I think they both feel equally fantastic, and equally medieval. The only difference is that Dragonlance has a richer background and world development, whereas Forgotten Realms is becoming more and more the cut-and-paste world. The result is that FR becomes more and more grey and stagnant, while worlds that continue to develop leave it in the dust.
Just my two cents though.
Dragonlance is a world of high adventure and romance. It seems to be a post-apocalyptic fantasy world (examples; Cataclysm, Chaos War) where heroes are the most unlikely people. A world of rich storytelling that redefined the “dungeon-crawl” status quo of D&D.
In closing both worlds have plenty to offer and in my opinion both worlds have suffered some of what made them especial in D&D 3rd Edition. I really don’t understand what’s with the Realm bashing all the time. I wish people would just drop it already.
Anyway, when people say midevil they're usually talking about the people of DL not their heroes. Most commoners never travel farther than ten miles from where they're born, news doesn't travel far, technology is roughly at a midevil period. Superstition and fear rule the day.
Common example of this is that the Companions, very well traveled people even at the beginning of Chronicles, didn't know that Tarsis had been Landlocked for 300 years even though it was one of the 'closer' cities to Solace geographically. They didn't know because people just didn't travel... except Kender but no one listens to them.
DEAD or ALIVE
TROLLS!!
PAYS 5000 STL per TROLL
Originally posted by Baron the Curse
FR is way to massive. And some cultures and their gods do resemble Earth's a little to closely.
Leave the FR alone!!! If I want to play a Psionic Half elf/Half demon Spellfire Channeler Chosen of Mystra Lich King, then by Golly I will!
But I'm just a simple country chicken, with evil magical powers, so what do I know?
Originally posted by Ashaman Nash
The result is that FR becomes more and more grey and stagnant, while worlds that continue to develop leave it in the dust.
While I'm not big into FR, I fail to see how this can be the case. Atleast in the case of the novel lines.
Sure, DL is more in the "present" now with the stories coming out. But guess what, they all still focus on one continent, and are stories that are directly impacted by WoS. That's it.
Not saying that's entirely a bad thing though.
However, for FR, you have alot of stories focusing on events in alot of different places. And you don't have to worry about what's going on in every other story to be able to enjoy what you're reading now.
The elves still had their aloofness but were not some kind of corny isolationists in the story(Elaith Craulnober was off the hook.). Of course there is the elves that live on Evermeet but every single elf does not have the hermit attitude that they do in DL. That is what I like about FR.
On the other hand, what I do not like though is that there are waaay too many NPC's, waaay too many gods, too many races all mashed in together, and it gets too much attention to the point where your just sick to death of hearing of it.
~~~
While I'm not big into FR, I fail to see how this can be the case. Atleast in the case of the novel lines.
I'm talking from a purely gaming standpoint. And in all honesty, I've never even touched an FR book, so that as well might tip my level of objectivity into the Abyss.
Originally posted by LordofIllusions
In defense of FR, the thing that I like about FR is the fact that it is not always centering on the same tired people(Mina, The Heroes of the Lance[With the exception of a few of them.], Takhisis[I did backflips when she keeled over], etc.).
Just out of curiosity...how many DL books have you read? Or, well, more specifically...which series?
Originally posted by LordofIllusions
In defense of FR, the thing that I like about FR is the fact that it is not always centering on the same tired people
I think whoever is running your games is doing a disservice to Dragonlance. The game is what you make of it. If your DM focusses all the attention on the heroes from the novels, then of course your heroes are going to feel inadequate.
IMC, the iconic characters barely make an appearance. I think the only ones they've met were Dalamar and the heads of the Orders of High Sorcery.
Dragonlance is what you make of it.
Originally posted by Galeros
I always hear about how Dragnlance has a very Medieval eel to it. Well, honestly, to me, The Forgotten realms has a more Medieval feelt han Dragonlance does. Hwich, in my eyes, is a good thing. I can not quite explain why, but Dl just does not fee Medieval at all. It seems like what it is supposd to be...Fantasy. Well, sorry for rambling, but those are just some of my thoughts.
Well, traditional fantasy genre varies as widely as modern or science fiction genres.
If you ask my opinion, Dragonlance leans toward the epic-style fantasy, although no one can top Tolkien's Middle-Earth. I can only speak for the 4th Age and up to the War of the Lance, but it has everything that would be considered classic fantasy literary elements: good vs. evil, friendship, death, knights, wizards, kings, and dragons.
FR (also my favorite fantasy setting) leans toward high adventure fantasy, with no moral restriction. it is much more closer to real Earth. After all, Elminster did spoke to Greenwood in an interview that there there are many gates bridging this world and Toril long ago, but many of them have been severed only only a secret few are known to a handful of FR denizens.
