret had already returned, with The Soulforge and various draconian short stories and novels). Dragons of a Fallen Sun was the first War of Souls novel, in March of 2000.
3rd edition D&D had no Dragonlance material published other than an appendix in Draconian Measures in late 2000 and a Tracy Hickman adventure (published first in 2001's Dungeon magazine, then the following year in Best of Tales II.)
The Dragonlance Campaign Setting (August, 2003) was the first 3.5 D&D campaign setting published. I remember working on it and the Age of Mortals sourcebook (September 2003) during the 3.0/3.5 transition. Some of the rules were a little raw, but once Sovereign Press got rolling I think we made up for that with some stellar product.
MWP is not working on Dragonlance material, as I've said before, and no new novels (as opposed to reprints) have been announced for 2010 beyond Fate of Thorbardin in January, completing Doug Niles' dwarf trilogy. They would have been by now, based on advance publisher requirements. Dragons of an Hourglass Mage is the last Dragonlance book from Margaret and Tracy, and once Jean Rabe's, Richard Knaak's and Doug Niles' trilogies are complete that's it.
Cheers,
Cam
Large races?
Also... sterile half-breeds?
Half-(sand) giants, large in 2E, oversized in 3E, probably oversized in 4E as well.
Half-dwarves, derogatively called "Muls" in Athas. They are actually a pretty good and fluffy addition to the setting fluff... until you realize that humans are mildly hairy and mildly psionic, dwarves and very hairy and mildly psionic, but their sterile half-breeds are hairless and highly psionic.
While I think ThaX is going overboard with all of his Darksun bashing, but then again one person's view of a setting is no less valid than another's... assuming they have experience with the setting.
Half-(sand) giants, large in 2E, oversized in 3E, probably oversized in 4E as well.
Half-dwarves, derogatively called "Muls" in Athas. They are actually a pretty good and fluffy addition to the setting fluff... until you realize that humans are mildly hairy and mildly psionic, dwarves and very hairy and mildly psionic, but their sterile half-breeds are hairless and highly psionic.
While I think ThaX is going overboard with all of his Darksun bashing, but then again one person's view of a setting is no less valid than another's... assuming they have experience with the setting.
I'm sure if they port Dark Sun to 4th edition, they'll change the half-giants mechanically to suit the system. Oversized/large PC races would be a little broken.
And sterile halfbreeds... so what? I'm not sure I see the problem.
But I'm excited for either Dark Sun and Dragonlance.
I'd rather Dark Sun, but DL would be cool too. (My group does NOT share this sentiment.) Besides, I just farm the campaigns for their classes, races, and feats. Fluff be damned, I'm homebrew through-and-through.Cyber-Dave and CelticMutt, I'm afraid I have to reveal your true orgins to you now. Both of you are actually sentient AIs that I dxeveloped to try and help me keep order in this place. You two just aren't aware of it because of some data corruption that occured during the time travel experiment that I performed on the two of you. Anytime the two of you disagree with me? Data corruption. Your memories of your real lives? Data corruption. The need to eat and sleep?.....well that was actually a design spec to make you two seem more realistic. Anyways in summation, I am your father! Join me!:P
Hahaha. Brilliant!
MWP is not working on Dragonlance material, as I've said before, and no new novels (as opposed to reprints) have been announced for 2010 beyond Fate of Thorbardin in January, completing Doug Niles' dwarf trilogy. They would have been by now, based on advance publisher requirements. Dragons of an Hourglass Mage is the last Dragonlance book from Margaret and Tracy, and once Jean Rabe's, Richard Knaak's and Doug Niles' trilogies are complete that's it.
Cheers,
Cam
The biggest problem for both Dark Sun and Dragonlance is that neither of them have any announced novels at this point. Which is part of the reason why I don't consider the lack of novels for either setting a plus or a minus.
I'm sure if they port Dark Sun to 4th edition, they'll change the half-giants mechanically to suit the system. Oversized/large PC races would be a little broken.
IIRC, Minotaurs in the MM1 were oversized. And while it hurt their versatility it wasn't mechanically broken.
And sterile halfbreeds... so what? I'm not sure I see the problem.
The sterile part does not bother me one bit. What bothers me is Muls being completely hairless and more naturally psionic than both of their parent races combined. Nothing about their appearance or abilities screams half-dwarf.
But I'm excited for either Dark Sun and Dragonlance.
I really don't care which published setting gets a game guide. I won't use it for anything beyong digging for bits to my my homebrew setting better anyway. ^_^
I just hope if they do make Dragonlance they retcon the horrible 5th-age/War of Souls crap into oblivion. (I haven't like a DL book since SoulForge, and the last point in the timeline I liked was Summer Flame).
IIRC, Minotaurs in the MM1 were oversized. And while it hurt their versatility it wasn't mechanically broken.
That's very true, but for the Dragon write-up (and inevitably the future PHB3 write-up) they don't have that racial feature.
Half-(sand) giants, large in 2E, oversized in 3E, probably oversized in 4E as well.
Half-dwarves, derogatively called "Muls" in Athas. They are actually a pretty good and fluffy addition to the setting fluff... until you realize that humans are mildly hairy and mildly psionic, dwarves and very hairy and mildly psionic, but their sterile half-breeds are hairless and highly psionic.
While I think ThaX is going overboard with all of his Darksun bashing, but then again one person's view of a setting is no less valid than another's... assuming they have experience with the setting.
Actually, Athasian Dwarves are not hairy. They are bald as babies butts.
I, despite my dislike on some of the more unheroic aspects, rather liked the Dark Sun setting. The biggest huddle, in my mind, would be the treatment of slavery in this dark and dreary world.
So to the question in the title of the thread, I think it is Dark Sun, not DragonLance.
... it'd be the first campaign book I buy if it were so.
Its actually not true. Its true that minotaurs, pre their racial write ups, had the oversized class feature. Its not true that it was not mechanically broken. In fact, it was mechanically broken enough that the developers stated that the power would never be given to any offical PC race write up.
Having used the MM minotaurs extensively, I can tell you they are not mechanically broken. It does not give the character a balance-breaking edge over other races. It does, however, pidgeonhole the race into a melee using class, as if they did not do that they would have a game-breaking loss in the balance scale.
I would love it if they used Dark Sun as a platform for a new variant "gritty" 4e...
... it'd be the first campaign book I buy if it were so.
A grimdark and gritty 4e campaign guide would win at existence.
Having used the MM minotaurs extensively, I can tell you they are not mechanically broken. It does not give the character a balance-breaking edge over other races. It does, however, pidgeonhole the race into a melee using class, as if they did not do that they would have a game-breaking loss in the balance scale.
If that is your opinion, fair enough. I'm sorry, but neither me nor the game designers agree with you. When you start taking races, giving them a +2 to strength, and then grant them the ability to use more powerful damage die weapons, what you have done is created the BEST combination for a strength based melee class in the game. There is no reason for anyone to play anything else, except for roleplaying. Oversized is a heluva overpowered ability. It drastically increases a melee based characters weapon damage dealing capabilities. There is nothing balanced about that.
Also, where did the game designers say that it was broken on the issue of damage out and how that broke the balance of the game? I distinctly remeber them not saying that. Just like in my opinion, I got the feel it was pulled because it made minotaurs not versatile enough.
The whole point was that races need to be able to be fun and playable in any class, Minotaurs from the MM and neither in any non-melee class.
Damage output is irrelevant in cooperative gameplay.
Not that minotaurs are an example, but in general this idea is bunk. We have a ranger that does more damage that all the other party members combined and it hampers other people's fun.
Being able to deal on average extra 1+([w]1.5) damage does not ever stop the other players from doing their jobs correctly or having fun playing the game.
The term "broken" gets thrown around a lot when it doesn't necessarily apply, but the oversized feature is definitely "poorly designed" if not "broken". When one option is far and away the best option over all the others, its faulty mechanic that need fixed. The +2 Str races with Oversized are an example of such faulty mechanics.
Damage output is irrelevant in cooperative gameplay. Being able to deal on average extra 1+([w]1.5) damage does not ever stop the other players from doing their jobs correctly or having fun playing the game.
That is bologna. In cooperative gameplay, damage output between different classes of different roles doesn't necessarily have to pan out. However, every class of the same role should be equally good at performing that role, and every build should be roughly balanced against any other build. Obviously, its never possible to perfectly achieve this result. But this is the goal. If you have a choice between a weapons based class with a build that deals significantly more damage, or a weapons based class with a build that deals significantly less, and in all other respects the builds are equal, there is no reason to ever choose the character that deals less damage. Once you introduce the oversized PC race with the +2 bonus to strength, there is no reason to play any other race as a strength based melee combatant.
And the increase to damage is a lot more than you make it out to be. Being able to wield a 2d6 brutal 2 weapon (which is what a large creature could wield in two hands) is a massive increase to damage when one keeps in mind the effects of the x[w] mechanic . So is being able to wield a 1d12 brutal 2 weapon in one hand.
Also, where did the game designers say that it was broken on the issue of damage out and how that broke the balance of the game? I distinctly remeber them not saying that. Just like in my opinion, I got the feel it was pulled because it made minotaurs not versatile enough.
The whole point was that races need to be able to be fun and playable in any class, Minotaurs from the MM and neither in any non-melee class.
They never said, outright, that the reason was the increase in damage output. However, that is the only logical explanation. The changes the developers made did not make the minotaur more versatile. Its class based encounter power keys off only one attack stat, strength. At the time the race was first released, only melee based combatants used strength as a primary stat. Right now, only one spellcaster uses strength as a main stat (and the stat is its secondary stat not its primary stat). The minotaur is still not a particularly versatile race. Nothing has changed. And yet, they removed the oversized quality. If a lack of versatility was not what they considered to be the primary problem of the race (as they did not drastically increase the races versatility, and didn't increase its versatility at all at the time of its release) the only logical explanation is that they considered the increased damage output to be unbalanced.
I just hope if they do make Dragonlance they retcon the horrible 5th-age/War of Souls crap into oblivion. (I haven't like a DL book since SoulForge, and the last point in the timeline I liked was Summer Flame).
This has to do with the lack of Raistlin in all post Summer Flame books doesn't it?
This has to do with the lack of Raistlin in all post Summer Flame books doesn't it?
He was in Dragons of Vanished Moon, just not as a main character.
He was in Dragons of Vanished Moon, just not as a main character.
That's right. I just forgot about him. I just figured that his death or whatever was the reason alot of DL fans quit liking the books. He is the poster child for the angst ridden youth after all.
The current DL is so very cool to me. I just like the way the world is set up now. Turmoil in almost every area. The minotaurs in Silvanesti, the elves in the Vale of Silence, Samoval and the knights of Neraka in Qualinesti. There are now more open areas to adventure in. There are now more reasons to adventure.
Just my opinion. I could be wrong.
That's right. I just forgot about him. I just figured that his death or whatever was the reason alot of DL fans quit liking the books. He is the poster child for the angst ridden youth after all.
The current DL is so very cool to me. I just like the way the world is set up now. Turmoil in almost every area. The minotaurs in Silvanesti, the elves in the Vale of Silence, Samoval and the knights of Neraka in Qualinesti. There are now more open areas to adventure in. There are now more reasons to adventure.
Just my opinion. I could be wrong.
I like the very same things you mentioned about the current era, but there are things I really hate as well. The KNights of Neraka are incredibly lame in comparison to the Knights of Takhisis. The afflicted Kender are kind of dumb, the various new kinds of magic detract from the setting instead of adding to it, and the two chief protagonists among the gods are gone. Pretty much every thing that really separated every other campaign world from Krynn has been butchered.
That's right. I just forgot about him. I just figured that his death or whatever was the reason alot of DL fans quit liking the books. He is the poster child for the angst ridden youth after all.
The current DL is so very cool to me. I just like the way the world is set up now. Turmoil in almost every area. The minotaurs in Silvanesti, the elves in the Vale of Silence, Samoval and the knights of Neraka in Qualinesti. There are now more open areas to adventure in. There are now more reasons to adventure.
Just my opinion. I could be wrong.
I don't think you're wrong at all. I see much more potential for a variety of storytelling and role playing options in the "current" DL. I don't like the idea of a reboot back to the War of the Lance for the sole reason that it will tend to lead to lazy storytelling or railroaded adventuring. Every fan of DL knows about the events of the War of the Lance and I think many of those fans that DM would want to follow along with or replicate those events. Been there, done that, read it 15+ years ago. I wouldn't be opposed to including a section in the CS showing tips on how to run a campaign set during the War complete with a historical account of the events, but a reboot to that time would be disappointing.
I don't think the events of the 5th Age and War of the Souls were as lame as everyone is seeming to say. Certainly not out of line with anything that has happened in the Realms, at least. While I personally think it is unlikely, to say that the last handful of books were so bad that we're pretending they never happened would be somewhat disrespectful to MW and TH. Everything changes. No one is stopping anyone from playing a nostalgia campaign. From a DMs standpoint, it is far easier to enhance a campaign by limiting or subtracting options or history than by adding stuff that wasn't included. My two cents, anywho.
Also, this is a Dragonlance thread so maybe we should migrate the DS discussion back over to the actual Darksun thread.;)
The 5th age is as much a part of dragonlance as the war of the lance. If you scrap the chaos war, the time of the one moon, the war of souls or the age of mortals, you might as well scrap the war of the lance, raistlin majere, the orders of high sorcery, the knightly orders, the entire patheon, the cosmology, the original timeline and the entire campaign setting. Then we can rename it forgotten realms and call it a day.
Seriously, its part of the setting and has been for a long time. Its part of what dragonlance is, whether you like it or not, the 5th age IS dragonlance.
While I personally think it is unlikely, to say that the last handful of books were so bad that we're pretending they never happened would be somewhat disrespectful to MW and TH.
I want the setting to be rebooted, but I will say that I actually liked all of the novels Weis and Hickman wrote for DL. Summer Flame change the setting into a place that I didn't want to game in, but it was a great books, and I really liked the War of Souls Trilogy.
I don't think they contradict either. I loved Star Trek the Next Generation, and plenty of the Star Trek movies, like the Undiscovered Country and First Contact—but I'm still psyched as hell about the new movie that rebooted the franchise. It just got to the point in the Star Trek franchise that the dead weight needed to be cut away, and I think Dragonlance is there too.
I want the setting to be rebooted, but I will say that I actually liked all of the novels Weis and Hickman wrote for DL. Summer Flame change the setting into a place that I didn't want to game in, but it was a great books, and I really liked the War of Souls Trilogy.
I don't think they contradict either. I loved Star Trek the Next Generation, and plenty of the Star Trek movies, like the Undiscovered Country and First Contact—but I'm still psyched as hell about the new movie that rebooted the franchise. It just got to the point in the Star Trek franchise that the dead weight needed to be cut away, and I think Dragonlance is there too.
Yeah, I get that and I agree on the Trek part for sure. However, as a clarification, I think that the type of campaign you want to game in can be easily achieved through subtraction (read: restricting rules options) from a CS set after the War of Souls. Conversely, the type of campaign I would like to see would take much more work to build through addition (read: building from scratch) from a rebooted setting. Paring down a crowded campaign setting is much easier than building up a sparse one, IMHO.
Yeah, I get that and I agree on the Trek part for sure. However, as a clarification, I think that the type of campaign you want to game in can be easily achieved through subtraction (read: restricting rules options) from a CS set after the War of Souls. Conversely, the type of campaign I would like to see would take much more work to build through addition (read: building from scratch) from a rebooted setting. Paring down a crowded campaign setting is much easier than building up a sparse one, IMHO.
While that's technically true, it doesn't really change the fact that many people want a DL focused on their own view of DL. I don't know who's in the majority, but if most favor WoL era DL, then any work done on 5th age or later DL is pretty much wasted effort and capital. I just think any decision about where a campaign setting would start would be where the fans want it too. Maybe I'm wrong though, and a sizable majority of people like the new DL eras.
