i just want to congragulate the desiners, artists, and evreyone else who worked on the book on an amazing job.
than i noticed something was missing.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
kender weapons! the book doesent say ANYTHING about the hoopak!
or, am i just not seeing it?
if anyone knows where i can find rules for the hoopak, and othe kender weapons, please let me know.
thanks.
I hope there will be some other Rulebooks in the near future...
Originally posted by SweetMeats
That is my one complaint with the DLCS. It should have been Dragonlance first and not 90% 5th age material.
It's all one and the same, SweetMeats.
Remember, the War of the Lance has its 20th anniversary next year. 20 years. If the Realms had stayed exactly as it was for 20 years, it wouldn't be anywhere near as popular as it is. Remember, Drizzt et al are all 1st edition AD&D characters in a popular best-selling novel trilogy and yet WOTC doesn't keep the setting locked into the time period of those books.
Cheers,
Cam
The DLCS should have had rules for racial weapons, gnomish inventions, draconians (I know it has this)...etc. The things that make Dragonlance what it is.
I'm not advocating having the DLCS be Age of Despair, Reign of Istar or even 5th age. Just that it should have left the details of such to respective books.
I completely understand the desire for the hoopak, etc. That's something that was mistakenly left out and not a design issue - it's being rectified in later products.
But I have to ask this question and it may seem somewhat silly to those of you who are making an issue out of it, but how much use did you get from gnome invention rules?
They've only appeared in once place previously - Dragonlance Adventures. There are none in any other product which presents gnomes as a player race for Dragonlance. They aren't in Tales of the Lance, or the Monstrous Compendium. Even the tinker classes presented in those two books didn't include any wild and crazy rules to create steam-powered toasters. They weren't even in SAGA.
What's the utility of these rules to you? Let's imagine you have a gnome player character. Do the other players sit around and wait while you and the DM roll dice to see if the gnome's steam-powered toaster has spikes or pistons or whirligigs or is 15 feet tall or green or coasts about on wheels? Once the gnome's done it, what have you gained? A device that makes toast. Great, on with the adventure.
I know Chris did a fantastic job with the gnome invention rules and they're evocative and suitably gnomish, but it's a huge chunk of material for use by only one race in the game and for a limited window of application. It's ideal for a race book, for example; a book which would also include charts for the random determination of kender pocket contents or the details of dozens of Kirath weaponry and dwarf clan politics. But given that the gnome entry in the DLCS has exactly as much information as ever was given out for the gnome in Dragonlance outside of the complicated charts in DLA (bonuses to Craft, Knowledge or Profession skill checks, etc) I think the gnome angle's pretty near covered.
I guess the bottom line is, the setting is so rich and exciting and full of flavorful elements that obsessing about choices such as leaving the tinker mechanics out of the DLCS rather than recognizing how useful the rest of the book is for any DL campaign just baffles me.
Cheers,
Cam
I don't often get gnomish characters from the players I've had, but they do appear from time to time, and those players have wanted to make devices (*Remembers one gnomes attempt at a secret door detector*).
Now, apart from the rules in DLA there have not been any and gnomish inventions are just as much a apart of the setting as kender and hoopaks.
There are no official rules currently for inventions and I don't feel that a craft or profession check is suitable, nor does it capture the flavour.
Great, on with the adventure.
Ah, but no gnomish tinkerer in my games has ever sat down in the middle of an adventure to make a hydromatic thermodynamic toaster. Instead, anytime they want to do it, its done outside the game in the downtime between adventures.
When I think of an adventuring gnome (as opposed to your average expert gnome in Mt. Nevermind), I think of a guy who has all sorts of tools and gadgets on his person. He's a living Swiss Army Knife, able to pull out any tool one needs in a given situation. His gadgets are small and portable, but they have neat effects. He's still able to work on large-scale inventions in a pinch.
This is why I like the gnome artificer in Magic of Faerun. It's a great way to do a tinker while allowing the player to have a bunch of neat options.
Originally posted by Cam Banks
Hmm.
I completely understand the desire for the hoopak, etc. That's something that was mistakenly left out and not a design issue - it's being rectified in later products.
