DLA, TotL, or DLCS - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

DLA, TotL, or DLCS

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
greylord
Aug 20, 2004 13:57:25 Which do you think represented Dragonlance better for gaming purposes? Dragonlance Adventures? Tales of the Lance? Or the Dragonlance Campaign Setting?

Though overall I favor 1e, the way Knights of Solamnia were handled in older editions always seemed a tad odd. The same went for Wizards of High Sorcery. I must admit, I like the DLCS best currently for it's way of handling these classes. I think that in many ways these were prestige classes before there were prestige classes!

I also prefer the DLCS for it's sorcerer and mystic classes. It helps in the spontaneous casting arena. However, at the same time, the inclusion of these in the Core Rulebook make it sometimes confusing to those unfamiliar with DL who want to have these classes in the time before AoM. Especially those that favor playing these.

In addition, though the Knights of Takhisis (Neraka) were included at the end of Second Generation, I like having the Class as a PC class in the DLCS.

I'd say DLA comes in close behind, but more from a flavor standpoint that I enjoy. I like the Tinker Gnomes and how they are presented in DLA.
#2
iltharanos
Aug 20, 2004 16:31:21 Hands down I'd go for the Dragonlance Campaign Setting. The 3.5 mechanics play much better than the clunky older editions ever did. The new campaign book and (relatively) new system also handles one of the big facets of Dragonlance that always seemed lacking in older editions ... dragons. In 2nd edition, dragons were pitiful opponents. 3rd edition dragons are every bit as powerful and difficult to defeat as the Dragonlance novels have always portrated them.
#3
ares
Aug 20, 2004 16:35:01 put me down for dragonlance campaign setting as well. the prestige classes kick large quantities... except the inquisitor. I wonder where the Abthalom (a 1000 points to whomever gets that joke) that one came from.
#4
silvanthalas
Aug 21, 2004 12:20:55 You'd have to go with DLCS, and alot of that has to do not only with updated rules, but it is also the only one of the three that presents a more complete picture of what Ansalon consists of.
#5
zombiegleemax
Aug 21, 2004 16:45:34 I mix some of the elements from each of the previous editions with the 3.5 edition. It works out quite well and my players enjoy it!
#6
zombiegleemax
Aug 30, 2004 20:45:34 I am one of aramons players in a game in which we are going throu the war of tha lance and i enjoy it very much as do most of the players.and the drgons are extremly tough althouth our knight of solamnia beheaded ember in one hit very lucky rolls with the generals sword.
#7
Dragonhelm
Aug 30, 2004 21:31:27 DLA, TotL, or DLCS?

Yes, yes, and yes!

I love them all.

DLA was my introduction to Dragonlance, and was what got me hooked. The flavor is great. Yeah, some of the rules were a bit clunky, but it was a great book for the time it was written in.

Tales of the Lance is probably my most-used DL sourcebook/boxed set. I used this in the height of my old games. The map is about ready to fall apart!

The DLCS is, probably, my most favorite of the three. Great rules, great flavor, up-to-date, and very representative of DL. I have a personal stake in this, too, as it was partially shaped by our efforts with the Whitestone Council.

We would be remiss if we omitted SAGA, as those sourcebooks played a significant part in the development of Dragonlance. While I can't really comment on the SAGA rules, I can say that the sourcebooks did a lot to expand upon the setting.

We've been through quite an evolution with Dragonlance. I'm really happy with the current state of the setting. The sourcebooks we have now are far better than any before. The setting is getting back to basics, yet still has the momentum to drive it forward.

It is a good time to be a Dragonlance fan.
#8
theredrobedwizard
Aug 30, 2004 21:44:25 I have to agree with my good buddy Dragonhelm. Yes, yes, and yes.

Though my introduction to Dragonlance was the DLCS, I've gone back and read any piece of Dragonlance gaming goodness I could get my grubby little hands on.

My suggestion: get em all. Twice, for good measure.

-TRRW
#9
zombiegleemax
Aug 30, 2004 22:13:00 My answer: None of the above. WotL all the way baybee.
;)
#10
hatrel
Aug 31, 2004 16:59:48 I thought that the DLA was cool due to the different advancement charts for each alignment of Wizards and Clerics. Granted, that does not really apply to the current version, but I always thought that it was a great way to represent the speed to power vs. the end result.
#11
Dragonhelm
Aug 31, 2004 17:26:35
I thought that the DLA was cool due to the different advancement charts for each alignment of Wizards and Clerics. Granted, that does not really apply to the current version, but I always thought that it was a great way to represent the speed to power vs. the end result.

Oh, definitely. The idea basically is that evil has a quicker road to power, although good is more powerful in the end.