Personally, the more I think about it, the less enthusiastic I am about 4e DL. I've become nearly entirely dissatisfied with 4e lately, and I find myself thinking that even if DL is the choice for this year, a player's guide, campaign setting and one adventure won't nearly satisfy me the the wonderful sourcebooks DL had in 3e did. I think 4e D&D has become pretty sterile— I picked up Divine Power a week ago and I couldn't do more but flip through it. I used to read my D&D sourcebooks cover to cover and if felt almost like I was reading a sort of tour book of a fantasy world, with the game rules being a sort of description of the laws of physics of the place. I don't get that feeling anymore.
I don't think it's just nostalgia either. Look at the 4e Monster Manual and flip to the beholder and read it—and do it while trying to forget everything you know about beholders from past editions. The entry really doesn't tell us anything. Maybe I'm jaded, but I'm almost certain that if I had never played D&D before and came across any of the books and glanced through it, I would have just put the book down and looked elsewhere for something more interesting. A big part of me is worried that a 4ed DL sourcebook will do the same thing—reduce everything wonderful about DL into a few sparse lines of flavor injected into heaps of statistics.
I could run a DL game in any era w/o a book to tell me how to do it. I still have all of the 1st, 2nd, & 3rd ed books. I am fairly sure that there is at least one map of Krynn pre-cataclysm in one of them and I can find the maps for after the 2nd as well. Meaning every era is posible.
I want the CS to continue the cannon as it currently stands so I have something to base the game from.
Hey, maybe I'm in the minority.
"[A beholder is a] large aberrant magical beast.
"Beholders use a wise range of minions and strike alliances with other powerful monsters. Eyes of Flame prefer to fight behind a group of submissive soldiers or brutes.
"Eyes of Flame are less egotical than Beholder Eye Tyrants and will work with one another. They often serve more powerful Beholder masters.
"Beholder Eye Tyrants consider themselves to be paragons of creation, and they like to rule over 'lesser' creatures. An Eye Tyrant's ego prevents it from egtting along with others of its kind."
For myself, that is enough background material. Plus there is a clear illustration. I do not want to know how they defecate, masticate or reproduce. And I am sure I could make it up if I had to. Aberrant tells me it is a creature from the cthulhoid far realm.
That's right. I just forgot about him. I just figured that his death or whatever was the reason alot of DL fans quit liking the books. He is the poster child for the angst ridden youth after all.
The current DL is so very cool to me. I just like the way the world is set up now. Turmoil in almost every area. The minotaurs in Silvanesti, the elves in the Vale of Silence, Samoval and the knights of Neraka in Qualinesti. There are now more open areas to adventure in. There are now more reasons to adventure.
Just my opinion. I could be wrong.
I really don't think there is a right or wrong here. I agree, though, that the current world is very cool, and I would enjoy playing in it a lot. I have had a lot of fun just thinking of how to build the current world in 4e (I made the elves in the Vale of Silence Eladrin).
What people who hate the 5th Age don't seem to understand is that there are as many 5th Age novels as 4th Age novels, and the 5th Age comprises 14 of the 25 years the setting has existed. It is a big part of the setting, a major part. If they added Paladine and Takhisis back into the gods, I would feel it more complete.
I really don't think there is a right or wrong here. I agree, though, that the current world is very cool, and I would enjoy playing in it a lot. I have had a lot of fun just thinking of how to build the current world in 4e (I made the elves in the Vale of Silence Eladrin).
What people who hate the 5th Age don't seem to understand is that there are as many 5th Age novels as 4th Age novels, and the 5th Age comprises 14 of the 25 years the setting has existed. It is a big part of the setting, a major part. If they added Paladine and Takhisis back into the gods, I would feel it more complete.
Many of the novels were about the 5th age, but the best-selling books weren't. I suppose War of Souls did well, but it ended the 5th age.
Many of the novels were about the 5th age, but the best-selling books weren't. I suppose War of Souls did well, but it ended the 5th age.
Yes, I believe all three books of the War of Souls trilogy were all NY Times Best Sellers, but the War of Souls did not end the 5th Age. Krynn is in its 5th Age, and from all accounts, it will be the last age.
The KNights of Neraka are incredibly lame in comparison to the Knights of Takhisis. The afflicted Kender are kind of dumb, the various new kinds of magic detract from the setting instead of adding to it, and the two chief protagonists among the gods are gone. Pretty much every thing that really separated every other campaign world from Krynn has been butchered.
With no Takhisis, the Knights of Nereka lost their leadership...Turmoil. Sorcerery and the power of the heart have added new things, things that a 4e game needs. Takhisis is dead. Get over it.
The afflicted Kender are kinda dumb.
I think they made the setting stronger. What makes you think it's butchered?
My bet is that it will be Dragonlance when the announcement comes. Damn shame.
With no Takhisis, the Knights of Nereka lost their leadership...Turmoil. Sorcerery and the power of the heart have added new things, things that a 4e game needs. Takhisis is dead. Get over it.
The afflicted Kender are kinda dumb.
I think they made the setting stronger. What makes you think it's butchered?
One of the great things about DL was it's coherence. THe world had it's own rules and ecology, and they were unique. No orcs or drow. All magic essentially came from the gods, who numbered 21 and were extremely anthropomorphic. There were no clerics of "law", or "caverns", or other merely conceptual ideas.
It was a world that looked like it was created by a group of gods, who were now fighting over rulership of it. If a cleric had faith in something other than the gods, he gained no power over it. If he exhibited powers, he was a charlatan.
It had memorable characters and organizations, and the whole world was about heroism and sacrifice and dedication.
Monsters had little ecological niches, though admittedly contrived, and Krynn never tried to be the place where everything existed, like Forgotten Realms did. Gnomes were different, even if annoying, and halflings never existed.
During the Fifth age DL became a lame place where every human villain was a stooge for a super powerful Dragon Overlord from an alien planet. One of the coolest evil organizations in any campaign setting became nothing more than drunken armored thugs. The gods disappeared and magic became lame. Cool organizations like "The Orders of High Sorcery", with their awesome magical towers became something stupid like "The Academy of Sorcery" with some stupid building near Solace that looked like something designed by the United Nations.
Eventually, DL started to suck so much that they realized they had to fix, so they brought most of the good stuff back, but now those gems are quite literally floating in a pool of crap that you have to wade through to appreciate.
"Few monsters evoke greater terror than the dread beholder, an avaricious tyrant that fires terrible rays from its eyestalks.
"[A beholder is a] large aberrant magical beast.
"Beholders use a wise range of minions and strike alliances with other powerful monsters. Eyes of Flame prefer to fight behind a group of submissive soldiers or brutes.
"Eyes of Flame are less egotical than Beholder Eye Tyrants and will work with one another. They often serve more powerful Beholder masters.
"Beholder Eye Tyrants consider themselves to be paragons of creation, and they like to rule over 'lesser' creatures. An Eye Tyrant's ego prevents it from egtting along with others of its kind."
For myself, that is enough background material. Plus there is a clear illustration. I do not want to know how they defecate, masticate or reproduce. And I am sure I could make it up if I had to. Aberrant tells me it is a creature from the cthulhoid far realm.
Right, I guess the fact that while they are aggressive and egotistical, they are also self-preserving and will negotiate with parties who are sufficiently imposing isn't very interesting. Or the fact that you could cut off their eye-stalks without damaging the beholder, but that they grow back within a week. All of that stuff helps make it feel like a real and interesting creature, while the stuff about it in the 4ed MM remind me of the little monster descriptions I used to read in my Legend of Zelda walkthrough guide.
Yes, I believe all three books of the War of Souls trilogy were all NY Times Best Sellers, but the War of Souls did not end the 5th Age. Krynn is in its 5th Age, and from all accounts, it will be the last age.
I'd actually like to see it move passed the age of mortals, not that I don't completely enjoy the 5th age. The 5th age IMO just isn't a good time period to flex its 4e muscles. We need to advance the storyline so we can include more 4e elements without it feeling out of place. Plus, Krynn has been stuck in the same time period forever. Now we actually have blackpowder! Progression has been seen! Its a miracle!:D
DL doesn't have to turn into a steampunker setting or another eberron but it really does need to advance itself a bit. WoHs and Mad Gnomes need to join forces with Solamnia, the Elves and the Dwarves, with the blessing of Reorx and pump new life into the setting.
During the Fifth age DL became a lame place where every human villain was a stooge for a super powerful Dragon Overlord from an alien planet. One of the coolest evil organizations in any campaign setting became nothing more than drunken armored thugs. The gods disappeared and magic became lame. Cool organizations like "The Orders of High Sorcery", with their awesome magical towers became something stupid like "The Academy of Sorcery" with some stupid building near Solace that looked like something designed by the United Nations.
Eventually, DL started to suck so much that they realized they had to fix, so they brought most of the good stuff back, but now those gems are quite literally floating in a pool of crap that you have to wade through to appreciate.
All that you hate is what I love. I like the mortal age. I think that it is the best place to adventer. There is so much to see in the new Krinn. You like the evil Knights, they lost thier god...of course they are in disarray. If all they do is drink and ****, the are still an evil to be destroyed.
In a world without gods, the dragon overlords were the worst thing ever. The mortals had to find a way to exist with the dragons, they cound't defeat them. Turmoil. It is what a new CS needs. DS is'nt in turmoil last I read. The Tyr region had become peaceful, and the dragonkings were on the run. Turmoil was defeated, thus I believe that DL would be a better world. The whole world is in turmoil. Adventurers line up. We have a world to take back.
again, just my thoughts, I could be wrong.
Hlethvagi
Peace is boring, conflict breeds adventure. Action promotes play.
In a world without gods, the dragon overlords were the worst thing ever. The mortals had to find a way to exist with the dragons, they cound't defeat them. Turmoil. It is what a new CS needs. DS is'nt in turmoil last I read. The Tyr region had become peaceful, and the dragonkings were on the run. Turmoil was defeated, thus I believe that DL would be a better world. The whole world is in turmoil. Adventurers line up. We have a world to take back.
again, just my thoughts, I could be wrong.
Umm, yeah. You are very wrong indeed. At least, about Dark Sun's Tyr Region becoming peaceful.
The majority of the sorcerer-monarchs were still alive.
The Dragon of Tyr has been replaced by a much more dangerous foe: an undead Dragon-King named Dregoth, who is vastly more ambitious, and more powerful, with access to tremendously dangerous magic items (he was only one level lower than Borys when he was killed), including a portal to other worlds that he has used extensively. He also has a race of beings he created (the dray, akin to dragonborn) who worship him and fight for him. He is much more patient, yet much more active than Borys was. He doesn't collect a tribute to keep Rajaat imprisoned. Rather, all he does is to further his own goals.
Tyr itself is now basically a representative republic. It does not have the protection of a sorcerer-monarch, and controls one of the largest concentrations of iron still known in the region. It has become more a haven for preservers to flock to, however, although the citizens are still quite wary. It is one of the few points of hope in the world, along with the city of Kurn, which secretly has an avangion instead of a dragon as its monarch. Tyr, again one of the few cities in the region without a dragon-king, is all that stands between the Tyr region and a huge threat:
The Kreen Empire, an absolutely massive nation of six sub-species of thri-kreen, and their tohr-kreen super-soldiers, now has an access point to the region, thanks to a huge earthquake. They've constructed a large wall, and set up outposts, having begun to test the defenses of the region. They plan a huge invasion. A sweeping war looks likely to engulf the region once more.
A continent-sized plain of pure obsidian has been found to lie south of the region. The entire plain is covered in undead, and obsidian-coated ruins of cities. Little is known of the region.
Rajaat has a new, weaker prison, and the Obsidian Lens is trapped deep below the earth now. It is not known how or when he may return, and if he does, it is far less likely he can be stopped.
So yes, while there are now more points of hope on Athas where once there were all-but none, that hope looks to be fleeting without a lot of help.
Sounds like a good point for PCs to step in, and become points of hope themselves, trying to make the world slightly better, step by baby step.
Also, only 3 SK's were left of the original tyr monarchs, the others are either dead or trapped. (not including the one who became a AV) Also near the end of RaFoaDK, rajaat was somehow free and coming for urik, which lead to hamanu allowing his transformation (IIRC) a willing transformation into the final steps and then his self imprisonment in the obsidian. (but thats a discussion for another thread, not a dragonlance thread.)
It isn't Dragonlance.
Cheers,
Cam
Posted this to the Dark Sun thread already, but thought I should post it here too. Cam Banks is managing editor of Margaret Weiss Productions, who last I heard still had rights to Dragonlance.
Ninjad!
The only problem with that is WotC pulled all of the rights to DL from MWP nearly a year and a half ago. So Cam will not be in the loop as to what is happening anymore.
Now saying that he seems like he cares for the setting he has worked on for so very long. He just cannot effect it in any way.
Unless WotC re-licensed it to MWP, in which case it could still be announced at the 25th Anniversary at Gencon and not be WotCs next setting. However, IMO that's unlikely and I take his pronouncement with a huge grain of salt since there is no evidence to support it.
Hey, maybe I'm in the minority.
Then I am in the minority too.
The books, IMO, that destroyed Krynn (DoSF, War of ouls triology) were great to read but they destroyed the campaign setting I was most interested in playing. The time approximately 3 years after War of the Lance (1 year after Time of the Twins).
That's ok. I have all the necessary information I need from AD&D 1E to run a DL campaign. I don't need to buy anything from WotC concerning Dragonlance.
Meh, I'd rather see Dark Sun before Dragonlance, I liked Dragonlance as a kid but it's pretty dull. I'd like to see something new and unique than either, three rehashed settings in a row reeks of lack of creativity.
My bet is that it will be Dragonlance when the announcement comes. Damn shame.
I'll take a Dark Sun campaign setting over a Dragonlance setting. I like DL more prior to 2002.
I'm also getting the feeling that many of the nay sayers here have no idea what the current Dragonlance world is like after the War of Souls.
What I'd really like to see is to move forward about 100 years. No cataclysm. Just small gradual changes. Ansalon has had so much happen to it over such a short time, it's time to let there be peace for awhile as the new major powers build their empires. The CS can take place after those powers are fully established and begin to test each other (Dragonlance is a war setting after all).
The Knights of Neraka are a wonderful villian who have been at times overused but despite this have never been utilized to their full potential save for the first halfof Dragons of Summer Flame. Give them a strong leader and a clear goal/purpose. Show us what happens with the Tarmuks. What do the minitaurs do after they have assimilated Silvanesti? How do the Orders of High Sorcery deal with Sorcerors?
Most 4E changes are EASY to explain since Krynn was PHYSICALLY MOVED by Takhisis. The new system of planes can be a reaction to that. Tieflings and Dragonborn are easy enough to explain as well, just create a newly discovered chain of islands between Ansalon and Taladas where they've always been. This introduces the Tieflings and Dragonborn AND links Ansalon and Taladas together at last.
Mina's ascension can explain just about anything else.
Launch the campaign setting with a new trilogy by Weis and Hickman. The purpose of this trilogy is to introduce the setting and settle the conflicts of the characters... but NOT to settle the conflicts in the world. Giving us the best of both worlds. This trilogy should be about CHARACTERS and not the EVENTS. Design these adventurers by comittee if you have to just like how it was done for the Heroes of the Lance. But make them unique and flavorful. Use them to show the new CS in microcosm.
And last of all... stop trying to make Dragonlance into just any other setting. Embrace REAL Kender and Gnomes. Just give guidelines on how to use them. Whimsy is part of Dragonlance. It's what helps give it the soul that places like Forgotten Realms lack.
Also... show us what you can do with an adventure path. Dragonlance is a world at war... so give us an EPIC adventure path in Dungeon magazine in addition to the starter adventure and first module. Because honestly I love everything about 4th Edition but your modules are extremely lacking at the moment.
To sum it up... move the timeline forward but give us in that new era what we loved in the original but without lame cataclysmic events or shake ups to get there. Emphasize what makes Dragonlance unique and don't be afraid to embrace those differences. Link the fiction and Campaign Setting together but do so in a way that players don't feel overshadowed. Make novels about characters not events.
Regarding Dragonlance, you know what's most important and significant and personally meaningful to me is that this is the 25th anniversary of the setting. This year, with the release of Dragons of an Hourglass Mage, and the last few books in a collection of trilogies coming in, this year's the big silver.
