So I have a small bit of expierence with Dragonlance. Two years ago, I read Autumn Twilight, and saw the movie based on it, and own some of the other books set in the Dragonlance world. Just recently, I picked up my copy of the first volume of The Lost Chronicles, Dragons of the Dwarven Depths, and started reading it. As I've been reading it, the idea of playing D&D, set in this setting, has repeatedly been kicking around in my head. So here's a question: Would you want Wizards to publish a Dragonlance Campaign Setting book, for Fifth Edition? It seems like they've been giving a lot of attention to Forgotten Realms and not as much for Dragonlance. It feels like an interesting enough setting to play in. I would DM a campaign set in it. But what do you guys think?
I'd probably prefer Dragonlance to Forgotten Realms (the moon-dependent magic is cool, and centaurs as a playable race interests me), but neither one tickles my fancy very much: they just fall too much into that "generic fantasy" category for me to muster much interest in those settings as a whole.
That said, if you want to DM for the Dragonlance setting, you might be able to find a copy of the setting book from a previous edition; perhaps as part of WotC's D&D classics line.
I've always struggled to see Dragonlance as a viable RPG setting. Krynn is so small and everything's so oriented around the War of the Lance. But that's just me.
You may have noticed that there are some Dragonlance references in the core rulebooks. Tika is used as an example in a number of places, for instance, and the DL deities are in the PHB appendix. The point being that WotC hasn't completely abandoned all the other settings in favor of the Forgotten Realms. That being said, they have come out and said that while they're are going to focus on the Realms for now, they do intend to get to the other settings down the road.
We may not ever see a fully-fledged Dragonlance Campaign Setting book but we will no doubt eventually see some kind of 5e support for the setting.
Thing is, my favorite Era of DL is War of The Lance. But you can only thwart Tiamat so often.
2007/08 i played Red Hand of Doom. Took about a year. 2013-summer of '14: I ran Red Hand of Doom for my Sunday group. Right now I'm a player in TWO Hoard of the Dragon Queen/Rise of Tiamat campaigns. I'm getting sick of this damned 5 headed dragon.... Wich sucks since I want to someday run a DL campaign set during the War of the Lance.
dragon lance has three power scales,
1. before the destruction, the characters were haughty, powerful, and similar to netheril or pre-darksun athas.
2. the young raistlin period, most characters were weaker than the previous period, used steel as currency,
and a couple of character classes, artifacts, and personalities ended up being more powerful than 5e could handle.
3. 5th age dragon lance, which has a spell shaping system, but otherwise characters are very weak, and enemies
were very powerful.
the basic gist of phase 2 is time travel and possession to attain power from phase 1 to kill all the gods, and then click "undo"
only to reset everything before some uber outer god comes in and introduces phase 3.
phase 3, however had really low level power thresholds.
phase 2 characters could take out dragons in 2 hits with the right gear. The wizards could time travel and a lot of the main characters were either nobiliy or powerful monsters in disguise. I question whether 5e could handle the phase 2 power structure without either modifying the story line or flow, so that PCs deliberately sucked compared to the protagonists who did things like chitty chatted with god avatars or led armies of dragons.
At least it's a legit "dragonborn" setting (draconians), although all are evil, and none are metallic.
I've always thought DL would be a great setting but pullng it off has been harder to do. But then again when I tried and even my friends, we weren't as experienced DMs as we are now. I feel I could easily craft a story using 5e rules but set it back around the time of the War of the Lance. Similar to what I did in a storyline of Middle-earth that was running concurent to the fellowship of the ring. The PC's sort of new of the ring and what was going on, but in my story, the fellowship loses, the 2 blue wizards arrive to try to help the PC's with finding another way to beat Sauron type thing. I'd have the PCs in DragonLance do the same but maybe not even know of the Tanis and the gang but still have a story ongoing that is affected by it and vice versa.
shintashi wrote:
pukunui wrote:
First things first, if no one else has mentioned it: go to the dragonlance nexus: http://dragonlancenexus.com/
It's where all the DL supernerds hang out.
Second, try to find some pdfs of the old DL setting books. There was this one about gnomes, that had ths whole thing about this intricate system of ropes with each gnome in Mt. Nevermind at the end of a rope, so you can always find the gnome you're looking for and basically it's like a page and a half "world wide web" pun.