But I have to ask this question and it may seem somewhat silly to those of you who are making an issue out of it, but how much use did you get from gnome invention rules?
They've only appeared in once place previously - Dragonlance Adventures. There are none in any other product which presents gnomes as a player race for Dragonlance. They aren't in Tales of the Lance, or the Monstrous Compendium. Even the tinker classes presented in those two books didn't include any wild and crazy rules to create steam-powered toasters. They weren't even in SAGA.
What's the utility of these rules to you? Let's imagine you have a gnome player character. Do the other players sit around and wait while you and the DM roll dice to see if the gnome's steam-powered toaster has spikes or pistons or whirligigs or is 15 feet tall or green or coasts about on wheels? Once the gnome's done it, what have you gained? A device that makes toast. Great, on with the adventure.
I know Chris did a fantastic job with the gnome invention rules and they're evocative and suitably gnomish, but it's a huge chunk of material for use by only one race in the game and for a limited window of application. It's ideal for a race book, for example; a book which would also include charts for the random determination of kender pocket contents or the details of dozens of Kirath weaponry and dwarf clan politics. But given that the gnome entry in the DLCS has exactly as much information as ever was given out for the gnome in Dragonlance outside of the complicated charts in DLA (bonuses to Craft, Knowledge or Profession skill checks, etc) I think the gnome angle's pretty near covered.
I guess the bottom line is, the setting is so rich and exciting and full of flavorful elements that obsessing about choices such as leaving the tinker mechanics out of the DLCS rather than recognizing how useful the rest of the book is for any DL campaign just baffles me.
Cheers,
Cam
In years of DL gaming, I never used those rules once. None of my players had any desire to play a gnome, and the ratio of "pain in the XXXXX" vs. "fun from use" just wasn't balanced in the right direction.
Banshee
anyone know where i can find official (or non-official) rules for kender weapons.
thanks.
Hope it helps.
The hoopak is a kender sling-staff.
With one end forked, with small amounts of gut used to make a slingshot at that end.
The other end is pointed; ment to be stuck into the ground, but can be used as a less-than-perfect shortspear.
The shotspear end is used by stabbing someone with it, but seeing as how it is not made to be used as a weapon, you suffer a minus two to hit people with the pointy end ; the hitting part, the shaft is used by whaking someone with it; and the sling can be used in two different ways:
1. Sticking the spear part in the ground, and bending it back, thus flinging the rock; this entails a minus one to hit, a plus one to damage, and the range goes up by 30 ft. planting or removing the hoopak from the ground is a standered action, and cannot be done if the ground is too firm(i.e. rock), or if it is too soft (i.e. quicksand)
2. Spinning the hoopak about your head, than releasing the rock, as in a sling. This entails no bounses or penalties.
The hoopak is treated as a simple weapon for kender, one in which all kender are proficient. For evreyone else, it is an exotic weapon.
Hoopaks have two more functions. They are hollow, allowing storage; and they have a ‘whistle tip’. This sound is made by swinging the hoopak clockwise, and can not be made if the hollow space has something in it.
Hoopak damage crit range type mods
sling 1d4 X2 50ft B
sling in ground 1d4+1 X2 80ft. B -1 to hit
point 1d8 X3 P
shaft 1d6 X2 B
Cost:6stl Weight:4lbs
Originally posted by CNEFD
back to the original topic . . . .
anyone know where i can find official (or non-official) rules for kender weapons.
thanks.
Well did you check the Kencyclopedia? It has stats for battak, bollik, chapak, hackak, hoopak, polpok, sashik, sithak and whippik.
Originally posted by jonesy
Well did you check the Kencyclopedia? It has stats for battak, bollik, chapak, hackak, hoopak, polpok, sashik, sithak and whippik.
went. went to the weapons section. said it was down.
one other ting. does anyone have any pictures of the kender weapons. i'm not entireley sure what most look like
Originally posted by CNEFD
one other ting. does anyone have any pictures of the kender weapons. i'm not entireley sure what most look like
http://www.kencyclopedia.com/kender/roleplaying/Tools_display.cfm
Originally posted by SweetMeats
That is my one complaint with the DLCS. It should have been Dragonlance first and not 90% 5th age material.
wow. The sheer idiocy of this comment has prevented me from reading the rest of this thread. You do see the dragonlance logo on the DLCS right? Here's a hint, its the same one as the dragonlance logo on the fifth age box set.