They could shock everybody and release a Dragonlance sourcebook next year, and an adventure, and a campaign guide. But it's so not my concern at the moment. I mean, can't we celebrate what it is and was and could be this year, and not take all of the celebrations as hints as to a 3-book product line the year AFTER its anniversary?
Cheers,
Cam
So, from that, it appears Cam is still open to Dragonlance being the 2010 setting.
Shall we let the speculation recommence?
Well, it looks like Cam has more to say on DL in 2010.
So, from that, it appears Cam is still open to Dragonlance being the 2010 setting.
Shall we let the speculation recommence?
Well, that just confirms what we've been suspecting. Cam has no idea what the next setting will be, but he doesn't seem to think that DL is very likely. Could still happen, but it is looking to be less and less likely for DL. Whether it'll be Dark Sun or not is a different question.
Well, that just confirms what we've been suspecting. Cam has no idea what the next setting will be, but he doesn't seem to think that DL is very likely. Could still happen, but it is looking to be less and less likely for DL. Whether it'll be Dark Sun or not is a different question.
He does think it would shock us if they did release a DL CG/PG/Adv next year, which is what WotC told us they were going to do.
He does think it would shock us if they did release a DL CG/PG/Adv next year, which is what WotC told us they were going to do.
1) WotC has NEVER stated that Dragonlance would be the 2011 setting.
2) All Cam stated is that people should take the 25th Anniversary Celebrations as just that, and not a sign that it will be the 2011 setting. That does not suggest that it will be the 2010 setting. He has outright stated that he does not believe it will be.
1) WotC has NEVER stated that Dragonlance would be the 2011 setting.
2) All Cam stated is that people should take the 25th Anniversary Celebrations as just that, and not a sign that it will be the 2011 setting. That does not suggest that it will be the 2010 setting. He has outright stated that he does not believe it will be.
Umm, Cam doesn't make reference to 2011 at all in the quote. He makes a statement that he would be surprised that DL would be the setting next year (2010), but never mentions 2011.
Where you not just trying to say that that quote by Cam puts Dragonlance as a potential next setting? And, if you were trying to say this, were you not trying to say it because you felt that Cam was saying that it is more likely that they would release the setting sooner rather than later? As in, you felt that he was saying that they are more likely to release it in 2010 than 2011? And, if I did misunderstand you, would you mind please clarifying what you were trying to say?
EDIT: Ah, I see. You were trying to say that Cam thinks it would shock us, which WotC claimed that its next release will. Well. That's what I get for reading and posting in the forums at 2:37 AM. Please forgive my sleep addled lack of wits.
EDIT: Ah, I see. You were trying to say that Cam thinks it would shock us, which WotC claimed that its next release will. Well. That's what I get for reading and posting in the forums at 2:37 AM. Please forgive my sleep addled lack of wits.
It happens
. Ultimately, it doesn't matter if Cam does or does not think DL is coming in 2010. Cam is as in the know as I am (as in NOT in the know), based on his statement.Once again, I am going to renew my plea for WotC to just get it over with and tell us already.
Once again, I am going to renew my plea for WotC to just get it over with and tell us already.
Amen!
Amen!
I am beginning to think that there is no 2010 setting and this is all a ploy to get players and DMs to say "Screw it, I am am just going to buy FR/Eberron". That sure would surprise the crap out of me. Though I can't say it would delight me.
I have a plan formulated in my head for busting into WotC headquarters all ninja-like, and getting view of what is coming out next. But then I keep having recurring thoughts of a secret pet Tarrasque being kept there that eats me alive.
the same goes for for whether or not it will be Dark Sun or Grey Hawk.
however evidence does point to DL.
which as I am sure we all know only means one thing.
nothing.
either way in 2010, people will be pleased or disappointed.
some will buy it, some wont.
So, from that, it appears Cam is still open to Dragonlance being the 2010 setting.
Shall we let the speculation recommence?
Oh please can we just let the speculation die. We have less then a week until it is announced, and I'd sort of prefer a peaceful week before the riots begin rather than a week of chaos. Besides we all already know it is going to be Dark Sun.....or Star*Drive:P
never heard of star drive, is it like spell jammer??
It was a campaign setting for the Alternity RPG from WotC. Rich Baker, who made statements people are using to justify what the next setting is (he is one of the lead developers), was one of the leads.
Sincerely,
Lord Dreadman
Just because a new setting comes out doesn't mean you have to play it, but you don't have to wish others couldn't as well. Thats almost like someone saying they wish dragonlance was the ONLY setting for 4e and all other settings should hit the trash bin.
Completely unreasonable. Dragonlance is a solid setting enjoyed by much more than a small selection of fans or it would not have seen the amount of support it has since its introduction.
I had a nightmare last night that the 2010 CS was Dragonlance. I'm not kidding. It sucked.
Sincerely,
Lord Dreadman
I guess it is too much to ask for civil, adult discussion on internet forums.
I guess it is too much to ask for civil, adult discussion on internet forums.
Basically. But I have to admit that I'm not suprised by the common attitude here on the wotc forums. I mean these are not just people who enjoy gaming, they're infact "gamers" and I think we know what that means.
Yeah, I know, thats a stereotype, but enough gamers act EXACTLY like that, so the stereotype is very well supported.;)
This reply will PROBABLY get deleted, but I felt like it had to be said.
It was a campaign setting for the Alternity RPG from WotC. Rich Baker, who made statements people are using to justify what the next setting is (he is one of the lead developers), was one of the leads.
You are forgetting that he was involved with at least 6 other supplements for the setting, wrote a short story for it, and a novel for it. Only setting he has been more involved with is Forgotten Realms.....which would cause all kinds of riots and hilarity were it to be the 2010 setting. So FR for 2010!:D :P
You are forgetting that he was involved with at least 6 other supplements for the setting, wrote a short story for it, and a novel for it. Only setting he has been more involved with is Forgotten Realms.....which would cause all kinds of riots and hilarity were it to be the 2010 setting. So FR for 2010!:D :P
Oh, I haven't blocked that possibility out of my mind. It certainly would surprise(the other setting fans) and delight(the FR fans not pleased with the 4e version). Of course, it would probably not delight WotC to see the angry mob of DL/DS/PS/SJ/etc. fans charging them at GenCon with pitchforms and torches.
I also haven't blocked the possibility of there being two Campaign Settings released next year. Sure, they keep telling us they won't do that, but it could just be deflection. James Wyatt, lead designer of whatever it is that is coming out, said he wasn't opposed to more than one.
I guess it is too much to ask for civil, adult discussion on internet forums.
Oh, for goodness sake! I thought it was funny! I wouldn't have said it if it wasn't true. I really don't care what the CS is in 2010, to be honest with you (I'm happy with Eberron). I was just looking through the forums this morning and remembered my dream last night. It really was a terrible dream ... the fact that Dragonlance was the setting might not have even been involved ... but it was.
You ought to appologise. I meant no offense; I merely thought it was a humorous coincidence that people were talking about my dream.
Then again, perhaps only children have dreams nowadays.
Just so you know, that comment offends me. You ought to say you are sorry.
Sincerely,
Lord Dreadman
I'm having cold sweats and Nam flashbacks of 4e eberron.
:DOh, for goodness sake! I thought it was funny! I wouldn't have said it if it wasn't true. I really don't care what the CS is in 2010, to be honest with you (I'm happy with Eberron). I was just looking through the forums this morning and remembered my dream last night. It really was a terrible dream ... the fact that Dragonlance was the setting might not have even been involved ... but it was.
You ought to appologise. I meant no offense; I merely thought it was a humorous coincidence that people were talking about my dream.
Then again, perhaps only children have dreams nowadays.
Just so you know, that comment offends me. You ought to say you are sorry.
Sincerely,
Lord Dreadman
Double lol? The way you worded your comment implied that what sucked was that DL was the 2010 setting. Word things better next time?
Oh, I haven't blocked that possibility out of my mind. It certainly would surprise(the other setting fans) and delight(the FR fans not pleased with the 4e version). Of course, it would probably not delight WotC to see the angry mob of DL/DS/PS/SJ/etc. fans charging them at GenCon with pitchforms and torches.
I also haven't blocked the possibility of there being two Campaign Settings released next year. Sure, they keep telling us they won't do that, but it could just be deflection. James Wyatt, lead designer of whatever it is that is coming out, said he wasn't opposed to more than one.
Oh they are going to have to deal with the pitchforks and torches unless they announce the "twelve months of settings" at gencon. Fans of every campaign setting have convinced themselves that it is going to be their favorite setting(heck we have a Gamma World thread). Almost all of those fans are going to to be disapointed, and all the hard core fans will riot....which I'm hoping will give us at least one entertaining news story before Gencon is over with.
As for multiple settings in a year, I don't see doing that just yet. The way I'm looking at it is that they are going to limit themselves to a single campaign setting a year until they start to run out of ideas for other products at which point they will start using additional ones to plug in the release schedule holes. I don't think they are going to resort to that for a couple more years.
Almost all of those fans are going to to be disapointed, and all the hard core fans will riot....which I'm hoping will give us at least one entertaining news story before Gencon is over with.
Que the intro to Starcraft 1, where the marine (played by the wotc rep) is running through the trenches as the zerglings (played by fans) are fast approaching.;)
We all know what happens next.:D
The way you worded your comment implied that what sucked was that DL was the 2010 setting. Word things better next time?
Which is exactly how I took it. And no, LordDreadman, you won't get an apology if that was your intent. Drive-by posts of "This setting sucks!" are juvenile and don't have a place in any discussion.
Que the intro to Starcraft 1, where the marine (played by the wotc rep) is running through the trenches as the zerglings (played by fans) are fast approaching.;)
We all know what happens next.:D
I know that was ment as a joke, but if we fans get anymore rabid, theses devs will start to need body guards at conventions...
Which is exactly how I took it. And no, LordDreadman, you won't get an apology if that was your intent. Drive-by posts of "This setting sucks!" are juvenile and don't have a place in any discussion.
Whatever, man. I guess some jokes aren't for everybody. Good luck getting your setting! I already have mine.
Sincerely,
Lord Dreadman
I know that was ment as a joke, but if we fans get anymore rabid, theses devs will start to need body guards at conventions...
... And, yes. No kidding.
Sincerely,
Lord Dreadman
Whatever, man. I guess some jokes aren't for everybody. Good luck getting your setting! I already have mine.
Sincerely,
Lord Dreadman
Stop funny. This is serious business.
The 2010 campaign setting is at STAKE here, man!
Stop funny. This is serious business.
The 2010 campaign setting is at STAKE here, man!
Funny is all well and good, when it's actually funny. That wasn't funny, it was Pauly Shore. :P
Whatever that means, I don't know. I am not a trademark guru.
You know, after searching through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, I found a little tidbit that might lend an idea on whatever Campaign Setting is coming next year. Wizards of the Coast applied for the trademark (probably a renewal) of Ravenloft around the same time they did for the trademark renewal of Eberron.
Whatever that means, I don't know. I am not a trademark guru.
since they did a mod at the end of 3.5, and have put ravenloft like stuff in 4e...I am not supprised..
since they did a mod at the end of 3.5, and have put ravenloft like stuff in 4e...I am not supprised..
Crap, I had forgotten about Expedition to Castle Ravenloft. Thanks for pointing that out. The trademark application would correspond perfectly with that.
I know that was ment as a joke, but if we fans get anymore rabid, theses devs will start to need body guards at conventions...
They would simply not go to conventions anymore then and the fan community would be the one hurt by it. Wotc is a monster company. It can put things out and "rabid" fans will eat it up. They don't have to do have of the PR they do for those fan types to purchase product.
Also, harming someone over a stupid game is stupid. I understand what you mean, but if D&D players are actually like that, then the problem isn't with wotc and their practices, its with those fans, which sound like dysfunctional adults with mental or emotional issues that should be medicated.
- And I'm far from a wotc defender. I love D&D, but I'd never hurt anyone or even threaten to hurt anyone over it. Thats just ******* stupid.
PS: Wotc devs could have top of the line body guards who could pop the heads of "wittle gamers" easily.
This is a subject best dropped completely.
Dragonlance for 2010!
Hlethvagi
Is this all we are going to do now? Just wait til we find out on the weekend? Sounds like a whimper or a bang situation.
Dragonlance for 2010!
Hlethvagi
What else can we do?
What else can we do?
Prepare for an edition war of sorts, as people begin to ***** about how they are messing up Dark Sun by throwing all the 4E stuff into it. ;)
Prepare for an edition war of sorts, as people begin to ***** about how they are messing up Dark Sun by throwing all the 4E stuff into it. ;)
Oh that won't happen until Dark Sun is released as the setting tomorrow. ;)
Prepare for an edition war of sorts, as people begin to ***** about how they are messing up Dark Sun by throwing all the 4E stuff into it. ;)
I don't know, I'm as critical about 4e conversions as anyone but even I managed to see that 4e is a different game than older editions. I look at it like this, I still have my 2e settings and my 3e settings. I can play those anytime I want. 4e will be different and that WHY I will play it.
If 4e was the same as 2e, what the point of owning it? I already have it.;)
Whether its better or not is like asking which transformers cartoon series was the best. Its all personal taste and if you own all of them, you can still watch them all. So you lose nothing but have much to gain.:D
At first, the idea that they were going to change things around and cram stuff into athas annoyed the hell out of me but i've come to peace with it over the past few months. I think that preparing for the idea that DS may not be the setting made me realize that once psionics came out, i would have a pretty easy time homebrewing a 4E DS based on the original boxed set. Now, ill just be glad if it gets released at all since it will make homebrewing the original version that much easier.
But, I'll wait for that too happen first.;)
Oh, trust me, when I finally crack open the darksun players guide and see an example for a halfling paladin, I'll be on the forums screaming "ZOMGWTFRAWRZERSRAGE!"
But, I'll wait for that too happen first.;)
what are you going to say when the 'other race' section talks about warforged on athes....
what are you going to say when the 'other race' section talks about warforged on athes....
"mmm athasian warforge avangions."
"And so Rajaat, distrusting his champions and planning their eventual destruction, began in his isolation, to create beings to bring about the downfall of the champions. Using the power of the darklence and sapping
the energies of the sun, Rajaat created the first Warforged in the pristine tower..."
Or something like that.:P
Whatever the new setting is there will be changes. I'm under impression the original DL didn't have Orcs, am I right?
*Deepbreath*
"HALFLINGPALADINPSIONWARLOCKSWTF!!!RAWRZORZRAGE!!"
ZOMGRAWRZORZNOHALFGIANTSBECAUSEOFGOLITHASRAGE!!!
:P
what are you going to say when the 'other race' section talks about warforged on athes....
Never have understood the hate against Warforged in Athas. They're probably the easiest non-original DS race to slot in. They're Blue Age/Green Age relics, recently re-awakened in a strange new world. And all the metal (which really isn't much more than the skin in the first place) is replaced with bone, chitin, or obsidian.
Simple, clean, efficient, and completely 100% in keeping with already established continuity.
I would imagine that depends on the time you're playing in. Playing in a world that thinks the gods have abandoned them is certainly intruiging. As I said though, my preference lies with the dark stuff.
If you've followed the latest novels (The Dark Disciple Triology) you;ve got...
...a new deity (Mina) thrown in the mix that doesn't belong to any of the branches.
...a pantheon in general that is mixed up do to the death of Takhisis and the mortality of Paladine.
...Minotaur empire in the ancient homeland of the Silvanesti and a kingdom run by Baron Samuval in Qualinesti.
...Elves without a homeland (and therefore don't live in forests) and are urban-blighted refugees.
...the three wizard branches each have their own Tower of High Sorcery.
...Mystics, Sorcerers, Necromancers, Warlocks, Psionics, Shadowfell, Feywild, Far Realm, etc. that will have to be added to a classic world.
...Kender :D.
There's plenty there to work with for DL.
If you've followed the latest novels (The Dark Disciple Triology) you;ve got...
...a new deity (Mina) thrown in the mix that doesn't belong to any of the branches.
...a pantheon in general that is mixed up do to the death of Takhisis and the mortality of Paladine.