Also check out the old threads here in these forums, as there's some really good discussions.
pukunui wrote:
I think it would be amazing to actually see WotC release something in DL again. The devs have a lust to continue saturating our every sense with Forgotten Realms.
The beauty of this though, is that since Dragonlance has been given a back seat in the decade/next iteration isle, that we as users of this setting don't really have to worry about adhering to any core stories that are developing things that players will come to a table expecting. FR on the other hand has the need for an "update". There are hard core players out there and they want all games to adhere to the dictations of the modern FR so they may plan around said dictations accordingly.
It is my feeling that, even though DL has just as rich a history as FR, that it can more easily be abandoned to allow room for creation, since no one else is doing anything about that. All the old books and fan sites are floating around out there. I know that many people seem to feel stifled in an attempt to develop stories off in DL because of the grandeur the history has, and it can be a challenge. But... it can also just be another D&D setting. Make it your own, express the things you like about it and write your own story within that ... lance.
pukunui wrote:
rcdude12 wrote:
Actually, I consider War of the Lance a really poor time to play in. It's a window of a few short years during which some character options are barely available and NPCs are driving all the events.
A much better time period, IMO is the phase after the War of the Lance, before the 5th Age changes. You have 30 years of time to play around in where you actually have access to clerics, a functioning order of the Knights of Solamnia, and plenty of general D&Dness, Dragonlance style.
And of course, if you aren't interested in any of that 5th Age shenaningans after those 30 years are up, you can just have it never happen and keep on moving the timeline forward in a different direction.
Synjin wrote:
Synjin wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
ankiyavon wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Sands666 wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Okay well. There is always just... "Cause the DM said so". Lol
joeburgos wrote:
Synjin wrote:
DoctorBadWolf wrote:
I loved the heroes of the lance (and Tika gets a name-check in )PHB). In 4e it was a struggle to stat them up to retain their flavour but 5e looks much easier. I'd certainly like to see 5e versions for posterity's sake 
Sands666 wrote:
pauln6 wrote:
joeburgos wrote:
I was expecting be provided a Dragonlance package by now. They gave us the one for Eberron, but decided not to provide us with a package for any other setting.
oh well, TSR is still the king when it comes to campaign setting material.
dmgorgon wrote:
I have it!
Start the NEW 5th Edition D&D: Dragonlance Campaign in the War of the Lance or the Earlier period... BUT... here's how:
Built directly into the old mechanics (AD&D 1st dragonlance hardback) is a Time Travel spell, a relatively low level time travel spell. Have the campaign start with some wizard, a group of adventurers, and blam... you are rewriting history. Every Campaign would be it's own unique Timeline. To add cross over homogeny for something like Adventurer's league, you could assume the wizard was actually a small cult or large Tower of High Sorcery experiment - maybe even an amusement ride (sounding like the old cartoon), such as during a Festival. Zap... tons of characters tossed back to the same time line, so all of them can interact with each other and swap notes, but it also gives you something the previous edition didn't have:
the ability to have non NPCs taking a central role in shaping the events. Interacting with the original NPCs, but they are no more important than the PCs. End result is the time line as you play it out. Tournaments could even be set up so your competing teams determine if they switch to a happy generic fantasy setting (best outcome), an ashen wasteland with dead gods (worst outcome), or a magic dead apocalyptic god quest of 5th age (mediocre outcome).
Additionally, you could have an expansion for the timeline where Fistandentalus (spelling?) was running around. Ishtar or whatever.
besides dragons, draconians, solomnic knights, kender, and over powered magic items,
dragonlance has an enormous amount of Time Travel/Time Lines and PC:God Avatar interaction.
The used to be a chronomancer's handbook. They could probably integrate some of that material into Dragon Lance. (and dump the rest into the Psionics section and then use those guns/laser weapons section of the 5e DMG).
Honestly they really should've made Dragonlance their opening campaign adventure. Thinking back the developers were taking about how they wanted to put something iconic into their opening adventure and that what they decided that should be was DRAGONS. So they put Tiamat in Forgotten Realms interest of using a campaign world with dragons in its name lol!