In Dark Sun, they had a similar thing with preservers and defilers. Defilers didn't care that their magic destroyed the land, so they advanced faster in magical power. Preservers are more of your standard wizard, and while they advance slower, they don't destroy the land.
#12
zombiegleemax
Aug 31, 2004 20:03:30
I thought that the DLA was cool due to the different advancement charts for each alignment of Wizards and Clerics. Granted, that does not really apply to the current version, but I always thought that it was a great way to represent the speed to power vs. the end result.

That was one thing that I noticed was missing in DL 3rd Ed. I could have sworn black robes advanced faster but white robes had the potential to become more powerful. I wish that could have been includued somehow into the DLCS. I was thinking of doing it anyway in my campaign by restircting black and red robes from certain potent higher level spells or losing some arcane high level spells with the evil descriptor but then my red robe mage had a hissy fit, so I dropped it.
#13
cam_banks
Aug 31, 2004 22:20:08
That was one thing that I noticed was missing in DL 3rd Ed. I could have sworn black robes advanced faster but white robes had the potential to become more powerful. I wish that could have been includued somehow into the DLCS.

It hasn't worked that way since 1st edition AD&D. In fact, Tales of the Lance for 2nd edition has all three wizard Orders advancing the same and having the same spell progression as each other.

In 3rd edition, Order secrets are the primary means of accentuating the philosophies of the three Orders. The White Robe secrets concentrate on protection, redemption and sustenance while the Black Robe secrets rely on hunger, betrayal and pain. It was a nod towards the older mechanics.

Cheers,
Cam
#14
orodruin
Sep 02, 2004 15:23:43 :D Dragons of Mystery!!!.... (sound of crickets chirping)

Um... bye... (runs away)
#15
myriddian
Sep 03, 2004 3:30:35 DLCS.

Better rules system, and they made an effort to sort out a few of the inconsistancies.
#16
Dragonhelm
Sep 03, 2004 8:55:09
:D Dragons of Mystery!!!.... (sound of crickets chirping)

Um... bye... (runs away)

I'm guessing less than 10 members of this board get that one.
#17
cam_banks
Sep 03, 2004 9:24:18

I'm guessing less than 10 members of this board get that one.

DL5 Dragons of Mystery was a great little product. Especially since it contains errata for the first four DL modules...

Cheers,
Cam
#18
zombiegleemax
Sep 03, 2004 10:27:00 I liked the spell progression for the clerics and mages too! It gave the orders a different flavor that is not found in the newer systems. I also liked how the robes had access to different schools depending on the robes, kind of gave people a reason to be what they were. I mean, look at the table, at 13th level a Black Robe casts 9th level spells. They might get only one but they are casting 9th level spells at 13th level. They obtain power more quickly than the red or the white. The red drew from more school and the white obtained more spells though,