...Minotaur empire in the ancient homeland of the Silvanesti and a kingdom run by Baron Samuval in Qualinesti.
...Elves without a homeland (and therefore don't live in forests) and are urban-blighted refugees.
...the three wizard branches each have their own Tower of High Sorcery.
...Mystics, Sorcerers, Necromancers, Warlocks, Psionics, Shadowfell, Feywild, Far Realm, etc. that will have to be added to a classic world.
...Kender :D.
There's plenty there to work with for DL.
The elves have a homeland now, it is called Inath-Wakenti, and it is located in a mountain valley somewhat in the middle of the desert. It is forested, but everything surrounding it is desert, so you kinda get the best of both worlds.
If you've followed the latest novels (The Dark Disciple Triology) you;ve got...
...a new deity (Mina) thrown in the mix that doesn't belong to any of the branches.
...a pantheon in general that is mixed up do to the death of Takhisis and the mortality of Paladine.
...Minotaur empire in the ancient homeland of the Silvanesti and a kingdom run by Baron Samuval in Qualinesti.
...Elves without a homeland (and therefore don't live in forests) and are urban-blighted refugees.
...the three wizard branches each have their own Tower of High Sorcery.
...Mystics, Sorcerers, Necromancers, Warlocks, Psionics, Shadowfell, Feywild, Far Realm, etc. that will have to be added to a classic world.
...Kender :D.
There's plenty there to work with for DL.
To add to what Silverblaze said, yes the elves have a homeland now, which we don't know much about except, well, I don't want to spoil the trilogy for anyone, but its interesting. Also Samuval is basically a bandit lord and if he has his own kingdom, its news to me. I know a new goblin nation is rising in qualinesti and the scarecrow is leading a minor army to reclaim the homeland
Mina was disconnection from the patheon and does not grant spells or truely take worshippers, atleast not in 3.5. As to each order having their own tower, can this be confirmed? I thought the tower of istar had sunk again or something. Is it still around?
As for takhisis and paladine, assuming 4e DL remains in the current age, they will have to provide options to include them in the game if the players want. Thats a big concern of mine. Either a reboot to include them which would rob us of mina and the 5th age, or exclusion of the prior two main gods, which would rob us of the chance to use them if we wish.
Also, the idea of adding psionics to krynn after all this time makes me laugh considering how people always said, "NO PSIONICS BAD! RAWR!":D
The wizards and the sorcerers are getting along last I read. The clerics and the mystics are getting along too. The knighthood is growing, the minotaur empire is growing, the goblin realm is growing. The new era is very open to new ideas. The past is just as important as it ever was, but the future is where the people spend their time and energy now. To make a better tomorrow, they must addapt to new things and new philosophies. Psionics should easily integrate themselves into the setting.
Just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Hlethvagi
For DragonLance in this new edition to be right, the 5th Age needs to never have happened.
I will say it again.
For DragonLance in this new edition to be right, the 5th Age needs to never have happened.
I will also say again that the current era is the best one to base a CS on. The War of the Lance era is fine, but it pretty much shoehorns the DMs creativity. The war moves on, things go down, the citadels fly, the good dragons return, the end. Not much fun if you ask me.
Dragonlance 5th age is more open and exciting. There is no meta-plot, no shoehorning of the DM, and no limit to the kinds of adventures the DM can run. The world is open to explore and find adventure.
Hlethvagi
I will say it again.
For DragonLance in this new edition to be right, the 5th Age needs to never have happened.
You don't deserve to have a tas AVI.:P
Plus, DL isn't this years new setting.
Sorry, but I know it.You don't deserve to have a tas AVI.:P
Plus, DL isn't this years new setting.
Know it as in "I got some accurate intel" know-it, or just a unch?
If it's accurate, then all i need is for Dark Sun to not be the setting and I get to laugh at everyone! Mwahahah! :evillaugh
Know it as in "I got some accurate intel" know-it, or just a unch?
If it's accurate, then all i need is for Dark Sun to not be the setting and I get to laugh at everyone! Mwahahah! :evillaugh
A much bigger DL fan than myself doesn't think so for whatever reason and he wouldn't say as much without cause. So I hold no hope at all for DL in 2010.
Trust me, it speaks volumes even though I can't say who or why.
[edit] So you mock our pain huh? I love both DL and DS, so remind me not to buy you a beer! :p
Know it as in "I got some accurate intel" know-it, or just a unch?
If it's accurate, then all i need is for Dark Sun to not be the setting and I get to laugh at everyone! Mwahahah! :evillaugh
a guy at our FLGS has a bet with 3 people... 100$ on it not being dragon lance, $100 on it not being dark sun and $200 on it not being Greyhawk... if he is $400 richer tommorro I will be very upset...(I expect him to be $200 richer myself....)
a guy at our FLGS has a bet with 3 people... 100$ on it not being dragon lance, $100 on it not being dark sun and $200 on it not being Greyhawk... if he is $400 richer tommorro I will be very upset...(I expect him to be $200 richer myself....)
I'll bet 1,000 bucks that he will be 300 bucks richer.:P
I'll bet 1,000 bucks that he will be 300 bucks richer.:P
I'll take that bet:D . Either he's $400 richer, he's $200 richer, or he breaks even.
I'll take that bet:D . Either he's $400 richer, he's $200 richer, or he breaks even.
Well unless I'v been drinking too much and my math is completely wrong, he can only win once, unless he made those bets with each person. So if darksun is released, he wins 300 bucks. If he made three bets against all three people, he walks away with 900 bucks.
Then again I could be muddled, it happens and its not that rare. 2d4 coors since 7pm. I'm a bit on the dwarvish side of things right now.:D
Well unless I'v been drinking too much and my math is completely wrong, he can only win once, unless he made those bets with each person. So if darksun is released, he wins 300 bucks. If he made three bets against all three people, he walks away with 900 bucks.
Then again I could be muddled, it happens and its not that rare. 2d4 coors since 7pm. I'm a bit on the dwarvish side of things right now.:D
they are 3 seprate bets with 3 sperate people...
EDIT: Cool I was actually right.
they are 3 seprate bets with 3 sperate people...
Oh, then my bet is nil and void due to not understanding the details and being a boozed up troll. Plus theres no ink in this pen.
That's two books I don't have to waste money on next year.
Told ya. But you didn't believe me.
Yeah. I'm bitter.
no, wrong... IT'S DARKSUN!!!
now time to begin the plotting and scheming...
I will definetly check out the previews. I liked DS back in the day. I guess it's time to give it another chance.
If it was DL, I would of been very happy
If it was DS, I would of been very happy
If it was a completely new setting, I would have been happy
If it was a futuristic setting, I would have been very interested
If it would have been a classic setting, I would have been interested
If it would have been the core three settings into a single setting, I would have been happy.
If wotc would have said "SIKE, we were just yanking your chain, No new setting this year", I would have been roaring with laughter and then burned the world in my RAWRZORZRAGE!!!
SO in the end, I'm very :D
Its Dark Sun! Ive never been so happy to be wrong. ;)
SAME HERE
Sigh, looks like it will be another year or two before I start running 4.0. Lets hope for 2011!
Not true, look to dragonlance nexus for some basic 4e DL fanmade rules in the future to use until wotc publishes offical 4e DL.
Look for dragonlance in 2012 assuming we're still here.;)
ok god (and everyone here) knows I am not a big DL supporter...but why is everyone say 2012...am I missing a 2011 announcment? Dark sun 2010...and???
ok god (and everyone here) knows I am not a big DL supporter...but why is everyone say 2012...am I missing a 2011 announcment? Dark sun 2010...and???
2011 = SPELLJAMMER !! of course ;)
2011 will probably be a new setting TBH. If not, it will probably be the year of core support (i.e. planescape,ravenloft,spelljammer info) so I highly doubt we will see anything for DL til 2012.
I also doubt we will get another medieval fantasy setting before DL.
So, with the publishing of a new Dragonlance book, possibly they were testing the waters for a campaign setting of Dragonlance in the next few years? I figure it will be 2012 or 2013, provided of course that 4th edition lasts that long (I figure it will, but hey, we never know).
What new book are you talking about? Dragons of the Hourglass Mage? That is one of a dozen Dragonlance titles that came out this year. What waters were they testing?
So, with the publishing of a new Dragonlance book, possibly they were testing the waters for a campaign setting of Dragonlance in the next few years? I figure it will be 2012 or 2013, provided of course that 4th edition lasts that long (I figure it will, but hey, we never know).
Well wotc better stick to 4e for a longer period of time. 4e is still new and I would support no new edition for a long time. If they need to make more money, start a new product line or re-release magic the gathering in a whole new format and see how fans respond to all their cards being useless and all their money being wasted.
Stop using D&D fans as ways to buy wotc business heads new houses and cars.
Even my 3.5 books are giving the stink eye.
My 4e books just pulled out weapons. Oh boy.As for the novels, thats nothing new. DL novels are likely to never stop. Wanna see nerd rage? End the DL novel line.:P
Well wotc better stick to 4e for a longer period of time. 4e is still new and I would support no new edition for a long time. If they need to make more money, start a new product line or re-release magic the gathering in a whole new format and see how fans respond to all their cards being useless and all their money being wasted.
Stop using D&D fans as ways to buy wotc business heads new houses and cars.
Even my 3.5 books are giving the stink eye.
As for the novels, thats nothing new. DL novels are likely to never stop. Wanna see nerd rage? End the DL novel line.:P
I believe there are no novels on tap for Dragonlance next year.
ok god (and everyone here) knows I am not a big DL supporter...but why is everyone say 2012...am I missing a 2011 announcment? Dark sun 2010...and???
I don't know about everyone else, but I consider the 2011 setting to pretty much be guaranteed to be a new setting because of a comment in the interview that completely convinced me that Dark Sun was the 2010 setting.
As for the novels, thats nothing new. DL novels are likely to never stop. Wanna see nerd rage? End the DL novel line.:P
Ummm they might be doing that soon. Based off of what we know there is no editor for Dragonlance novels, and there have been no new ones announced for next year.....so it isn't out of the realm of possibility that they have decided not publish any new ones for the forseeable future.
As for the novels, thats nothing new. DL novels are likely to never stop. Wanna see nerd rage? End the DL novel line.:P
They are already doing that. No new DL novels planned for 2010 or beyond.
May the nerdrage ensue.
I guess I am somewhat looking forward to the nerdrage next year over WotC "ruining" Dark Sun.
Um, the two lead developers on Dark Sun 4e are also 2 of the lead developers for the original Dark Sun boxed set, and the 4e rules in general. In a recent interview they flat out stated that they will be attempting to keep the setting as close to its 1e boxed set roots as possible, with other D&D options being options, and with even the Prism Pendant novels being only a "potential" direction in which to take the setting (as opposed to hard official cannon). To a Dark Sun fan, all of this points towards an amazing setting release.
To top that off, there is no proof that WotC will, by far and large, "ruin" settings to make them fit into 4e. Certainly a large portion of Forgotten Realms fans feel that way, but Eberron 4e has been received (by far and large) with open and welcoming arms.
So, I am sort of looking forward to an awesome setting being released so I can laugh at the prospect that WotC will somehow "ruin" Dark Sun.
Um, the two lead developers on Dark Sun 4e are also 2 of the lead developers for the original Dark Sun boxed set, and the 4e rules in general.
You mean Troy Denning and Timothy Brown?
To top that off, there is no proof that WotC will, by far and large, "ruin" settings to make them fit into 4e.
I could be wrong, but I think his comment was more of a comment on how some people are bound to react, than a claim that the setting really will be ruined.
Um, the two lead developers on Dark Sun 4e are also 2 of the lead developers for the original Dark Sun boxed set, and the 4e rules in general. In a recent interview they flat out stated that they will be attempting to keep the setting as close to its 1e boxed set roots as possible, with other D&D options being options, and with even the Prism Pendant novels being only a "potential" direction in which to take the setting (as opposed to hard official cannon). To a Dark Sun fan, all of this points towards an amazing setting release.
To top that off, there is no proof that WotC will, by far and large, "ruin" settings to make them fit into 4e. Certainly a large portion of Forgotten Realms fans feel that way, but Eberron 4e has been received (by far and large) with open and welcoming arms.
So, I am sort of looking forward to an awesome setting being released so I can laugh at the prospect that WotC will somehow "ruin" Dark Sun.
I was actually making reference to the group of people that think WotC "ruined" Forgotten Realms with its most recent version. I have no doubt in my mind that Dark Sun 4e will be as close as the designers can get it to its original feel, especially considering the inclusion of a lot of people that have worked on Dark Sun before. I just can't wait for the group of people that P&M about minute details being off. They are always good for some comedy.
P.S. That is why ruining is in quotation marks ;)
I do have an issue with the idea that they are going to try to preserve Dark Sun's 1e form over sticking to the ridiculous PoL stuff. I've only recently (like the past couple years) started following Forgotten Realms, but I really dislike how they ripped out the plumbing to make it fit the PoL overview, including the fiction. They stated with a straight face that this is the 4e way, only to back off that when they get to do "their" setting.
They basically gave it a reboot for many reasons besides the edition change. Notice that eberron never suffered from these specific issues, thus it didn't get a clean slate.
You have to remember that with Forgotten Realms the setting destruction wasn't simply because they were trying to fit in 4E stuff (that would have been fairly easy to do without the apocalypse) but the fact that they were desperately trying to combat the largest complaints about the setting: too many super npcs, too much detail and general "setting bloat."
They basically gave it a reboot for many reasons besides the edition change. Notice that eberron never suffered from these specific issues, thus it didn't get a clean slate.
I absolutely agree with this, which is why I find the fans crying RUINED FOREVER!!!!1111 so hilarious. This update, in one fell swoop, made Forgotten Realms look intriguing to me.
The thing is, there always seems to be that group of fringe fans, no matter the setting, that flips their lid whenever a setting change, regardless of reason, occurs. It happened with Eberron too, with things like Dragonmarks. I am sure it will happen with Dark Sun as well. Sometimes it seems that some people won't be happy unless Wizards takes the original product, slaps a new cover on it, and markets it as a new product.
Nothing productive comes of wishing ill on Dark Sun. Just because I have no desire to see it doesn't make it "bad," and if it is not well received, it forces Wizards to reevaluate their stance on settings altogether, which could harm any future thought of Dragonlance 4e. (Though at the same time, I guess a failure of Dark Sun might force them to say "Well, maybe we should have done Dragonlance...")
I do have an issue with the idea that they are going to try to preserve Dark Sun's 1e form over sticking to the ridiculous PoL stuff. I've only recently (like the past couple years) started following Forgotten Realms, but I really dislike how they ripped out the plumbing to make it fit the PoL overview, including the fiction. They stated with a straight face that this is the 4e way, only to back off that when they get to do "their" setting.
Well, not quite - I think they genuinely felt the changes made to the FR setting were an improvement on the setting, while letting them work in the new 4E elements at the same time.
They took a different approach with Eberron, and seem to plan another one entirely for Dark Sun. I don't think they were ever commited to 'cataclysming' every setting in order to bring it into 4E...
NO NEW DL NOVELS! RAWRZORZULTIMATEMADANGRYNERDRAGE!!!
MADANGRYNERDRAGE!!!
+1
Though without the size increase :P
+1
Though without the size increase :P
Thank goodness your post didn't include the size increase... :P
But, your post did include the size increase... :P
Telling lies only hurts yourself. :D
Telling lies only hurts yourself. :D
What are you talking about? I didn't write what you quoted! ;)
MADANGRYNERDRAGE!!!
QFT, I wont buy that dark sun stuff.
Im also glad I sold out to Paizo
You have to remember that with Forgotten Realms the setting destruction wasn't simply because they were trying to fit in 4E stuff (that would have been fairly easy to do without the apocalypse) but the fact that they were desperately trying to combat the largest complaints about the setting: too many super npcs, too much detail and general "setting bloat."
They basically gave it a reboot for many reasons besides the edition change. Notice that eberron never suffered from these specific issues, thus it didn't get a clean slate.