Anyway im glad to see a lot of other people also chiming in that they'd like to see DL back. Interesting to hear what people want out of DL.
joeburgos wrote:
pauln6 wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
I think FR was the opening salvo of realms due to the fact that it, and Greyhawk are "generic" when it comes to magic. Krynn is too specifically defined when it comes to the moons and their phases and how it affects Arcane casters. I think it's a great follow-up though, that should definitely be next, IMHO!
ETA: Grey Robes FTW!
ankiyavon wrote:
Sands666 wrote:
Sands666 wrote:
Id definitely want to see Dragonlance brought back, it’s a setting that I have always wanted to explore but never got around to actually playing for any extended period. Looking back I´m disappointed that FR was the setting they went with for HotDQ etc. I feel like DL would mark a more definite break from previous editions. A break I feel was needed partly as I feel that FR became somewhat tarnished by 3rd and 4th ed. As I understand, even its original creator has shown dislike towards some of the changes they made. In the off chance that I get to run some DL one day I made some very simple house rules, based on ideas from different sources online, to adapt 5th edition to the setting.
Keep in mind that its been a while since I played dragonlance or read any of the novels
Kender: use hafling
Minotaur: use minotaur from the unearthed arcana articles
Classes:
Wizard of the robe (sorted by school):
Black: Evoker, enchanter, necromancer
Red: Illusion, transmutation
White: Abjuration, conjuration, divination
Knight:
Crown: Fighter (battle master and champion)
Sword: Paladin (devotion and vengeance)
Rose: Bard (valor)
Neraka: Paladian (oathbreaker)
Moon magic:
The position of the moons and whether they are waxing, waning or full will effect Magic in Dragonlance. I’d solve this thourgh rolling a 1d4 dice to decide whether the position of the moon is waxing or waning – giving no bonus, in high sanction – giving bonus or in low – giving penalty.
Depending on the moons position I think the most simple solution is to grant him a +1/-1 bonus to proficiency. (Other alternatives is for example letting him get advantage/disadvantage on concetration checks, or +1/-1 spell slot of the highest Level avaiable (and perhaps add that he might break this up, say for a 4th Level spells slot (for a 7th Level caster), break it up into a 1st and a 2rd or two 2nd)). I prefer the simple solution of changing proficiency bonus though (this will also effect concentration checks as well).
1. low sanction
2. waxing
3. high sanction
4. waning
It is really weird that the setting with Halflings whose who shtick revolves around being annoying kleptomaniacs that screw up everything, has Gnomes who create devices capable of destroying the world, has a whole race of mentally-challenged inbred hill-billy Dwarfs and is basically entirely revolved around a handful of characters from novels written more than 20 years ago would be on the list of settings people would actually want to see return.
It was kind of by a long mile the most hated setting ever printed. But I guess the new generation has a fondness for that cartoon setting. Maybe it is just the result of so many people reading the books while they were in junior high school.
Is it just nostalgia though or is there anything in particular about Krynn that was uniquely worth salvaging?
Hebitsuikaza wrote:
To be fair there are silly things in most published settings. The entire premise of HotDQ in FR seems a bit silly, as there are surely more competent people in the realms that can take care of the world ending threat that is Tiamat.
I like the Kender as an example of a race that is truly distinctive, compared to other races that often only seem to embody just different aspects of human nature. They’re difficult to pull off without being an annoying nuisance though. Didn’t know that about the gnomes, but I think the gully dwarves were cool partly for the same reason as the Kender, and I´ve always read the description of them as others peoples prejudice.
Not going to start a discussion on the merits and flaws of DL though, I´m simply saying that I was disappointed that they went with FR, and would have considered DL as a refreshing change and break with the old.
ankiyavon wrote:
It's a setting I'd like to see support for, but I'm the lone dragonlance fan in my group (the others have never read any material or watched any). Plus I re-read Dragons of Autumn Twilight (the first novel I read) very recently and was struck by how little I enjoyed it compared to the first reading.
mrfisk wrote:
Hi Hebitsuikaza
Lol, you really seem to hate the Kender. By distinctive, in this context, I mean that they possess a trait that is so far removed from any traits present in humans, that it makes them unique. My problem with many other fantasy races, in the way they are described and played, is that they often just seem like different variations of humans.