Have you even read the book? The only thing fifth age about it is the geography section, and even there, it tells you what everything was like in the fourth age. The entire book is easily interchangeable between 4th and 5th. Just pretend the mystic and sorceror arent there.
Just what the hell kind of comment is this supposed to be anyway? Are you that stubborn, or just slow? Its as idiotic as saying, 'Man, i wish this muffin was more English, and Less British'. Or is the fifth age not part of dragonlance somehow? And if you say some tripe like Weis and Hickman Didnt Do It So It Isnt Real, i swear i'll kick you. They started it with Summer Flame and a plan to do the age of mortals. The Fifth age team did the best they could under the circumstances with which they had to work. When it came time for war of souls, there was a lot of give and take between W&H and the 5a crew, and in the end both parties were happy with the results.
I've seen the original plan the SAGA team had for the wos, and it was awesome, with lord soth and his undead armies exploding out of nightlund. I've also read the finished war of souls. While i may not like the path it took, the end result is undeniably Dragonlance, and undeniably Fifth Age. The DLCS and the AoM actually make the war of souls sound totally consistant with both fourth and fifth age eras.
Seriously dude, stop being retarded. The lack of kender weapons has nothing to do with the ages of the book. more dragonlance and less fifth age...hmph. what a moron.
For what its worth, racial weapons are coming with the DM screen.
And to the original poster, yeah, i do agree that it should have been in the core rules, and from my understanding it originally was, but someone in wotc had a +5 pen of editing....
And if you want detail on kender weapons, get Tales of the Lance.
Originally posted by talinthas
For what its worth, racial weapons are coming with the DM screen.
WOOOOOHOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!
Originally posted by talinthas
And to the original poster, yeah, i do agree that it should have been in the core rules, and from my understanding it originally was, but someone in wotc had a +5 pen of editing....
bummer.
Originally posted by talinthas
And if you want detail on kender weapons, get Tales of the Lance.
the whose and the what now?
wow. The sheer idiocy of this comment has prevented me from reading the rest of this thread. You do see the dragonlance logo on the DLCS right? Here's a hint, its the same one as the dragonlance logo on the fifth age box set.
What brought this about? Perhaps if you read what I said afterwards you would understand what I was saying. Dragonlance has nothing to do with whatever age it is being played in.
Just what the hell kind of comment is this supposed to be anyway? Are you that stubborn, or just slow? Its as idiotic as saying, 'Man, i wish this muffin was more English, and Less British'. Or is the fifth age not part of dragonlance somehow? And if you say some tripe like Weis and Hickman Didnt Do It So It Isnt Real, i swear i'll kick you. They started it with Summer Flame and a plan to do the age of mortals. The Fifth age team did the best they could under the circumstances with which they had to work. When it came time for war of souls, there was a lot of give and take between W&H and the 5a crew, and in the end both parties were happy with the results.
Despite my dislike of 5th age, that has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
Regardless of the era in which a DM and his group like, that should not be in the core book. Any era material should be in the respective books. I understand that thats not possible really with something like geography and I agree that there is information in there for different eras.
What I wanted from a core Dragonlance book is Dragonlance material such as racial weapons & classes and gnomisn inventions. The stuff that Dragonlance is made from at the core level.
Seriously dude, stop being retarded. The lack of kender weapons has nothing to do with the ages of the book. more dragonlance and less fifth age...hmph. what a moron.
Oh.. name calling. How grown-up. Seriously, read what I had to say before you judge me and my thoughts. I thought the posters on here as being above that sort of behaviour.
For what its worth, racial weapons are coming with the DM screen.
Thats good to hear but I still stand by my view that they should have been in the core book where they belong.
Admittedly, i was a lot angrier when i posted, so my coherency was lacking. Did you read my review of the DLCS? I agree that it should have been in the core book, along with gnome rules. I agree for the same reason you postulated, even. Its what makes Dragonlance Dragonlance.