I think whoever is running your games is doing a disservice to Dragonlance. The game is what you make of it. If your DM focusses all the attention on the heroes from the novels, then of course your heroes are going to feel inadequate
LoL! Noone is running my games. I am a DM myself. I was referring to the DragonLance novels in my statement.
~~~
Originally posted by LordofIllusions
LoL! Noone is running my games. I am a DM myself. I was referring to the DragonLance novels in my statement.
And I ask again...how many have you actually read? This is not a true statement.
But this is a problem faced with all popular fantasy. Your characters will likely never gain fame greater than the Companions.
Your Jedi Knight will never step out of Skywalker’s shadow…
… and your mage will never achieve greater power than Elminster.
Icon characters can suck sometimes.
Originally posted by silvanthalas
Sure, DL is more in the "present" now with the stories coming out. But guess what, they all still focus on one continent, and are stories that are directly impacted by WoS. That's it.
And to tell the truth even though the WoS was a good idea it was not all that interesting storywise. Especially since Mina is such a bore as a character. Typical extreme fanatical bad guy (or girl) for no reason just like boring behind Takhisis.
However, for FR, you have alot of stories focusing on events in alot of different places. And you don't have to worry about what's going on in every other story to be able to enjoy what you're reading now.
That can be good and bad. You don't want the story to be too sporadic like FR novels sometimes are. But then again you don't want to bore people to death with Mina, the corny elves, and corny behind Takhisis either.
~~~
Originally posted by LordofIllusions
And to tell the truth even though the WoS was a good idea it was not all that interesting storywise. Especially since Mina is such a bore as a character. Typical extreme fanatical bad guy (or girl) for no reason just like boring behind Takhisis.
For as much as you can't stand Mina, LoI, you should acknowledge that your impression of her differs from that of others, especially those who liked or found some use in her portrayal in the War of Souls trilogy. I felt she was a classic villain, one who was driven by faith and confidence rather than greed or baser vices, similar to (but not the same as) Verminaard. She was in many ways the anti-Goldmoon, and demonstrated how Takhisis likes to take something her enemies have done and twist it around to suit her purposes.
Also, given that she's only been in 3 books out of hundreds of Dragonlance novels, she's hardly over-used as a character.
Cheers,
Cam
Originally posted by Cam Banks
She was in many ways the anti-Goldmoon, and demonstrated how Takhisis likes to take something her enemies have done and twist it around to suit her purposes.
Which all just adds up to yet another "Takhisis tries to take over the world" scenario. I'm extremely happy that she keeled over. I hope Mina is next.
Also, given that she's only been in 3 books out of hundreds of Dragonlance novels, she's hardly over-used as a character.
The whole "fanatical villain for no reason" thing is over-used. Takhisis was "fanatical" enough- with all those Road Runner-ish schemes to take over the world- why add another moron to the roster ?
~~~
Originally posted by LordofIllusions
Which all just adds up to yet another "Takhisis tries to take over the world" scenario. I'm extremely happy that she keeled over. I hope Mina is next.
You have to hand it to her, though, she never tried the same trick twice. It was in her nature to want to dominate the world - she's the freaking Queen of Darkness, not the Goddess of Bunny Rabbits.
The whole "fanatical villain for no reason" thing is over-used. Takhisis was "fanatical" enough- with all those Road Runner-ish schemes to take over the world- why add another moron to the roster ?
Mina was not a fanatical villain for no reason. I explained what her motives were above - just because it wasn't for mundane reasons like monetary gain or anger at the world doesn't reduce the value of her character.
You came into this setting somewhat late, as I understand it. It's easy to pigeon-hole the entire thing into stereotypes, but the danger in doing that is that you miss the actual developments which have occured over the past twenty years.
Cheers,
Cam
Originally posted by LordofIllusions
The whole "fanatical villain for no reason" thing is over-used. Takhisis was "fanatical" enough- with all those Road Runner-ish schemes to take over the world- why add another moron to the roster ?
~~~
Hrm... fanatic... Takhisis...
I'd say that considering we call those who are most devoted to a perticular religion Fanatics, Takhisis (being the god of the religion in question herself) SHOULD be a fanatic.
Okay, on topic...
I think Dragonlance has a medieval flavor that's somewhat burried under uneducated writing.
Don't get me wrong here... I'm not knocking anyone... some simply fail to realize the significant changes that have occured in military organization over the past 1500 years or so.
I find it a bit of a mood breaker when I see terms like Compgroup and Platoon, and other relatively modern terms used in Dragonlance books. The Draconians, for instance, are modeled after the modern Canadian army (or so I read). The Knights of Neraka come off more like modern infantry than a knighthood at all.