You know, as far as the cataclysmic changes to FR, I only disliked that Mystra was murdered. And then, mostly because of the effect on the fiction, not as much the campaign setting. (Though at least a couple guys in my group agree with me that Mystra should not have been killed in the RPG, the rest just had no comment on the subject.)
I think it's a great idea that they're splitting the fiction from the RPG for Dark Sun. I don't care at all about the setting or the fiction, but I wish that's what they'd have done for Forgotten Realms. (Hence, my "their setting" comment.)
As for Eberron, they bombed a whole country, didn't they? That's pretty cataclysmic. ;)
Well, not quite - I think they genuinely felt the changes made to the FR setting were an improvement on the setting, while letting them work in the new 4E elements at the same time.
They took a different approach with Eberron, and seem to plan another one entirely for Dark Sun. I don't think they were ever commited to 'cataclysming' every setting in order to bring it into 4E...
I don't think a cataclysm is needed for any setting. I wasn't clear enough in my previous post though. I despise the whole "Points of Light" thing in 4e. It's the only thing I truly want to abolish from the entire edition. It's more constraining in an edition dedicated to opening up everything. It forces cataclysmic events to established worlds.
A world should be able to say "There aren't any orcs" (Dragonlance.) 4e's "Everything is core" prevents that (well, until now it would seem.) It's too late for Forgotten Realms, but when (if
) there's a Dragonlance, at least some of the setting's elements can be preserved. (Actually, it's two things I'd abolish from 4e...)Well... good luck to the DS fans... I think wotc has learned the lesson with forgotten realms, they will not make that big mistake again. Eberron is nice done too.
And for Dragonlance... again on hold, old buddy. Again... 25 years... and to being put on hold like this is really a shame. Well, we all know that some designers from wotc really hates dragonlance. Why? Well, wish I have the answer to this. Maybe there is some religious conflitc (mormons VS christs?), maybe Dragonlance don't sell like the big companies like (I mean... wotc=hasbro, and hasbro dont like fluff, its just cruuunchy they like... solds much more in 3 months, altough fluff solds more in the year... but we all know that executives don't really understand the concepts of time)
Anyway, Happy 25 Years of Dragonlance. And thanks to wizards, to make such a great year end in 2 miniatures, some entries in a boring dragon book, and the final romance of Weis & Hickman (the real "gift" in this history... by the way, everyone remember a old fatty buddy called mrs. Phil A talking about dragonlance las year no? Please... a booo for him, at least).
My thanks to all designers that have participate in this wrongness. I know, it's to good to make others be dumbed.
As for Eberron, they bombed a whole country, didn't they? That's pretty cataclysmic. ;)
Its not a cataclysmic change. The destruction of Cyre was a key feature of Eberron from its original inception.
Its not a cataclysmic change. The destruction of Cyre was a key feature of Eberron from its original inception.
Ahh, I wasn't aware of that. I never got into Eberron. Sorry about that, I thought it was a 4e thing.
Again though, Eberron really doesn't need big changes to do it's thing. It was a 4e setting before there was a 4e. (At least from what I understand.)
and btw, it's the last one
Wizards... making the possible seems impossible. :D
I don't think a cataclysm is needed for any setting. I wasn't clear enough in my previous post though. I despise the whole "Points of Light" thing in 4e. It's the only thing I truly want to abolish from the entire edition. It's more constraining in an edition dedicated to opening up everything. It forces cataclysmic events to established worlds.
I truly agree. Not every world needs to be a kitchen sink setting. In fact, there really only should be one kitchen sink setting by the virtue that being kitchen sink is its special hook.
A world should be able to say "There aren't any orcs" (Dragonlance.)
And Dark Sun. ;)
4e's "Everything is core" prevents that (well, until now it would seem.) It's too late for Forgotten Realms, but when (if
The thing is that Forgotten Realms got pretty much zero 4e-specific things crammed into it that it didnt already have. Dragonborn were introduced to FR in 3E and tieflings were in the 3E FR player's book. Eladrin just became an alternate name for high elves. Ultimately, the cataclysm of FR didnt really force a bunch of 4e stuff into the setting (it was already there!) as much as it killed a lot of the aspects that players have been complaining about for years. If they ever do dragonlance, it would be a different story no matter what they do.
Ahh, I wasn't aware of that. I never got into Eberron. Sorry about that, I thought it was a 4e thing.
Again though, Eberron really doesn't need big changes to do it's thing. It was a 4e setting before there was a 4e. (At least from what I understand.)
So was Dark Sun, really. The whole premise is of a world decimated by a massive apocalypse. A points of light setting where even the cities in the desert are places of grime and danger. Its a perfect fit...
And what Ghoststepper said.
It was a 4e setting before there was a 4e. (At least from what I understand.)
You are correct. Eberron was used to test the waters for many 4e mechanics and ideas. Like action points for instance, Although in 4e they are done a bit different, but you get the idea.;)
As for the day of mourning, thats easy. It was caused by a kender and a gnome activating a magical device the same time a great wizard was casting a spell and the energies from both mixed and resulted in a "poofers" situation.:D
No one knows what caused the day of mourning, so they can't say THAT isn't the cause. I love how that works. Since Eberron can fit ANYTHING into its world, its plausable, but unlikely.:P
Neither I. I really hate to have sand in the underpaints.
Well... good luck to the DS fans... I think wotc has learned the lesson with forgotten realms, they will not make that big mistake again. Eberron is nice done too.
Shrugs I did happy dance at changes to FR.
And for Dragonlance... again on hold, old buddy. Again... 25 years... and to being put on hold like this is really a shame. Well, we all know that some designers from wotc really hates dragonlance. Why? Well, wish I have the answer to this. Maybe there is some religious conflitc (mormons VS christs?), maybe Dragonlance don't sell like the big companies like (I mean... wotc=hasbro, and hasbro dont like fluff, its just cruuunchy they like... solds much more in 3 months, altough fluff solds more in the year... but we all know that executives don't really understand the concepts of time)
Its too much traditional fantasy. We have traditional fantasy setting in FR we dont need another one yet. 2012 will be Dragon Lance Im sure and by then people will be ready for a traditional fantasy world. Even though my dm prefers traditional fantasy settings I dont, I personally think every setting should have the races act in different/unique ways than what is listed in the players hand book.
And for Dragonlance... again on hold, old buddy. Again... 25 years... and to being put on hold like this is really a shame. Well, we all know that some designers from wotc really hates dragonlance. Why? Well, wish I have the answer to this. Maybe there is some religious conflitc (mormons VS christs?), maybe Dragonlance don't sell like the big companies like (I mean... wotc=hasbro, and hasbro dont like fluff, its just cruuunchy they like... solds much more in 3 months, altough fluff solds more in the year... but we all know that executives don't really understand the concepts of time)
Or maybe it is because you don't need a Dragonlance 4th Edition book.
All the fluff still works.
All the crunch is satisfied by the current material.
All the storylines are still there.
All the maps are still accurate.
All you need is to pull out the old manual and run the game.
Draconians? Draconomicon 2. Kender? Halflings. Gnomes? Gnomes. Swords and sorcery? Sword and sorcery. Method that would allow you to actually learn some of the stunts pulled off in the books, like time travel? Ritual casting system. Minotaurs? PHB3. Dragons? All over. Lances? Polearms. Elves and dwarves and humans and fighters and rangers and generic fantasy? Already here. Walrus-folk? Sorry, don't give a damn.
The only thing that a 4th Edition Dragonlance Player's Guide and Campaign Guide could do is rehash old fluff or drive fans mad.
If it keeps all the old fluff....it's worthless. Everything's a reprint, the crunch has been satisfied, the fluff is a regurgitation of all the lore you already know. We don't need this, and we don't need to waste a year on stuff we already know.
If it changes the setting to advance the timeline and move forward...they'll catch hell. No matter what changes, the Old Guard will go ballistic about them ruining their setting, and the main market, die-hard fans from the past, will reject it. Sure, people might say that they don't mind if the setting advances...but everyone will think it should advance differently. Metaplot tends to be the bane of settings, and trying to continue it will result in vast amounts of rage. Look at the comments on the changes of the gods, the shifting territory, the removal of the Platinum Dude and She Of The Five Heads and Terrible Morning Breath. If they change the future, that's what is in store.
You want to play Dragonlance? Go get your campaign books and play Dragonlance. You don't need a 4th edition book to play the setting you love when everything required is already here. And we don't need the setting taking up a precious 1-per-year-slot simply so that the old fans can get affirmation of their favorite without it actually contributing anything from a setting (generic fantasy world #1, 2, 3 don't need a year each) or crunch (all the major races and players are already statted).
Not publishing a setting for every old setting doesn't mean that Wizards hates Dragonlance or persecutes Greyhawk...it just means that you don't need new books if you can already run games in the old setting.
Or maybe it is because you don't need a Dragonlance 4th Edition book.
All the fluff still works.
All the crunch is satisfied by the current material.
All the storylines are still there.
All the maps are still accurate.
All you need is to pull out the old manual and run the game.
Draconians? Draconomicon 2. Kender? Halflings. Gnomes? Gnomes. Swords and sorcery? Sword and sorcery. Method that would allow you to actually learn some of the stunts pulled off in the books, like time travel? Ritual casting system. Minotaurs? PHB3. Dragons? All over. Lances? Polearms. Elves and dwarves and humans and fighters and rangers and generic fantasy? Already here. Walrus-folk? Sorry, don't give a damn.
The only thing that a 4th Edition Dragonlance Player's Guide and Campaign Guide could do is rehash old fluff or drive fans mad.
If it keeps all the old fluff....it's worthless. Everything's a reprint, the crunch has been satisfied, the fluff is a regurgitation of all the lore you already know. We don't need this, and we don't need to waste a year on stuff we already know.
If it changes the setting to advance the timeline and move forward...they'll catch hell. No matter what changes, the Old Guard will go ballistic about them ruining their setting, and the main market, die-hard fans from the past, will reject it. Sure, people might say that they don't mind if the setting advances...but everyone will think it should advance differently. Metaplot tends to be the bane of settings, and trying to continue it will result in vast amounts of rage. Look at the comments on the changes of the gods, the shifting territory, the removal of the Platinum Dude and She Of The Five Heads and Terrible Morning Breath. If they change the future, that's what is in store.
You want to play Dragonlance? Go get your campaign books and play Dragonlance. You don't need a 4th edition book to play the setting you love when everything required is already here. And we don't need the setting taking up a precious 1-per-year-slot simply so that the old fans can get affirmation of their favorite without it actually contributing anything from a setting (generic fantasy world #1, 2, 3 don't need a year each) or crunch (all the major races and players are already statted).
Not publishing a setting for every old setting doesn't mean that Wizards hates Dragonlance or persecutes Greyhawk...it just means that you don't need new books if you can already run games in the old setting.
I basically agree. Mechanically we can't play Dark Sun right now. We need rules for multi-armed races, we need rules for defiling, we need rules for game balance when players have access to little or no armor. We certainly can play Dragonlance with the system as is. I think it is a great idea to pick a setting which expands mechanical options. It will also make it easier for people building out-of-the-ordinary home-brewed settings to do so.
Or maybe it is because you don't need a Dragonlance 4th Edition book.
All the fluff still works.
All the crunch is satisfied by the current material.
All the storylines are still there.
All the maps are still accurate.
All you need is to pull out the old manual and run the game.
Draconians? Draconomicon 2. Kender? Halflings. Gnomes? Gnomes. Swords and sorcery? Sword and sorcery. Method that would allow you to actually learn some of the stunts pulled off in the books, like time travel? Ritual casting system. Minotaurs? PHB3. Dragons? All over. Lances? Polearms. Elves and dwarves and humans and fighters and rangers and generic fantasy? Already here. Walrus-folk? Sorry, don't give a damn.
The only thing that a 4th Edition Dragonlance Player's Guide and Campaign Guide could do is rehash old fluff or drive fans mad.
If it keeps all the old fluff....it's worthless. Everything's a reprint, the crunch has been satisfied, the fluff is a regurgitation of all the lore you already know. We don't need this, and we don't need to waste a year on stuff we already know.
If it changes the setting to advance the timeline and move forward...they'll catch hell. No matter what changes, the Old Guard will go ballistic about them ruining their setting, and the main market, die-hard fans from the past, will reject it. Sure, people might say that they don't mind if the setting advances...but everyone will think it should advance differently. Metaplot tends to be the bane of settings, and trying to continue it will result in vast amounts of rage. Look at the comments on the changes of the gods, the shifting territory, the removal of the Platinum Dude and She Of The Five Heads and Terrible Morning Breath. If they change the future, that's what is in store.
You want to play Dragonlance? Go get your campaign books and play Dragonlance. You don't need a 4th edition book to play the setting you love when everything required is already here. And we don't need the setting taking up a precious 1-per-year-slot simply so that the old fans can get affirmation of their favorite without it actually contributing anything from a setting (generic fantasy world #1, 2, 3 don't need a year each) or crunch (all the major races and players are already statted).
Not publishing a setting for every old setting doesn't mean that Wizards hates Dragonlance or persecutes Greyhawk...it just means that you don't need new books if you can already run games in the old setting.
This could be said for ANY setting. Any. Go tell that to the 4e FR and EB players and see what they say.
I basically agree. Mechanically we can't play Dark Sun right now. We need rules for multi-armed races, we need rules for defiling, we need rules for game balance when players have access to little or no armor. We certainly can play Dragonlance with the system as is. I think it is a great idea to pick a setting which expands mechanical options. It will also make it easier for people building out-of-the-ordinary home-brewed settings to do so.
Multiarmed race rules for combat? 4e DSPG, done. Rules on defiling and preservering magic and energy gathering, 4e DSPG, done. Little to no armor? Must not be familiar with athas at all to say that. Darksun has TONS of armor, many of which are JUST as hard as iron armor. I can understand the second to the last part and I agree with the last part.
Mostly this sounds like more anti DL crap. But w/e, its come to be expected.
If it keeps all the old fluff....it's worthless. Everything's a reprint, the crunch has been satisfied, the fluff is a regurgitation of all the lore you already know. We don't need this, and we don't need to waste a year on stuff we already know.
Isn't this what we are getting with DS? The old fluff and new mechanics? I believe they stated they are trying to keep it true to the old stuff, like the first boxed set.
Don't get me wrong, I think DS is a fine setting. I just would have preferred Dragonlance.
Isn't this what we are getting with DS? The old fluff and new mechanics? I believe they stated they are trying to keep it true to the old stuff, like the first boxed set.
Don't get me wrong, I think DS is a fine setting. I just would have preferred Dragonlance.
If old fluff = worthless to him, then I guess hes not a fan of eberron which doesn't add much new fluff at all. Its the same setting as 3e with minor changes. Most of the changes are mechanical with very little changes to fluff at all beyond the new 4e additions, like the planes.
Multiarmed race rules for combat? 4e DSPG, done. Rules on defiling and preservering magic and energy gathering, 4e DSPG, done. Little to no armor? Must not be familiar with athas at all to say that. Darksun has TONS of armor, many of which are JUST as hard as iron armor. I can understand the second to the last part and I agree with the last part.
Mostly this sounds like more anti DL crap. But w/e, its come to be expected.
I am not anti-Dragonlance at all. I mainly chimed in to make the point about giving us rule books that expand mechanical options. And yes, the upcoming DSPG will do that.
Also armor and weapons on Athas had issues with durability (we'll see if they give us rules for this) and you had to be darn lucky to find any at all (and you certainly weren't going to find a suit of magical full plate lying around). Heavily armored knights adorned like Christmas trees with magic items don't exist on Athas. They are going to have to give us mechanics to deal with this because the designers assumed +x magic weapons, and circlets of defense, and godplate and so forth when they set monster defenses, HP, attack bonuses, etc. Fighters, Warlords, Paladins (if they even attempt paladins) and anyone else assumed to wear heavy armor are going to have to receive alternate mechanical options to remain viable. You COULD just reskin everything (that's not plate...it is really thick obsidian armor! and that is a +6 bronze necklace of defense) and leave item acquisition frequency unchanged but then you've taken away one of the core elements of the setting: tougher-than-nails characters in crappy gear who have to scrape by without the benefit of all the fancy magical items (that provide additional abilities like flight, teleportation, new attack powers, etc.) that heroes rely on in other settings. It should be exciting and rare to actually find a powerful magical item in Athas and dangerous too because it will attract the attention of other forces. So yes, I think it is about time the developers give us options to do away with most magical items while still maintaining balance. I'm hopeful that they will do this with Dark Sun.
can we have it locked?
or atleast start a new one with it being 2011 or something?