But what the hell kind of comment is that? Fifth age is not a separate entity from Dragonlance. And even if it was, do you honestly believe that the SAGA system deliberatly took out hoopaks just to insult you? For what its worth, every unique dragonlance weapon and then some were translated into SAGA.
I really don't understand your argument. This is a core book. Core books are required to have a few elements to make them core. A timeline of the campaign, geographical data, specific races and classes, and unique monsters. The DLCS has all this. The FRCS has all this. The Kingdoms of Kalamar book has all this. What more did you want?
The timeline of the world has advanced, you know. Realms players hated the time of troubles, but that doesnt mean it was retconned out of existance. The new FRCS advanced the timeline even more, to allow things like dwarven casters. DL advanced to a point where nothing has yet happened, so that for once, DMs can run any adventure they want without tripping on continuity. Your comment on era books is almost true- this is why Age of Mortals is a separate book. But the core book has to have a starting point for the campaign somewhere. I think this is what your problem is. You want the campaign to start in the past, and ignore the present.
I ask again- What exactly did you want to see?
Originally posted by talinthas
heh. Years of watching people make comments like that have built up a sizable anger in me. Do you realise just how ridiculous you sound when you say More Dragonlance, less Fifth Age?
Admittedly, i was a lot angrier when i posted, so my coherency was lacking.
I can understand what your saying and I have never been very good at explaining my POV's online. I'm more a verbal person myself.
But what the hell kind of comment is that? Fifth age is not a separate entity from Dragonlance. And even if it was, do you honestly believe that the SAGA system deliberatly took out hoopaks just to insult you? For what its worth, every unique dragonlance weapon and then some were translated into SAGA.
[/quote0
I never said that 5th age is different to Dragonlance and I have no problem with SAGA (apart from the system) so I don't know where you have got this from.
DL advanced to a point where nothing has yet happened, so that for once, DMs can run any adventure they want without tripping on continuity. Your comment on era books is almost true- this is why Age of Mortals is a separate book. But the core book has to have a starting point for the campaign somewhere. I think this is what your problem is. You want the campaign to start in the past, and ignore the present.
I think you are looking at my preference for post WotL as a hatred of 5th age and a tantrum against spoiling the setting. Thats not true. I can take or leave the 5th age really, I just know what era appeals more to me.
At the end of the day, I think the DLCS is a great book. No complaints other than some things that were missed out should have been in there.
At the end of the day, I think the DLCS is a great book. No complaints other than some things that were missed out should have been in there.
On this we can agree. Here's to hoping that SovPress can make all of their dragonlance products this good =)
(and to be honest, the lack of a poster map annoyed me to such a huge extent that i completely didnt pay attention to the lack of hoopaks...)
((Of course, i find it incredibly amusing that chris coyle signed my age of mortals book with the text- "No hoopaks here, either" =) ))
Aye. A poster map would be very very useful.
Arandur
Here goes,
Why does the FRCS focus on the present so much, I want to play in the time before Elminster was born. The FRCS should burn in hell alongside WotC for making the book focus so much on the future.
Obviously this complaint is pretty stupid, as FRCS is a wonderful book(although I haven't used it since I quit my former gaming group), and DLCS is just as(if not vastly more) good as it.
On the subject of the hoopak, the one Kipper made is rather nice(and complete with drawing).
And hey, if you want to run a 4th Age campaign, that's all well and good. It's your game, more power to you. But what I'm wondering is, what advantage does the War of the Lance/post-Blue Lady's War baseline have over the Age of Mortals (post-War of Souls)?
The Age of Mortals baseline is free of canonical concerns, and arguably all of Dragonlance's hallmarks are present, not to mention the world is much more lacking in prolific NPCs for players to feel like they're living in the shadows of (which is good). Lots of new and unexplored stuff is here, and there's plenty of intriguing possibilities with all these new orders of magic vying for supremacy.
The War of the Lance is certainly the setting's golden age, but I don't think it's very well fit for a long-term campaign (for the opposites of the reasons listed above).