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 greylord Aug 20, 2004 13:57:25	Which do you think represented Dragonlance better for gaming purposes? Dragonlance Adventures? Tales of the Lance? Or the Dragonlance Campaign Setting? Though overall I favor 1e, the way Knights of Solamnia were handled in older editions always seemed a tad odd. The same went for Wizards of High Sorcery. I must admit, I like the DLCS best currently for it's way of handling these classes. I think that in many ways these were prestige classes before there were prestige classes! I also prefer the DLCS for it's sorcerer and mystic classes. It helps in the spontaneous casting arena. However, at the same time, the inclusion of these in the Core Rulebook make it sometimes confusing to those unfamiliar with DL who want to have these classes in the time before AoM. Especially those that favor playing these. In addition, though the Knights of Takhisis (Neraka) were included at the end of Second Generation, I like having the Class as a PC class in the DLCS. I'd say DLA comes in close behind, but more from a flavor standpoint that I enjoy. I like the Tinker Gnomes and how they are presented in DLA.
#2 iltharanos Aug 20, 2004 16:31:21	Hands down I'd go for the Dragonlance Campaign Setting. The 3.5 mechanics play much better than the clunky older editions ever did. The new campaign book and (relatively) new system also handles one of the big facets of Dragonlance that always seemed lacking in older editions ... dragons. In 2nd edition, dragons were pitiful opponents. 3rd edition dragons are every bit as powerful and difficult to defeat as the Dragonlance novels have always portrated them.
#3 ares Aug 20, 2004 16:35:01	put me down for dragonlance campaign setting as well. the prestige classes kick large quantities... except the inquisitor. I wonder where the Abthalom (a 1000 points to whomever gets that joke) that one came from.
#4 silvanthalas Aug 21, 2004 12:20:55	You'd have to go with DLCS, and alot of that has to do not only with updated rules, but it is also the only one of the three that presents a more complete picture of what Ansalon consists of.
#5 zombiegleemax Aug 21, 2004 16:45:34	I mix some of the elements from each of the previous editions with the 3.5 edition. It works out quite well and my players enjoy it!
#6 zombiegleemax Aug 30, 2004 20:45:34	I am one of aramons players in a game in which we are going throu the war of tha lance and i enjoy it very much as do most of the players.and the drgons are extremly tough althouth our knight of solamnia beheaded ember in one hit very lucky rolls with the generals sword.
#7 Dragonhelm Aug 30, 2004 21:31:27	DLA, TotL, or DLCS? Yes, yes, and yes! I love them all. DLA was my introduction to Dragonlance, and was what got me hooked. The flavor is great. Yeah, some of the rules were a bit clunky, but it was a great book for the time it was written in. Tales of the Lance is probably my most-used DL sourcebook/boxed set. I used this in the height of my old games. The map is about ready to fall apart! The DLCS is, probably, my most favorite of the three. Great rules, great flavor, up-to-date, and very representative of DL. I have a personal stake in this, too, as it was partially shaped by our efforts with the Whitestone Council. We would be remiss if we omitted SAGA, as those sourcebooks played a significant part in the development of Dragonlance. While I can't really comment on the SAGA rules, I can say that the sourcebooks did a lot to expand upon the setting. We've been through quite an evolution with Dragonlance. I'm really happy with the current state of the setting. The sourcebooks we have now are far better than any before. The setting is getting back to basics, yet still has the momentum to drive it forward. It is a good time to be a Dragonlance fan.
#8 theredrobedwizard Aug 30, 2004 21:44:25	I have to agree with my good buddy Dragonhelm. Yes, yes, and yes. Though my introduction to Dragonlance was the DLCS, I've gone back and read any piece of Dragonlance gaming goodness I could get my grubby little hands on. My suggestion: get em all. Twice, for good measure. -TRRW
#9 zombiegleemax Aug 30, 2004 22:13:00	My answer: None of the above. WotL all the way baybee. ;)
#10 hatrel Aug 31, 2004 16:59:48	I thought that the DLA was cool due to the different advancement charts for each alignment of Wizards and Clerics. Granted, that does not really apply to the current version, but I always thought that it was a great way to represent the speed to power vs. the end result.
#11 Dragonhelm Aug 31, 2004 17:26:35	I thought that the DLA was cool due to the different advancement charts for each alignment of Wizards and Clerics. Granted, that does not really apply to the current version, but I always thought that it was a great way to represent the speed to power vs. the end result. Oh, definitely. The idea basically is that evil has a quicker road to power, although good is more powerful in the end. In Dark Sun, they had a similar thing with preservers and defilers. Defilers didn't care that their magic destroyed the land, so they advanced faster in magical power. Preservers are more of your standard wizard, and while they advance slower, they don't destroy the land.
#12 zombiegleemax Aug 31, 2004 20:03:30	I thought that the DLA was cool due to the different advancement charts for each alignment of Wizards and Clerics. Granted, that does not really apply to the current version, but I always thought that it was a great way to represent the speed to power vs. the end result. That was one thing that I noticed was missing in DL 3rd Ed. I could have sworn black robes advanced faster but white robes had the potential to become more powerful. I wish that could have been includued somehow into the DLCS. I was thinking of doing it anyway in my campaign by restircting black and red robes from certain potent higher level spells or losing some arcane high level spells with the evil descriptor but then my red robe mage had a hissy fit, so I dropped it.
#13 cam_banks Aug 31, 2004 22:20:08	That was one thing that I noticed was missing in DL 3rd Ed. I could have sworn black robes advanced faster but white robes had the potential to become more powerful. I wish that could have been includued somehow into the DLCS. It hasn't worked that way since 1st edition AD&D. In fact, Tales of the Lance for 2nd edition has all three wizard Orders advancing the same and having the same spell progression as each other. In 3rd edition, Order secrets are the primary means of accentuating the philosophies of the three Orders. The White Robe secrets concentrate on protection, redemption and sustenance while the Black Robe secrets rely on hunger, betrayal and pain. It was a nod towards the older mechanics. Cheers, Cam
#14 orodruin Sep 02, 2004 15:23:43	:D Dragons of Mystery!!!.... (sound of crickets chirping) Um... bye... (runs away)
#15 myriddian Sep 03, 2004 3:30:35	DLCS. Better rules system, and they made an effort to sort out a few of the inconsistancies.
#16 Dragonhelm Sep 03, 2004 8:55:09	:D Dragons of Mystery!!!.... (sound of crickets chirping) Um... bye... (runs away) I'm guessing less than 10 members of this board get that one.
#17 cam_banks Sep 03, 2004 9:24:18	I'm guessing less than 10 members of this board get that one. DL5 Dragons of Mystery was a great little product. Especially since it contains errata for the first four DL modules... Cheers, Cam
#18 zombiegleemax Sep 03, 2004 10:27:00	I liked the spell progression for the clerics and mages too! It gave the orders a different flavor that is not found in the newer systems. I also liked how the robes had access to different schools depending on the robes, kind of gave people a reason to be what they were. I mean, look at the table, at 13th level a Black Robe casts 9th level spells. They might get only one but they are casting 9th level spells at 13th level. They obtain power more quickly than the red or the white. The red drew from more school and the white obtained more spells though,