Grey skrev:
> I do wonder why they have chosen to go backwards in DL instead of
forward=
s=2E
> Would it virtually admitting that 5E has been an ill conceaved flop and
> there's no point pressing forward with something no one wants?
There are a lot of post-WoS products, so there seems to be a market for
it. But there is obviously also a market for products set in the past.
Me, I'd like products set in the aftermath of the War of the Lance and
not featuring the Heroes of the Lance (books for adults, that is), but
sadly those are about the only books that don't get written.
> Just exactly who is it responsible for letting DL get into this mess?
WoS
> was three coffin nails in the buried casket of DL, and on the tombstone
is
> written "Here's lies one of the best contributions to the fantasy genre.
> Killed by apathy, bad stories and some idiot who thought 5E was a good
id=
ea"
Well, my personal take is that the explanation goes a long way back.
The curse of DL can be attributed to two main things: 1. Overuse of
popular characters and 2. It was never really developed as a setting.
Ever since Legends finished, Dragonlance lacked an overall plan on how
the products should be. The books concentrated on telling stories about
the HotL prior to the Chronicles, usually contradicting them and
contributing very little to the setting. The game line had a bunch of
different products, although set after the war they weren't part of a
plan and were often written by people who didn't manage to capture what
Dragonlance was about. The main sourcebook, Dragonlance Adventures,
didn't have as much world info as setting sourcebook should have; and
its obviously hastily assembled "replacement", Tales of the Lance, had
a little more but still not enough. The one and only truly good
Dragonlance game product from this era, Time of the Dragon, never
really got any sup****t, except for some rather blah modules). Sales
were dropping, and the game line was about to die out. (The book line
still sold though, but from a creative POV it was not doing well
because of the focus on familiar characters.)
I think part of the reason why Weis and Hickman wrote Dragons of Summer
Flame was to give DL a shock, and give it a clear direction again. At
least, it was successful in doing so. For the first time there was a
sense that the story continued. The bad side was that it removed things
that people felt Krynn was about, the gods and magic. Then, wothout
W&H's involvement, came the 5th Age. It was well intentioned, and it
was the first attempt since the original modules series and Chronicles
and Legends to advance the story in both novels and game products, and
to actually commit to advancing the story beyond a single module or
novel. However, despite intentions, it didn't work out. The 5A
introduced major changes to the setting, changes which were no more
popular than the changes already introduced in DoSF. Disbanding of the
Conclave, introduction of =FCberdragons and their destruction of much of
Ansalon as well as a completely new game system are the most obvious
examples. Unfortunate design desicions as well as cor****ate politics
seems to be the reasons behind this.
The 5A wasn't viable, as it became a setting that several DL fans
actually hated. But other liked it and started to despise the
opposition against it. So there became the problem of the fan base
being bitterly divided. Those who liked the 5A weren't many enough to
keep the line going, and sales once again dropped. And once again, W&H
came to the rescue with War of Souls. Due to the division among the
fans, of course, reactions against this were varied, to the point of
several people believing the franchise would have lasted without their
interference.
But what people want to believe notwithstanding, War of Souls once
again restarted the setting in such a way that its continued existence
was assured. It did this by reintroducing the gods and magic, and
removing some 5A features such as the =FCberdragons. There was again a
conscious effort to give the line a direction, and this time it seemed
to work better, partly because, IMO, the designers "got" Dragonlance to
a much larger degree than the 5A designers did. But I am on more thin
ground here, because I haven't read that many products after WoS. My
impression from those I have seen (some read, some leafed through) is
that while good, they are also unfortunately marked by the compromise
between the "old" Dragonlance and the 5th Age. As for the novels, I
know even less. Haven't read a single one since DoVM.
I am one of the fans who don't care much for Dragonlance as it has
developed. Much of the reason for this is that the way the setting
evolved isn't due to good and well thought out creative decisions, but
due to outside-world influences such as franchise restarts, cor****ate
politics and designers and editors who weren't familiar with
Dragonlance. Ansalon is a patchwork whose history thus isn't very
believable. That, as well as the fact that it still includes features I
don't particularly think is Dragonlance, is the reason why I would
welcome good products set in the aftermath of the War of Lance.
Unfortunately, apart from the (mostly) wonderful "War of the Lance"
sourcebook, they are few and far between. To be fair, many books seem
to try to cover several time eras, unfortunately they have a lesser
chance of solving one of the main problems DL as a game setting has
had: In-depth information. The sourcebooks on magic, the holy orders
and the knighthoods would perhaps have been more useful if they had
been published in a world where DoSF and subsequent events didn't
happen, and thus could have delved more fully into how its subject
relate to the world?
Anyway, that was a personal take on why DL looks back to the past.
Right now it does seem to have people who are both commited as well as
dragonlancish and sensible running it, for the first time since the
original effort. Unfortuately, the time in between has made the task of
restoring DL to what it once was impossible.
Morten
|