So why do you hippies prefer the 4th Age? And I don't want to hear any "yaya well i just ignore chaos war and 5a and keep going with 4a thx" arguments either. If you're going for a non-canonical approach, Age of Mortals is clearly superior anyway, to my thinking.
Note: I disliked the SAGA system, so I'm not some strictly 5th Age fanboy here. I did feel that the initial 5th Age material was handled pretty haphazardly, but it's taken a definite turn for the better, post-War of Souls.
So anyway, yeah. I'll shut up now.
--Ryan
I guess that one of the reasons the WoTL setting is preferred by many people is the scope of the War itself. It is a world-shaking event that players can become caught up in. The enemy is memorable and very well suited for a long-running campaign. Pigeon-holing the 4th age setting as you do by stating that you must live in the shadows of novelised characters seems a little lacking in vision. The WoTL has a certain feel that many players may prefer, it is a more romanticised era of Ansalon. Later eras of the Dragonlance setting have a definite more 'gritty and darker' feel to them that may not appeal to some players.
As I stated ealier in one of my posts, each era of Dragonlance has it's own feel and in a way, it's own direction, but they are all basically Dragonlance each with their own positives and negatives, it's just up to the players (and GMs) to find their own niche for what they enjoy. Some people may not like the AoM like you do, some may like the SAGA setting better and others will vehemently hate the 4th Age. It's all just personal taste.
Arandur
Originally posted by Arandur
Tal, you mentioned you saw the original world ideas that the SAGA team had designed. I was just wondering in which direction they were going to head?
Arandur
I'm not really allowed to say, sorry =)
Suffice to say, my trip up to WotC to hang out with Stan! was pretty eye opening =)
Excuse me for a moment while I lament and rant like Charlton Heston in Planet of the Apes...
"you damn dirty Wizards...;) '
Arandur
1. More spells
2. More prestiege classes
3. Better drawn maps that do not look like a 6 year old drew them
4. Pull out maps
5. Racial weapons
6. More regular weapons
7. Having in the geography Taladas and not just Ansalon
8. More magic items(including new item echantments .......)
9. Better grammar and spelling
10 The price, this book is the most expensive dnd book to date
Do not get me wrong I still love the book, but for the price I paid for it I expected these things.
I did not clame to be a good speller ;)
I think that Taladas should probably have it's own supplement as many DL probably don't really use this setting and are more interested in Ansalon (Which is a shame because Taladas is pretty good too).
Arandur
Originally posted by Insta_AxE_Toast
9. Better grammer and spelling
"grammar"
--Ryan
as for cost, this book cost as much as the FRCS and oriental adventures.
I totally agree with the map statement.
regular weapons are covered in the PHB just fine thanks.
Racial weapons would have been a good thing.
Totally agree with the more magic items.
And bad spelling/grammar is par for the course with Dragonlance =)
Originally posted by Insta_AxE_Toast
I think the DLCS could have been better in the following ways.
1. More spells
2. More prestiege classes
3. Better drawn maps that do not look like a 6 year old drew them
4. Pull out maps
5. Racial weapons
6. More regular weapons
7. Having in the geography Taladas and not just Ansalon
8. More magic items(including new item echantments .......)
9. Better grammer and spelling
10 The price, this book is the most expensive dnd book to date
Do not get me wrong I still love the book, but for the price I paid for it I expected these things.
Counterpoints
1. Can't say I agree or disagree with this one, the only spell I miss is the one that both Par-Salian and Raistlin cast in Time of the Twins.
2. It has just as many as the other WotC campaign books that are out.
3. What is wrong with the maps, they are just like the ones in the FRCS.
4. It has already been stated that the book shipped before it was realized that the map was not present. The upcoming Atlas will likely contain it.
5. The missing hoopak was an accident(we all make them)
6. If you can show me any unique mundane weapons from Krynn, I will gladly concede this point.
7. This will also likely be in the Atlas or a sourcebook of its own.
8. All the major weapons were covered. To my knowledge there was no need for different types of enchantments.
9. Once again, we all make mistakes(you spelled prestige wrong, BTW
)10. So far all WotC campaign books have shared the same price point.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by SweetMeats
That is my one complaint with the DLCS. It should have been Dragonlance first and not 90% 5th age material.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by talinthas
wow. The sheer idiocy of this comment has prevented me from reading the rest of this thread. You do see the dragonlance logo on the DLCS right? Here's a hint, its the same one as the dragonlance logo on the fifth age box set.