Isn't this what we are getting with DS? The old fluff and new mechanics? I believe they stated they are trying to keep it true to the old stuff, like the first boxed set.
Don't get me wrong, I think DS is a fine setting. I just would have preferred Dragonlance.
According to the interview, not only are we getting race and class love, but we'll be seeing rules for things like wilderness survival and environmental hazards, where merely getting from Point A to Point B through Wasteland Point C is an adventure all its own. That kind of grit doesn't currently exist, and one of the points of the DS campaign book is, again according to the designer, to push the system past its current limits.
This could be said for ANY setting. Any. Go tell that to the 4e FR and EB players and see what they say.
My changeling artificer, drow spellscarred, and warforged swordmage would like to disagree. Moreover, however, FR brought the high fantasy, traditional swords and sorcery game. Eberron supplied the pulp action thriller. Now Dark Sun is offering grit, grime, and tooth-and-nail survival.
There are simply too many generic fantasy settings for each one to take time out of the yearly cycle, especially if they don't have any significant crunch required to play them.
If they honestly need love, WotC could easily do a series of Dragon segments for Greyhawk, Birthright, 'Lance, and all the others that helps DMs incorporate the old into the new. Maybe a racial article for those obscure peoples that sometimes come up(Irda), or a feat or two here and there(red/black/white wizard traits akin to the white lotus school), or even something as simple as throwing in a critter or two (such as a dragon mount). Plus a good number of pages dedicated to the theme of each setting and how it can best be realized with 4th edition.
But you don't need a full player's guide for two or three pages of crunch, nor the one year slot just to feel better about your setting.
My point wasn't that old fluff is worthless. Old fluff is magnificent and wonderful, and contains countless gems that can be used to inspire gaming no matter what system you use.
My point is that all your old fluff still works. You can pick up Dragonlance Adventures from where it sits on your shelf, open it up, reread the setting you love, and run a game with it. Right now.
If the old fluff needed huge mechanical resources to run, that would be different. One of the reasons Dark Sun works so well for another setting is that it offers a chance to get rules on fighting for your own survival, not against the orcish horde, but simply to live through the day in a harsh environment. The old fluff, therefore, offers 4th edition itself something new and different. Not only do we get a setting, we get rules we can use whenever we run a game that includes the sort of wasteland vibe, where an adventure could literally have no villain, and the struggle to survive is the core of the game.
But if you're going to demand that we push back other sources an entire year so that your setting can be reprinted, you'll have to justify why. Why Dragonlance instead of Greyhawk, or Birthright, or Blackmoor, or Mystara? This justification, meanwhile, requires the setting offer up something you can't find anywhere else. And between all the generic fantasy settings, there just isn't enough difference to justify it when instead we can be breaking new ground.
Dragonlance fans don't need a book right now to run a game in the setting they love, and 4th edition doesn't need to box itself in by taking years and years to reprint every setting that has ever existed.
For those arguing that we don't currently have rules for characters without magical weapons, maybe you should wait a couple more weeks and see what "boons" are all about in the next DMG.
For those arguing that Dragonlance would simply be a re-hash of prior material with no additional crunch, why don't you go back and look at the points made in the thread. You know, stuff like:
Mysticism (which is divine power from within the individual, you know, like psionics is arcane magic from within?)
Draconians (who aren't dragonborn replacements, as proven by the fact that they'll get space in the next Draconomicon.)
A system of magic based on cycles of the moons, for which there is no equivalent in the game.
A completely altered landscape that could literally fill an entire Campaign Guide and repeat less total fluff from previous editions than either Forgotten Realms or Eberron did.
In-air dragonback-based combat.
I could keep going, but if you're anti-Dragonlance you're just going to keep throwing "DL suXors and nobody wants it anyway" barbs back. Because that's the only justification anyone can come up with. Well, that, and the "Dragonlance is just like Forgotten Realms" BS that has been proven false repeatedly.
You got your Dark Sun. Congratulations. I hope it's everything you want it to be and more. I mean that. If it were Dragonlance, I'd hope you could have the same respect for my side. I doubt it, but since it hasn't come to pass, I can keep following the carrot.
Draconians are DBs, just reflavored and repackaged with setting specific racials feats and paragon paths.
Why would you need a system for this? Just some feats would do the job. It's not like this system even remotely existed in all honesty in 3e's setting anyway. Ontop of that such an intricate casting system would require a lot of book keeping to keep up with that many groups might not be willing to do. Remember when designing a setting or a rule, you have to make it as marketable as possible and it has to remain compatible with your Players Handbook.
Actually, it's not "our feelings' about DL being too much alike, it's the Designers. They out right said we are not doing DL or greyhawk because they are too much like Traditional Fantasy.
I am not anti-Dragonlance at all. I mainly chimed in to make the point about giving us rule books that expand mechanical options. And yes, the upcoming DSPG will do that.
Also armor and weapons on Athas had issues with durability (we'll see if they give us rules for this) and you had to be darn lucky to find any at all (and you certainly weren't going to find a suit of magical full plate lying around). Heavily armored knights adorned like Christmas trees with magic items don't exist on Athas. They are going to have to give us mechanics to deal with this because the designers assumed +x magic weapons, and circlets of defense, and godplate and so forth when they set monster defenses, HP, attack bonuses, etc. Fighters, Warlords, Paladins (if they even attempt paladins) and anyone else assumed to wear heavy armor are going to have to receive alternate mechanical options to remain viable. You COULD just reskin everything (that's not plate...it is really thick obsidian armor! and that is a +6 bronze necklace of defense) and leave item acquisition frequency unchanged but then you've taken away one of the core elements of the setting: tougher-than-nails characters in crappy gear who have to scrape by without the benefit of all the fancy magical items (that provide additional abilities like flight, teleportation, new attack powers, etc.) that heroes rely on in other settings. It should be exciting and rare to actually find a powerful magical item in Athas and dangerous too because it will attract the attention of other forces. So yes, I think it is about time the developers give us options to do away with most magical items while still maintaining balance. I'm hopeful that they will do this with Dark Sun.
I was referring to both posts I quoted as the over all negativity in this thread is disgusting. Although it makes me happy that you are not anti DL. We have enough of those people on this forums.
As for the arms and armor issue. Yes, when sorcererking armies march against each other, they are fully geared with the best armor and weaponry the city states have. Special combat units and heroes/champions will almost always have the best of the pick, including magical items. Magical items are not really rare on athas. Only uncommon. But for PC's, magic is not uncommon at all nor is metal items. Every single merchant house has a stock of magic and metal to sell for increased prices and every single blackmarket has the same.
Now, finding magic or metal in the common street vendors stalls is going to be nearly impossible. Not because they don't have it (which granted, most don't.), but because if they put it on display, a templar would arrest them and confiscate said items. Also, a non-good wizard or other class buying said items could possibly murder the merchant to keep who purchased what, a secret. Cunning defilers leave no traces after all.;)
2e DS and DSR included tons of magical items and 4e DS will probably include a fair share of magical items and metal markup prices as well. But I agree that we need athasian flavored items and lots of them!:D
There are simply too many generic fantasy settings for each one to take time out of the yearly cycle, especially if they don't have any significant crunch required to play them.
You saying this shows you don't know the first thing about dragonlance as it is anything but "generic". For example, its history, cultures and religions can stand toe to toe with any other setting and can outshine many.
If they honestly need love, WotC could easily do a series of Dragon segments for Greyhawk, Birthright, 'Lance, and all the others that helps DMs incorporate the old into the new. Maybe a racial article for those obscure peoples that sometimes come up(Irda), or a feat or two here and there(red/black/white wizard traits akin to the white lotus school), or even something as simple as throwing in a critter or two (such as a dragon mount). Plus a good number of pages dedicated to the theme of each setting and how it can best be realized with 4th edition.
Dragonlance deserves the same treatment eberron got. Its a solid setting that offers a unique world. I could just as easily call forgotten realms, generic, only getting spotlight treatment to showcase what the 4e core rules can do for real settings. I'd never say that because I don't feel that way and I enjoy FR completely. But until you actually dig into the setting, you don't know what its about. Skimming through rulebooks and looking at pictures doesn't form reasonably experienced opinions of anything. Again, DL is as unique as FR and EB if you take the time learn the setting. Darksun just happens to be more unique than either of those three.
But you don't need a full player's guide for two or three pages of crunch, nor the one year slot just to feel better about your setting.
Feel better about my setting? What are you talking about? You have no idea what progressive changes can come from a 4e conversion and how the setting could improve. Its far more than two or three pages of crunch and a page or two of fluff.
My point wasn't that old fluff is worthless. Old fluff is magnificent and wonderful, and contains countless gems that can be used to inspire gaming no matter what system you use.
I completely agree with you here, 100%. I'm glad you feel that way.
My point is that all your old fluff still works. You can pick up Dragonlance Adventures from where it sits on your shelf, open it up, reread the setting you love, and run a game with it. Right now.
I agree and this can be said of any pre-converted setting, including FR and EB and DS. But its in the conversion that we learn new ways on how old things work and improve on the overall story by adding new elements. Some people thing 4e ruined FR. I disagree by saying its simply different now. You can still pick up the older edition material and play the past version of FR or you can play the current 4e FR. We just want to be able to same the same for DL. Past and current forms. Which means a 4e conversion with inclusion of the new goodies with DL flavor.
If the old fluff needed huge mechanical resources to run, that would be different. One of the reasons Dark Sun works so well for another setting is that it offers a chance to get rules on fighting for your own survival, not against the orcish horde, but simply to live through the day in a harsh environment. The old fluff, therefore, offers 4th edition itself something new and different. Not only do we get a setting, we get rules we can use whenever we run a game that includes the sort of wasteland vibe, where an adventure could literally have no villain, and the struggle to survive is the core of the game.
Mechanically, DL has been restructured so many times, the fluff has taken a pounding, yet managed to remain dragonlance inspite of the changes. I fail to see what DS offers mechanically that other settings do not. Thrikreen combat mechanics? We have deaththroe mechanics. Whether condition hazards? We have the same thing in less extreme for heat. But the cold on krynn in some regions would kill you minutes. Athasian wizards arcane energy gathering mechanics? Thats going to be done with feats I bet and be bypassed completely beyond fluff. We have the test of high sorcery, the waxing and wanning of the moons and the effects it all has on our magic.
Not to mention that 4e divine casting is BASED on a DL concept. The mystic, belief in oneself without the requirement of veneration of a deity.
Eberron adopted this in ALL of its faiths. 4e has adopted this completely as the central way of gaining divine spells. Oh how we forget that DL paved the way in that regard!:P I could go on and on about what DL can offer the game as a whole and the community as a whole if they could get passed curious kender, tinkering gnomes and agharpulting gullydwarves.
But if you're going to demand that we push back other sources an entire year so that your setting can be reprinted, you'll have to justify why. Why Dragonlance instead of Greyhawk, or Birthright, or Blackmoor, or Mystara? This justification, meanwhile, requires the setting offer up something you can't find anywhere else. And between all the generic fantasy settings, there just isn't enough difference to justify it when instead we can be breaking new ground.
First off, I would never "demand" a company do anything other than whats in its best interests. I'm not like YOU if you are like that. I'm not like other fans who "demand". I request, I ask and I happily wait my turn. I'm VERY happy about darksun. I played darksun before dragonlance or almost anyother setting and I played darksun for over 15 years. I played darksun when no one in my communities new what it was and they were avid D&D players.
I was the dopeman of darksun, slanging papered crack to all who would play and dozens upon dozens of people played DS because of me. We had D&D banned in our school because of me and my friends. I'm simply requesting that wotc gives DL its turn when it can. But when people come on here and gloat or flame or bash, Don't expect me to quietly ignore it. Those people should not be doing what they are doing and I will speak up in defense of a setting a enjoy and my fellow DL fans.
Dragonlance fans don't need a book right now to run a game in the setting they love, and 4th edition doesn't need to box itself in by taking years and years to reprint every setting that has ever existed.
Then I guess there is no point in 4e as awhole to begin with. Why produce what people like. Not everyone likes FR or EB or DS or DL or RL or PS or SJ, so why bother? Its "because" "some" do enjoy those settings. Besides, thats a bad argument on your part. "wotc doesnt need to limit itself by spending year and year of releasing products different people will buy". Thats the entire point.
You saying this shows you don't know the first thing about dragonlance as it is anything but "generic". For example, its history, cultures and religions can stand toe to toe with any other setting and can outshine many.
I'm going to have to disagree with this. The fundamental core of Krynn, Faerun, Oerth, et al, are essentially the same. That is why they are all placed in the genre of "generic" or "traditional" high fantasy. It doesn't mean the world isn't unique, or has interesting environs, cultures, and details to adventure in and color the world. It simply means it has much more in common with other traditional high fantasy than it does with other genres of settings.
Are there prodigious cultural and detail-oriented differences in each of those worlds? Yes. However, fundamentally speaking, just how different are they, really?
Here's an example. Take any sort of European-esque castle. Add knights in shining plate mail with tabards and coats of arms, many mounted on horseback, who serve the lord of the keep. Toss in an organized local militian with longbow archers and city guards in chainmail, a village surrounding it with peasants, woods with scattered farms surrounding it with regular patrols of said local militia, a road leading to other settlements through woods with little contact from outside save the occasional messenger or caravan, very few magic items of any sort available for sale, and so on. Focus a series of adventures around this castle.
Does this fit seamlessly into Forgotten Realms? Yes, absolutely. You could fit this in Faerun with zero changes save names.
Does this fit seamlessly into Greyhawk? Yes, absolutely. You could fit this in Oerth with zero changes save names.
Does this fit seamlessly into Dragonlance? Yes, absolutely You could fit this in Krynn with zero changes save names..
Does this fit seamlessly into Eberron? No, not seamlessly. You have to adjust more than you would in the previous three worlds, as communication with the outside world is vastly more common thanks to House Sivis. Travel is considerably easier, thanks to Houses Orien and Lyrandar. Healing is more common thanks to House Jorasco. Well-stocked restaurants and inns are more common thanks to House Ghallanda. Magic items, from the mundane that fulfill the same roles as scientific technological advances in our world, to great items of immense social repercussions, are vastly more common thanks to House Cannith. Commerce is much more universal in nature, and user-friendly, thanks to House Kundarak. Yes, you can fit this castle into Eberron. Certainly. However, there are many, much more widely reaching phenomena you must account for.
Does this fit seamlessly into Dark Sun? Absolutely not. Not even close. It would take a whole lot of adjustments to make this fit in Athas, especially fluff-wise, yet also mechanics-wise. You can't just grab the adventure line centered around this settlement, and simply toss it in essentially unchanged. Rather, it would take a lot of work to make it fit.
That is but one example among many such examples, from the big to the small, in terms of the similarities and differences in each genre.
Planescape, Spelljammer and Ravenloft were three of those more unique settings ever imagined and they got folded into the single core material yet forgotten realms retained its unique world.
Why then, was FR singled out to get its campaign world showcased? Because it spotlighted how the D&D cosmology worked in the general "core" sense. It again did this in 4e. Now one can argue, correctly, the planescape, spelljammer and ravenloft were only "Aspects" of a setting or could be considered "minor". Although I would argue that Spelljammer was a grander setting than any other ever created. Yet it still got compressed into the core rules. But this isn't a bad thing since its now the foundation on which the core was made. Its a very, very good thing when you think about it because it opens up more options to what can be core than any other edition.
As for the eberron example? I could argue that eberron is a traditional setting with a splash of difference and originality. I won't but I could.;) As for Darksun, I agree and have always been a voice on that. Darksun is the most exotic setting ever. Its not the most different, but it is different.