As for Forgotten Realms, they do a better job of weeding out the modern, but a worse job of maintaining any sort of uniting thread. There is no theme to FR, no concept, no flavor. I think that's why it's so popular... as a DM or a player, it's hard to feel railroaded into having to play a perticular character, while in Dragonlance, many feel compelled to disallow evil characters, many creatures don't seem to fit, etc..
Ultimately, I think Dragonlance has much more potential for being a psudo medieval society, but has failed to do so. I realize this might not have been the goal in the first place, but I think it would benefit from a more period feel.
Originally posted by adembroski
Ultimately, I think Dragonlance has much more potential for being a psudo medieval society, but has failed to do so. I realize this might not have been the goal in the first place, but I think it would benefit from a more period feel.
Dragonlance has never really tried to be a setting with a medieval society. From the beginning, it was a post-apocalyptic western with medieval trappings by way of Tolkien, a world where a mighty empire had been brought low by hubris and a cataclysmic event, bringing a darkness from which a light would eventually come forth. The War of the Lance had a lot of resonances with 19th and 20th-century wars, with dragons being the equivalent of Vietnam-era gunships and battles fought over ideology and the quest for superior technology.
It's a mistake to think that it was ever intended to be a purely medieval setting, and its also evident that the knights of Solamnia are more of an idea than an actuality at the time of the War. They had spent hundreds of years in hiding, abandoning ancestral estates to the commoners, establishing small circles of knights in various cities. They didn't behave like any medieval aristocratic class - they were more like the various crusader orders of our own history, with their own specific code and living as an adjunct to the nobility. Sure, they looked like the iconic knights, with their plate armor and swords and cavalry, but behind all of that was a much more modern reality.
Over the years this original vision seems to have changed slightly, and often drastically, depending on the individual authors' points of view. However, I think it's safe to say that the medieval nature of the setting is much more cosmetic than you might think. Consider it the trappings of the Middle Ages, worn over a substantial metaphor for the turbulent events of the past two hundred years.
Cheers,
Cam
Now, my current DL campaign, while having it's roots in the WoS, has little to do with it after that. The premise is that with the death of Malys, there is a vacuum of power that needs filling, and a lesser dragon overlord has enlisted a black-robed mage to aid him in taking over all of Malys's power and adding her own skull to his totem. My players, a former dragonspawn of Malys, who after her death was freed and transformed back to human form, but is now changing back, a yuan-ti who became so because of a dying curse of his former master, and a KoS who finds the current doings of his order to be less than honorable. Finally, the KoS is plagued by a kender that insists that the Knight and he are related, and will explain his reasoning at length if allowed. Now, the battle between Mina and Malys is important because every PC in the game witnessed this event, which caused for a bonding of the players. I think that this case proves that you can connect the "tired" events of the novels with your players to make something completely new.
Also, I never got tired of the Companions from the first novels. Quite the opposite, I found myself beginning to care deeply for these characters. This worked to really pull me in to the stories, and make them my favorite secular tales. Also, one has to remember a few things... One, that massive amounts of land do not necessarily mean that there will be much more interesting events going on. And two, that there are a plethora of untold stories and opportunities to create something wholly new that no one has thought of yet.
And now, on to the original reason for this topic. I do believe DL to have a medieval feel, but not so much in a historical sense. It has the feel of the romantic ideals that the people of the time had. Of course, that's just my opinion.
Anyway, I feel that Dragonlance is "more Medieval" than Forgotten Realms if you take "Medieval" in the sense of Earth's dark ages.
Just as the Roman Empire collapsed leaving scattered, distrusting, uneducated nations which were eventually dominated by religion and caught up into holy war so too do we have Ansalon become united under the King Priest, shatter with the cataclysm, and then reforge itself under the partisans of the returned gods only to tear again as good and evil struggle for dominance and neutrality swings in the balance.
Krynn is more Medieval in this particular socioreligious context. Faerun, being much larger, has no such unifying source. It's gods are countless, its nations sit atop the dust of thousands which have come before, the variety available in FR is unimaginable. With this too comes a sense of the generic.
Neither setting, however, strikes me as being particularly Medieval. They offer things such as liberated women, happy peasantry, proper sanitation and general lack of plague and pestilence, and other sundries (not to mention wizards and dragons) which never existed in the Medieval period on Earth. This is a good thing. Just thinking of the Middle Ages as they actually were (rather than as we romantically construct them to be) makes a chill go down my spine. Awful time. Dark Ages. Humanity's all-time low since crawling out of the cave. Bring on the happy fluffy versions to be found in most D&D campaign worlds, please.