I think SweetMeats' comment was perfect. Where are the maps of pre-cataclismic Ansalon? Where is the 4th age map of Ansalon? Where are the listings of magical items from other eras of play like the bloodstone of Fistandantilus, glasses of Arcanist, dragonarmor, or the plate of Solamnus? I could go on but I won't.
This is not a criticism of the writer's work, of course I am thankful for what they have done. And I agree they had a monumental task and attacked it almost perfectly. I am just tired of the accusation that people that prefer the WoTL are hippies or ignorant.
As to the logo on the cover, are we ever going to be rid of the deformed dragon that flew into the DL logo? The thing's body isn't even complete. The original logo looked much better.
The 4th Age will be covered in detail in the War of the Lance Setting (a whole book devoted to the War of the Lance!). I guess it will have the maps, the weapons, the personalities and the like but for the moment the Dragonlance 'spotlight (if you will)' is focused on the Age of Mortals which is the default setting for the new DLCS. Just like the current timeline was the default setting for the Forgotten Realms Campiagn Setting.
Let's give the setting a chance to grow...
Arandur
Originally posted by Daedavias
Counterpoints
3. What is wrong with the maps, they are just like the ones in the FRCS.
10. So far all WotC campaign books have shared the same price point.
i think those were his points : p
Originally posted by Daedavias
Counterpoints
1. Can't say I agree or disagree with this one, the only spell I miss is the one that both Par-Salian and Raistlin cast in Time of the Twins.
2. It has just as many as the other WotC campaign books that are out.
3. What is wrong with the maps, they are just like the ones in the FRCS.
4. It has already been stated that the book shipped before it was realized that the map was not present. The upcoming Atlas will likely contain it.
5. The missing hoopak was an accident(we all make them)
6. If you can show me any unique mundane weapons from Krynn, I will gladly concede this point.
7. This will also likely be in the Atlas or a sourcebook of its own.
8. All the major weapons were covered. To my knowledge there was no need for different types of enchantments.
9. Once again, we all make mistakes(you spelled prestige wrong, BTW
10. So far all WotC campaign books have shared the same price point.
Countering the counter points hehe
1. Exactly why were there no custom spells made by Rastlin or other major magi.
2. There are more prestige classes in the FRCS.
3. They seriously look like a 6 year old drew them, I don't care if the FRCS maps look like that I expect more for 65 bucks.
4. So now I have to pay extra that was supposed to come with my book that is an awesome deal.
5. Have they posted it on the web so we can get it ?
6. I do not know the weapons of Ansalon too well. But I am sure there are some unique ones out there.
7. I think this should have been provided in the campaign setting but you can't always get what you want.
8. I can think of more magic weapons, there are also more to magic items than weapons, what about armor , rings, wonderous items .... the list goes on.
9. Yes I make millions of spelling mistakes, but I am not a writer or an editor. Simple proof reading should have picked these up.
10. Yeah that is my point, the FRCS was longer and the same. price =(
Originally posted by talinthas
I'm not really allowed to say, sorry =)
Suffice to say, my trip up to WotC to hang out with Stan! was pretty eye opening =)
Eh? Why wouldn't you be allowed to share info on a storyline that never and will never see the light of day by a design team that no longer exists?
Unlike tasselhoff, this story i really did promise to never ever tell, and i plan on holding to it =)
Originally posted by talinthas
Out of respect for the folks who told me.
Unlike tasselhoff, this story i really did promise to never ever tell, and i plan on holding to it =)
Fair enough. If that's the case then I understand.
Originally posted by themeecer
What we do have to realize, we are arguing about an imaginary world. This just occured to me. I feel like a dummy for being offended at comments made towards something that doesn't exist.
Dude, don't trip over it. Its not what we're talking about, so much as the passion we're talking with. We all love dragonlance, and it bugs to see it go in ways that we don't want. Thats why we even have these arguments =)
That wouldn't be telling exaclty, more like showing...
Arandur