Greyhawk is traditional fantasy. End of story. It captures a sense of realism without going over board. Birthright on the other hand, could be argued as being the essence of realism in D&D. But I digress.
Dragonlance is more like eberron and darksun than birthright or greyhawk. It uses its own cosmology, its own planar structure and doesn't share any gods. (Although I believe this will change with 4e to mirror eberron)
Dragonlance, since it doesn't showcase the changes to the great wheel like FR does, is not the flagship setting. Understandably. But it is on as much equal ground as darksun or eberron in being "different". Its also a popular setting followed by more than a few fans.
So, as I'v said before. I am others like me are willing to wait. We just request wotc take notice of the setting and the fans and understand that its a product that will make the money.
Most people who hate on DL, claim its "like" another setting without even knowing the details or the grand scheme of dragonlance. They are ignorant for lack of a better word. They do not know what they are saying because they do not know the setting.
I know very little about Birthright beyond that it excludes many non human races and has its own take on magic and divine, yet I have NEVER made any comments about it beyond what its own fans have told me. That it captures a sense of realism few other settings can achieve.
Dragonlance deserves its time in the limelight when it can and its earned its place among the best of settings because its shown what it has to offer to those who have taken the time to get to know the setting beyond kender, gullydwarves and gnomes. ( we also have elf-fish :D )
But bashing a setting people know little to nothing about is childish and they deserve a time out.:P
You either approach a thread one of two ways, like an adult or like a troll and will be treated accordingly.;)
Tectuktitlay, I agree with your examples in what a traditional sense is. Beyond that its like comparing apples and oranges and pairs, since they are all fruit.
No, it isn't. That's the whole point. Two genres that are different are like comparing apples to orangutans. Two settings within the same genre are comparing apples to oranges. :P
Planescape, Spelljammer and Ravenloft were three of those more unique settings ever imagined and they got folded into the single core material yet forgotten realms retained its unique world.
Yes and no. There is something special about those three settings that makes them fit perfectly into the Core. That certain something? All three of those settings were specifically designed to include all other settings within them. Planescape has a city that is specifically linked to every other setting in the game. Spelljammer flies around in a space-like environ that is specifically linked to every other setting in the game. Ravenloft has domains and lords that specifically come from every other setting in the game.
Thus, it makes perfect sense that those three settings, of ALL the settings ever made, would be folded into the
Core of the game.
Why then, was FR singled out to get its campaign world showcased? Because it spotlighted how the D&D cosmology worked in the general "core" sense. It again did this in 4e.
No. FR was singled out for a very simple reason: It is the most popular setting in D&D. That's it. That's the only reason that mattered to make it the first setting. If Dragonlance were the most popular setting in D&D, it would have been the first setting, and it would have incorporated and highlighted the changes to the generic cosmology. I'll address the cosmology more below.
Now one can argue, correctly, the planescape, spelljammer and ravenloft were only "Aspects" of a setting or could be considered "minor". Although I would argue that Spelljammer was a grander setting than any other ever created. Yet it still got compressed into the core rules. But this isn't a bad thing since its now the foundation on which the core was made. Its a very, very good thing when you think about it because it opens up more options to what can be core than any other edition.
Addressed above.
As for the eberron example? I could argue that eberron is a traditional setting with a splash of difference and originality. I won't but I could.;) As for Darksun, I agree and have always been a voice on that. Darksun is the most exotic setting ever. Its not the most different, but it is different.
Except Eberron isn't like traditional high fantasy. It is more like taking traditional fantasy and fast-forwarding it such that magic becomes as superfluous in the world as technology is in ours. It is a wide fantasy setting, specifically, one with a "Turn of the (19th) Century" pulp feel to it. You could take many of the tropes of pulp fiction, and replace the technological items with magical items, and you'd easily adapt it to Eberron. Or vice versa, you can take Eberron, and adapt its mechanics easily to any other pulp setting. Trains? Check? Airships (i.e. zeppelins or planes)? Check. Telegraphs? Check. Flashlights and similar gear? Check. Explorations of ancient ruins with archeological (in addition to the traditional financial) motivations? Check. Cities with skyscrapers? Check. A world with much more common and prodigious mapping of said world (i.e., the world is swiftly becoming smaller to even the general populace)? Check. Without adding huge amounts of superfluous magic and/or technology to the world, these tropes would not be likely to be present.
Greyhawk is traditional fantasy. End of story. It captures a sense of realism without going over board. Birthright on the other hand, could be argued as being the essence of realism in D&D. But I digress.
Dragonlance is more like eberron and darksun than birthright or greyhawk. It uses its own cosmology, its own planar structure and doesn't share any gods. (Although I believe this will change with 4e to mirror eberron)
Dragonlance, since it doesn't showcase the changes to the great wheel like FR does, is not the flagship setting. Understandably. But it is on as much equal ground as darksun or eberron in being "different". Its also a popular setting followed by more than a few fans.
The cosmology of each world is considerably less important than the actual feel and tropes of the game itself. You misunderstand that point, methinks. It doesn't matter WHAT the planes look like, or HOW many gods there are (or said gods are organized, or how many are shared with other settings). Those details don't matter whatsoever, in fact, and are completely mutable and easily adjusted to any setting.
No, rather, what level of technology and culture do these settings have? European? Yup. Middle Ages combined with early Renaissance? Yup. Feudal society with only glimmers of other systems of government? Yup. Small groups of people who hold most of the knowledge of magic and mysteries in the world? Check. Traditional high fantasy it is. Change the names of and hierarchy of all of the gods? Doesn't change any of the above. Rearrange the cosmology, such that the planes themselves look different? Doesn't change any of the above.
So, as I'v said before. I am others like me are willing to wait. We just request wotc take notice of the setting and the fans and understand that its a product that will make the money.
This much is true. Dragonlance is second in raw popularity behind the Forgotten Realms. However, that does not change the fact that DL has much more in common with other traditional high fantasy than it is different. It is still in the same genre. Thus, it is a lower priority than introducing new genres.
You can take the many parts of D&D already presented, and easily make a Dragonlance campaign. Eberron becomes a bit harder. Dark Sun, much more so.
However, with Eberron now out, we can now more readily adapt other pulp settings, whether magical OR technological in nature.
With Dark Sun coming, we will be able to utilize grittier, post-apocalyptic, survival-oriented settings with greater ease.
If the setting after that is a high-seas adventure setting, for example, we will be able to convert any high-seas setting to D&D much more readily.
This means the material opens up the system more than simply including more traditional high fantasy settings would. This makes the game in general more appealing to a wider audience, making for a larger customer base. Since much of the crunch in each setting has crossover with the other settings, those books, even when set in an entirely different genre, have something unique to offer to any campaign more so than a setting within the same genre would.
Most people who hate on DL, claim its "like" another setting without even knowing the details or the grand scheme of dragonlance. They are ignorant for lack of a better word. They do not know what they are saying because they do not know the setting.
Well, I for one don't hate Dragonlance. I am also not ignorant of the differences, having read many of the novels, played in the setting itself, and played all of the video games related to said setting.
Nevertheless, Dragonlance can wait for quite some time to come, for a multitude of reasons. Primarily is the simple fact that Dragonlance campaigns can easily be run right now, with the rules as presented, and the massive body of fluff available. It and Greyhawk are the two easiest conversions. Thus, it behooves WotC to do one of two things: 1) license the setting out once again, or 2) wait to release it considerably further down the road once quite a bit more genres have gotten their turn to introduce wider-sweeping rules to the game.
*snip the rest*
It's the actual setting and themes.
Forgotten Realms (Not including Al-Qadim, Kara-Tur, Maztica campaigns), Dragonlance, Greyhawk still fit the mold of a traditional high fantasy as someone said.
Rolling hills, large castles, dragons, undead, large cities and small settlements.
Yes, the gods are different...big deal. Cosmology also is different, again, the style of world isn't THAT different. Dragonlance would be harsher i think, due to the closer interaction of the gods; but overall...if you appeared randomly in the middle of some plains, or forest on krynn, you wouldn't be able to tell if you on Toril, Krynn, etc.
Darksun, there are a few places you may not be able to tell, but the moment you see the sky, etc...you know...you're either in the Abyss, or Athas..rofl
Edit: Sorry, Tectuktitlay posted as i typed this...he shared my thoughts on it...
Sanjay
The brutish horde is at the castle gates! We need to ride quickly to stop them! Knights, take to your horses, the court mage will cast a spell to give haste to our mounts, and the cleric will bless our blades. Now, everyone, forward!
Where would such a statement take place? If you said Toril, Krynn, or Faerun, you'd be correct, probably orcs, draconians, and more orcs, respectively.
If it were Eberron, they'd be riding the lightning rail to catch the thugs sent by a guild putting a new spin on the term 'hostile takeover'. If it were the desolation of Dark Sun, a monster attack wouldn't be a horrible incident...it would be a Tuesday.
"Generic Fantasy" isn't about the changed details like different gods or an altered magic system, it's the Big Picture focused way down onto the PCs. If the party consists of dwafy dwarves, elfish elves, mages in robes and knights in armor out to save the princess from the dragon...that's generic fantasy.
So when you say Dragonlance is different....
Are the elves long-lived, wise, connected to nature, and generally good?
Are dwarves gruff, masters of crafting metal, and live in mountains?
Do wizards sit in towers, carry staffs with knobs on the end, and study ancient tomes?
Do clerics get divided into white hats and black hats based on which of the polytheistic gods they serve, and whether those gods are Good, Evil, or None of the Above?
And is magic something rare, the kind of thing that invokes a reaction of awe in the ignorant masses?
If you answered yes the the majority of these questions, congratulations, you are probably in a generic fantasy world.
That's not a bad thing. Fantasy of this sort can be a lot of fun. Each world will have a unique history, a fascinating story to tell, with its own gods and men in a world full of interesting nations and peoples.
But the thing is, these nations, these peoples, these gods, these mortal histories....they've been printed.
Why produce what people like.
It wouldn't be producing. It would be reproducing.
And as much as I love reproduction(as a mortal and warm-blooded being, I'm generally for it for both nurturing and recreational purposes), once you're told a story, you know it. Dragonlance is unique because of its setting, its history, its gods, its timeline, its characters.....things we already know. All that fluff still exists, and you can pull out that rulebook and run the game right now.
So that original campaign book still works, and you can run a full Dragonlance game...just as you can pull out Greyhawk right now and play it, or run a Blackmoor game next weekend. Because all the uniqueness of the setting is contained in its history and story, things you already know and love.
Saying that we don't need a Dragonlance book isn't saying that Dragonlance is a poor setting, or somehow unworthy of being played. It's saying that if you can run a 'Lance campaign perfectly well, why waste a year reprinting fluff you've seen before when we can instead bring something new to the table, and all those who wish to play a Dragonlance game can simply open up their old books and run it?
I, for one, hope that Dragonlance does get released eventually. Not because I want to purchase it myself, but because those who do deserve to be able to.
As much as I am not a fan of Dragonlance, for the record, I am siding with Duke5150 on this one. There is every reason for the Dragonlance setting to be released as a setting. It has plenty of fans (which means people will buy it). While it probably won't push the boundaries of the game anywhere near as far as something like Dark Sun, Planescape, Spelljammer, or Ravenloft would, there is still plenty of new setting specific mechanics that could be introduced in a players guide, and that would enhance D&D as a whole.
I, for one, hope that Dragonlance does get released eventually. Not because I want to purchase it myself, but because those who do deserve to be able to.
My bet is still for 2012 with a new setting in 2011. If they do it right I may look at it but only if they
1. COMPLETLEY remove arcane magic from being controlled by gods. Its not arcane energy if a diety can take it from you.
2. Keep it in the current age or fast forward the time line
3. Expand the world out to more than just two continents. As it stands the map is way too small for a real campaign.
4. Remove tinker gnomes or make them less ridiculous.
Originally Posted by Random NPC
The brutish horde is at the castle gates! We need to ride quickly to stop them! Knights, take to your horses, the court mage will cast a spell to give haste to our mounts, and the cleric will bless our blades. Now, everyone, forward!
Original quote about typical fantasy. Good example too, I must say!
Now for me to completely reflavor the quote in different ways while "attempting" to keep the same concept.;)
Originally Posted by Random NPC
The brutish horde is at the city gates! We need to ride quickly to stop them! Knights, take to your kanks, the royal mage will cast a spell to give haste to our mounts, and the cleric will bless our blades. Now, everyone, forward!
What setting is this? If you said darksun, you were right. (Draj example)
(ps, there are Draj Knight's;) )
Originally Posted by Random NPC
The brutish horde is at the citadel gates! We need to ride quickly to stop them! Knights, take to your horses, the court mage will cast a spell to give haste to our mounts, and the cleric will bless our blades. Now, everyone, forward!
What setting is this? If you said eberron, you were right. ( Thrane example)
Just wanted to have a bit-o-fun with that quote. Besides "language" issues, its the same thing and very fitting.:P
My bet is still for 2012 with a new setting in 2011. If they do it right I may look at it but only if they
1. COMPLETLEY remove arcane magic from being controlled by gods. Its not arcane energy if a diety can take it from you.
2. Keep it in the current age or fast forward the time line
3. Expand the world out to more than just two continents. As it stands the map is way too small for a real campaign.
4. Remove tinker gnomes or make them less ridiculous.
1.Um, the gods of magic don't take magic from casters. The orders of high sorcery police its use and use renegade hunters when needed. If the gods of magic could just snuff out the ability to cast spells, the orders would not be needed to safe guard the world against magical abuse. That all falls in line with free will, which is one of the gifts from the gods of twilight.
2. I agree, but we need options to include Paladine and Takhisis for fans of the wotl.
3. We have more than two continents already.
4. Thats personal opinion.
What setting is this? If you said darksun, you were right. (Draj example)
(ps, there are Draj Knight's;) )
Damn you, Draj Knights, always getting in my way and foiling my examples! :P
Damn you, Draj Knights, always getting in my way and foiling my examples! :P
:evillaugh
It just screamed Jaguar knight, kings defiler and moon priest to me when I read it.:P
1.Um, the gods of magic don't take magic from casters. The orders of high sorcery police its use and use renegade hunters when needed. If the gods of magic could just snuff out the ability to cast spells, the orders would not be needed to safe guard the world against magical abuse. That all falls in line with free will, which is one of the gifts from the gods of twilight.
Ah I see I still say getting rid of the gods of magic would be a plus. FR killed of mystara so Id expect every other setting to get rid of their gods of magic. Id also like to see the gods become more remote. Also make it clear that any future novels are non canon as far as the setting is concerned.
2. I agree, but we need options to include Paladine and Takhisis for fans of the wotl.
True but make it a side bar or something
3. We have more than two continents already.
Eh since when? Only one continent has ever been really detailed in DL as far as I know.
4. Thats personal opinion.
Thats true but having an entire race around the idea of creating technology that does not work is asinine if their inventions worked it would be one thing but the silliness is just over the top.
I see what you all are getting at and just used the most obviously different aspects of each setting as easily graspable differences, but I will get into the real differences and uniqueness of DL if thats what you want and show how it really does seperate itself from other settings. Although I wanted to play around with the first quote made by Dragoncat as it make me chuckle and could just as easily be applies to any setting given a different flavor but would utlimately be the exact same thing.
It doesn't matter what makes it unique. FR has plenty of uniqueness. As does Greyhawk. Same with Blackmoor. I'm sure you could list unique aspects of Krynn until you are blue in the face, because I can list such aspects until I pass out. It isn't difficult.
It is what makes it the same that puts it within a certain genre. Regardless of all of the unique aspects you list, the bulk of the setting, the overwhelming majority of the setting, has more in common with other traditional high fantasy settings than it does with any other genre, and it certainly isn't a genre unto itself.
Krynn still has traditional humans, medieval peasants, knights in shining armor, a traditional medieval mixed with Renaissance Euro-centric sense of style, buildings, castles, etc.
It still has gruff old dwarves with long beards, who work with stone and metal, often underground.
It still has tall, thin, beautiful elves who are ancient, mysterious, magical, connected with nature, and especially forests.