Shasarak wrote:
It was my mother buying me Dragonlance Chronicles for a birthday present (which she read before giving it to me, I think she really wanted to get me into fantasy novels so she could just give me stuff she wanted to read as presents) that led me into Dungeons and Dragons in the first place a couple of decades ago, it was the first world I played in, although that was mostly homebrewed using Dragonlance races, etc.
So, yeah, you can tick the Nostalgia box for me,
But as others have mentioned, I never really enjoyed it as a setting to play in beyond that, not compared to things like Planescape and Ravenloft.
…except for Taladas from the ‘Time of Dragons’ box which I would love to see get a 5E treatment.
My players and I loved Taladas so much that when I finally moved on from DMing a campaign set there and started a Planescape setting, one of my players asked if he could play a Tiger Clan elf from Taladas, which I was happy to see as part of planar adventures.
I love Dragonlance and would love to see a 5e setting book for it. We have only had a small taste of Krynn with minotaurs in the UE waterborne article, I would like to see more.
Neonflux wrote:
The problem is this is what anyone outside of the people who read the Dragonlance books has
You look at it and see a good book series you enjoyed. Anyone else looks at it, and sees dwarves that are trying to insult someone, ohsowhacky! gnomes, and god damn Kender.
Forgotten Realms is aggressively generic, that's why its always the go-to to use. Dragonlance won't be.
Mecheon wrote:
Well I voted for Greyhawk and Dragonlance in the survey. Done my bit.
Ive removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting/personal attacks are violations of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the Report Post button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
Have anyone attempted to convert the draconians to 5th edition? I was considering adopting HotDQ to Dragonlance, and using the draconians as the main antagonists felt natural. Perhaps replacing both half dragons and dragonbornes, or making them a subrace of dragonborne (the Sivak might be difficult to pull off). Any ideas?
mrfisk wrote:
Would something like this be ok? I´ve based this on what I´ve found online or earlier conversions, and on what I remember from earlier editions. Not feeling too inspiered so I left the fluff out and concentrated on the stats themselves. Havent though too hard about these and there are some obvious issues; I have to find some spells for the Bozak, the Auraks breath weapon is the same as red dragon BW for dragonborn, but it only takes a bonus action, I´ve left out flight for most because granting flight to all would basically leave me with nothing left but fluff to set them apart (as flight is very good).
Draconian:
+2 constitution
Speed: 30
Low light vision
Proficiency in perception
Claw attack: 1d6
Subrace:
Baaz:
+1 strength
Proficiency in intimidate
Flight: You have a flying speed of 30´ as long as you are not wearing any armour but light.
Death throes: turn to stone; if the attack that reduced you to 0 HP was a natural, melee or ranged attack, the attack must roll dex save DC 10 or attackers weapon will be stuck. DC 15 to break free.
Kapak:
+1 dexterity
Proficiency in stealth
Choose one of the following: you gain a bite attack; 1d4 piercing damage. Target must make Con save DC 8 + proficiency bonus or gain the poisoned condition. Roll new save at end of each turn. Or; your saliva has healing qualities, up to charisma bonus times per long rest you can use an action to coat a wound in your saliva, curing 1d8 + Con HP
Death throes: turn to acid; any creature adjacent to you when you is sprayed with burning acid as your body burst apart. They take 3d8 acid damage, DC 12 dexterity save for half.
Bozak:
+1 intelligence
Proficiency in history
You gain cantrip at first, 1st, level spell at 3rd, and 2nd level spell at 5th. All usable once per day, with intelligence as spellcasting ability
Death throes: turn to explosion; any creature within 10´. They take 4d6 fire damage, DC 10 dexterity save for half.
Sivak:
+1 strength
Proficiency in persuasion
Powerful Build: you count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push, drag, or lift.
Shape shift: when you reduce an opponent to 0 HP, you can assume its appearance as long as its small, medium or large sized. You remain in this form until you finish a short rest.
Death throes: turn to killer; the Sivak assumes the form of its killer when dead.
Aurak:
+1 charisma
Proficiency in arcana
Breath weapon: once every short or long rest you can use your breath weapon: bonus action, fire, 15´ cone, DC 8+con+prof. bonus, 2d6 damage, 3d6 at 6th, 4d6 at 11th, 5d6 at 16th.
Death throes: turn to magical explosion; any creature within 10´. They take 5d4 energy damage, DC 12 dexterity save for half.