It still has wizards wearing robes, living in towers, playing with the forces of the universe, who are privvy to most of the arcane secrets of the world.
It still has gnolls, and goblins, and traditional dragons, and wyverns, and griffins, and cyclops, and merfolk, and giants, and countless classic undead creatures, and so on, and so forth, ad nauseum.
You can still take virtually any adventure from any traditional high fantasy setting, and port it into Krynn with no changes save the most cosmetic (names of people, places, orders of knights, etc).
That's the point. The bulk of the setting is already in place, mechanically speaking. There are as many unique things left undone as there are in Greyhawk, Blackmoor, and beyond. You could easily squeeze most of the major points into a small handful of Dragon articles, or, as they're doing with draconians, simply merged into other sourcebooks as appropriate. Take the gods, for example. One article could cover all of the gods, any potential feats, paragon paths, et al, with room left over. Easily. The bulk of those gods will, mechanically speaking, be very similar to those of other worlds, with just alignment and domains listed, plus, as with the RPGA CB, a list of what Core gods = DL gods, and thus give access to the CD feats of said Core deities.
That doesn't mean DL shouldn't eventually get a full CS treatment. However, due to the enormous crossover, it is a low priority, as it should be.
Williamhm75
Ah I see I still say getting rid of the gods of magic would be a plus. FR killed of mystara so Id expect every other setting to get rid of their gods of magic. Id also like to see the gods become more remote. Also make it clear that any future novels are non canon as far as the setting is concerned.
2. I agree, but we need options to include Paladine and Takhisis for fans of the wotl.
True but make it a side bar or something
How would getting rid of the gods of magic be a plus? Its because of the gods of magic that focused magic is possible, otherwise we revert back to the chaotic wild magic and we've seen what happens with that with the devastation cause by the scions. (sorcerers)
So because a single setting had its gods killed, every other setting should have their gods killed?
The gods of krynn have been remote many times and been completely removed too. In the current age they are trying to aid the mortals in healing the world from the atrocities inflicted by the chaos war, theift of the world, the dragon overlords and the war of souls. Also, krynnish gods have begun to suffer for it as we have seen in the novels.
Also, making all the DL novels non canon would be a mistake since its the novels themselves that have always been the driving force of the world and the game. If it were not for the novels, we would be stuck in the default wotl era. Making DL novels non canon would fix as many problems as it solved.
Eh since when? Only one continent has ever been really detailed in DL as far as I know.
Ansalon is the primary focus of the campaign setting. But by far not the only continent. Taladas, Adlatum, Ithin'Carthia are the continents I know of personally. Otherlands include Selasia and Mitos Archipelagaes or Poes (not sure) and we also have the Dragon isles and the Isle of Gargath.
Thats true but having an entire race around the idea of creating technology that does not work is asinine if their inventions worked it would be one thing but the silliness is just over the top.
Um, Not working at all and not working the way it was planned are completely different things. The tinker gnomes DO make inventions that WORK but more often then not they don't work the WAY THEY PLANNED.
Also Mad Gnomes create inventions that ALWAYS work which is why they are exiled and considered failures or freaks by the tinkers. Whats the point of creating something that works the way its suppose to? You can't tinker if that happens!:P
It doesn't matter what makes it unique. FR has plenty of uniqueness. As does Greyhawk. Same with Blackmoor. I'm sure you could list unique aspects of Krynn until you are blue in the face, because I can list such aspects until I pass out. It isn't difficult.
It is what makes it the same that puts it within a certain genre. Regardless of all of the unique aspects you list, the bulk of the setting, the overwhelming majority of the setting, has more in common with other traditional high fantasy settings than it does with any other genre, and it certainly isn't a genre unto itself.
Krynn still has traditional humans, medieval peasants, knights in shining armor, a traditional medieval mixed with Renaissance Euro-centric sense of style, buildings, castles, etc.
It still has gruff old dwarves with long beards, who work with stone and metal, often underground.
It still has tall, thin, beautiful elves who are ancient, mysterious, magical, connected with nature, and especially forests.
It still has wizards wearing robes, living in towers, playing with the forces of the universe, who are privvy to most of the arcane secrets of the world.
It still has gnolls, and goblins, and traditional dragons, and wyverns, and griffins, and cyclops, and merfolk, and giants, and countless classic undead creatures, and so on, and so forth, ad nauseum.
You can still take virtually any adventure from any traditional high fantasy setting, and port it into Krynn with no changes save the most cosmetic (names of people, places, orders of knights, etc).
That's the point. The bulk of the setting is already in place, mechanically speaking. There are as many unique things left undone as there are in Greyhawk, Blackmoor, and beyond. You could easily squeeze most of the major points into a small handful of Dragon articles, or, as they're doing with draconians, simply merged into other sourcebooks as appropriate. Take the gods, for example. One article could cover all of the gods, any potential feats, paragon paths, et al, with room left over. Easily. The bulk of those gods will, mechanically speaking, be very similar to those of other worlds, with just alignment and domains listed, plus, as with the RPGA CB, a list of what Core gods = DL gods, and thus give access to the CD feats of said Core deities.
That doesn't mean DL shouldn't eventually get a full CS treatment. However, due to the enormous crossover, it is a low priority, as it should be.
So because dragonlance has always been successful in the past, it should suffer in the future? Eberron also didn't need a coversion in that regard as it is largely unchanged, yet it did.
Elves aren't wise, good, generally peaceful people - they're xenophobic isolationists that organize the occasional Wild Hunt to go out and slaughter entire human villages for fun.
Halflings are inhabitants of the Shadow World (the Shadowfell before the Shadowfell ever existed), and are capable of teleporting by doing a quick step into and out of the Shadow.
Goblinoids had their own kingdoms (plural) a decade bfore Eberron came out, including political relations with other realms.
The majority of antagonists are other PC races and wild beasts. The regular monsters of other settings are all unique creatures - one Siren, one Vampire, one Lamia, one Harpy, and the most feared of all, one Gorgon - who was one step from being a god himself.
All the gods of the setting killed themselves to stop the god of evil from conquering the world, and their closest followers became gods in their places.
People who claim Birthright is generic high fantasy like FR don't know Birthright at all. It's medieval renaissance political empire building scions of the gods. Actually, especially when you consider that only the elves and god-bloods could perform true magic, Birthright was one of the closest to Conan sword and Sorcery style settings TSR made.
Elves aren't wise, good, generally peaceful people - they're xenophobic isolationists that organize the occasional Wild Hunt to go out and slaughter entire human villages for fun.
Halflings are inhabitants of the Shadow World (the Shadowfell before the Shadowfell ever existed), and are capable of teleporting by doing a quick step into and out of the Shadow.
Goblinoids had their own kingdoms (plural) a decade bfore Eberron came out, including political relations with other realms.
The majority of antagonists are other PC races and wild beasts. The regular monsters of other settings are all unique creatures - one Siren, one Vampire, one Lamia, one Harpy, and the most feared of all, one Gorgon - who was one step from being a god himself.
All the gods of the setting killed themselves to stop the god of evil from conquering the world, and their closest followers became gods in their places.
Birthright has some really cool elements that make it distinct from other settings, but I'm not sure that it's any more distinct than Dragonlance is from the baseline, or FR, or thousands of other settings. It's targeted toward the same type of people, for sure.
So because dragonlance has always been successful in the past, it should suffer in the future? Eberron also didn't need a coversion in that regard as it is largely unchanged, yet it did.
Did I say this at all? I quite literally made zero references in the post you quoted with regards to DL's success. The past success of DL has no bearing on my opinion, and I would in no way mind seeing DL come out. Please don't put words in my mouth.
No, I said that, because Dragonlance doesn't have enough to offer that appeals, rules-wise, to a broader base of playstyles, it can and should wait.
Eberron, on the other hand, did indeed have more to offer. It offers wide magic, it offers artificers and artificial races, it offers a robust mechanic for a world-wide guild structure. It offers fast world-wide transport and comminucation ideas. Etc. It offers much that isn't common traditional fantasy convention.
How did the gods offing themselves stop the evil god from taking over?
I do agree with the folks that say Eberron really didn't need a full size conversion, it could have easily been done with a few issues of Dragon, or maybe a single smaller book.
Without Eberron taking writer's time we might have gotten Dragonlance included in 4E settings. I think it's a shame and feel for the hardcore DL fans. I'm with you.
My favorite is the big daddy, FR. So don't think I am saying these things out of blind fan boy angst. I am glad we're getting back Dark Sun. I'll be picking it up and maybe even run a spin off campaign, and I would have liked to seen Dragonlance get some love, too.
In any event, Grats DS guys, I'm looking forward to your user adventures and house rules... get to work! :D
I wasn't trying to twist the meaning of your post, I was just asking the question. Also I enjoyed that description of birthright, sounds neat.
How did the gods offing themselves stop the evil god from taking over?
They blew him up when they went kablooey. The explosion spread god essence out to all their followers - the closest champions became the new gods, the next closest became things like the Gorgon and the first emperor of the human empire that formed afterwards, and those further out got lesser and lesser amounts of power.
People with the divine blood (the Birthright) have a connection to domains that allows them a greater level of control than normal rulers have, plus in 2e terms various spell like abilities, resistances, or other changes depending on the strength of their bloodline.
The strongest bloodlines, rated as a strength of 80+ (out of 100) were often nearly impossible to kill, though PC strength was tapped out at around 50 - 60. For example, the Spider (a Drider like Goblin) could only be killed if you chopped him up into itty bits, burned the pieces, and spread the ashes as far apart as possible. And he was at an 80. I think the Gorgon was over 100.
You could increase your blood-strength by killing another scion with a special type of metal thrust through the heart, Highlander style. Which the Gorgon loved doing, including to the last Emperor of the human Empire.
Thats one of the settings I never played. I want a god blooded gorgon riding drider slayer!People who claim Birthright is generic high fantasy like FR don't know Birthright at all. It's medieval renaissance political empire building scions of the gods. Actually, especially when you consider that only the elves and god-bloods could perform true magic, Birthright was one of the closest to Conan sword and Sorcery style settings TSR made.....
You know after reading your descriptions of Birthright, you have managed to convince me that it could work as a 4ed setting, and for the moment I am setting it as my guess for the 2012 setting.
So yeah, I really have most of what I might have gotten if it had been Dragonlance. Unless they planned on making new races for DL. :D
Also, personal thoughts?
We have Forgotten Realms, Ebberon, and now Dark Sun.
Ravenloft would attract "goths" (the 'dress in black kind', not the Germanic Tribe), and Planscape, as I understand it, would attract the "steampunk crowd" (those who haven't already been attracted by the pulpness of Ebberon). Spelljammer might get a few of the "space opera" sci-fi fans.
Meanwhile, Dragonlance is similar enough to Forgotten Realms to be able to be delayed in favor of more variety in terms of settings.
Not that DL is a bad setting, it's just relatively similar to other high fantasy settings, and so it won't be 'the' setting. Not for a little bit at least.
Well, the only thing I plan on picking up from any of their campaign settings are the Player's Guides to provide my players with more class and race options. I prefer jamming things from other settings into a world of my own devising, pulling liberally from the published material of all settings.
So yeah, I really have most of what I might have gotten if it had been Dragonlance. Unless they planned on making new races for DL. :D
Also, personal thoughts?
We have Forgotten Realms, Ebberon, and now Dark Sun.
Ravenloft would attract "goths" (the 'dress in black kind', not the Germanic Tribe), and Planscape, as I understand it, would attract the "steampunk crowd" (those who haven't already been attracted by the pulpness of Ebberon). Spelljammer might get a few of the "space opera" sci-fi fans.
Meanwhile, Dragonlance is similar enough to Forgotten Realms to be able to be delayed in favor of more variety in terms of settings.
Not that DL is a bad setting, it's just relatively similar to other high fantasy settings, and so it won't be 'the' setting. Not for a little bit at least.
...Planescape attracting "the steam punk crowd"? Aside from the fact that I stake serious issue with the notion that games attract types (what about those of us who are not of any such type, and happen to like multiple settings from multiple different genres?), there is nothing about Planescape that is steampunk in any shape or form. Planescape is more philosophical and literary than anything else.
...Planescape attracting "the steam punk crowd"? Aside from the fact that I stake serious issue with the notion that games attract types (what about those of us who are not of any such type, and happen to like multiple settings from multiple different genres?), there is nothing about Planescape that is steampunk in any shape or form. Planescape is more philosophical and literary than anything else.
Then perhaps I understand it's flavor improperly. I have never played in it. Then again, many worlds could be claimed to be "philosophical and literary more than anything else".
Also, from reading that Mina became a god not aligned with good nor evil, that would be worth publishing a new DL setting. But if all the fans want is the "old" Dl, I really don't see the point.
Then perhaps I understand it's flavor improperly. I have never played in it. Then again, many worlds could be claimed to be "philosophical and literary more than anything else".
When I say philosophical and literary more than anything else, I meant just that. The setting is about a city in which multiple different anti-thetical philosophical concepts come and live, together, in close quarters. Its about the nature of the battle between good and evil, law and chaos. Its about what makes something a god. Its about the process through which belief becomes a reality. Its a fiction which highlights the production of its own fiction. The setting is probably the most literary and philosophical setting ever released by D&D. I don't know if its necessarily the best game setting (its one of my favorites, but I don't like it any more than dark sun, ravenloft, planescape, or eberron, as a game setting), but it is one of those places where D&D transcended game and started to become art. With a good writer behind it, the concept of planescape could have made an awsome piece of fiction. Awesome on the level of Kafka, not awesome on the level of a D&D book. Of course, for whatever reason, nobody has ever published that book. But the potential still exists with that setting.
The setting is all about what it means to believe in something, and in the process make that something real through the power of belief. Its a fictional setting about a bunch of people living in a fictional city,and making parts of that city real through the experience of belief. Its a phenomenal idea, really. Which would make sense, since the setting is all about what its like to live in and amongst things that exist only because they are phenomenal ideas.
None of that, however, has anything to do with steam punk. There is no steam technology. Really, there is no technology of any kind. Unlike Eberron, which features a healthy dose of magitech, planescape never did.
I am still hoping that we get an actual Steampunk setting. I don't find Eberron scratches that itch, since it is still medieval and no actual steam-technology. I am hoping to see a setting with gas-airships, trains, difference engines, rifles, etc.
I am still hoping that we get an actual Steampunk setting. I don't find Eberron scratches that itch, since it is still medieval and no actual steam-technology. I am hoping to see a setting with gas-airships, trains, difference engines, rifles, etc.
If they were smart they'd license the Iron Kingdoms setting from Privateer Press. That setting is full of win and awesome sauce. Due to the popularity of the Warmachine and Hordes minis games they more or less have left the IK RPG setting to moulder and die and are not updating it to 4e. Product that was going to be published for it is not going to see publication now and their in house magazine that used to have quite a bit of RPG material in it only has RPG stuff once in a blue moon now as it's all been taken over by the minis.
Although it's unlikely that WotC would do so since they wouldn't fully own and control the setting.
I, myself, am hoping for a separate book that details the city of Sigil.
There is. It's called the Dungeon Masters Guide 2.
I congratulations fans of the DS setting. I think many of said fans have certainly waited long enough.
You, good person, are very kind and a good sport to congratulate the DS fans, even though you may have wished for DL to be the setting of next year. This is the sort of behaviour that I wish I saw around these parts more these days.
A blip and back page adventure does not make a supplement. Much more detail can be done with a self named Sigil book.
I just realized the spell check doesn't work with this cheaper forum. What a mess.
A blip and back page adventure does not make a supplement. Much more detail can be done with a self named Sigil book.
I just realized the spell check doesn't work with this cheaper forum. What a mess.
It does you have to click the spellchecker icon, at least that's the way it works on my firefox.
Bel
I just realized the spell check doesn't work with this cheaper forum. What a mess.
It worked for me yesterday.
Yep, it is a toggle on the buttons up above now. I don't beleive it was there when this new community board went live, but added later.
Congratulations DS fans. Hopefully at some point DL will in fact be given some 4e attention- though despite a few pleasentries saying otherwise I sincerely doubt it ever will.
How do we SAGE on this damn thing.