Huh, I wonder how that got in my pouch? New Dragonlance is happening!

[warty goblin]

Somehow, out of last year's inevitable 2020 detour into stupidity and unpleasantness, the new Weis & Hickman Dragonlance trilogy is actually happening!

https://mobile.twitter.com/WeisMargaret/status/1353734464724226048

Interestingly enough, it talks about the "most beloved characters of the original series." Which suggests pretty strongly to me it won't be picking up where the Dark Disciple trilogy left off, since by that point in the timeline the last if the heroes of the lance have died of old age. Though given that time travel is a thing, who knows?


On an entirely personal note, this means a lot to me. I still remember picking up DL as a teenager, and it still to a large degree defines what I think of when I think about fantasy. Flawed as they may be, I still love them all to bits, the way the books wear their melodramatic, romantic heart on their sleeve, the sheer enthusiasm that leaks through everything, the sense of place Krynn still evokes in me. It'll be good to go back.

[Mordar]

Somehow, out of last year's inevitable 2020 detour into stupidity and unpleasantness, the new Weis & Hickman Dragonlance trilogy is actually happening!

https://mobile.twitter.com/WeisMargaret/status/1353734464724226048

Interestingly enough, it talks about the "most beloved characters of the original series." Which suggests pretty strongly to me it won't be picking up where the Dark Disciple trilogy left off, since by that point in the timeline the last if the heroes of the lance have died of old age. Though given that time travel is a thing, who knows?


On an entirely personal note, this means a lot to me. I still remember picking up DL as a teenager, and it still to a large degree defines what I think of when I think about fantasy. Flawed as they may be, I still love them all to bits, the way the books wear their melodramatic, romantic heart on their sleeve, the sheer enthusiasm that leaks through everything, the sense of place Krynn still evokes in me. It'll be good to go back.

I'm right there with you. It is hip to disparage beyond personal taste/opinion, but I'll have none of that hipness here! :smallbiggrin:

I wonder who they view as the most beloved.

- M

[Palanan]

Is anyone else having trouble viewing the twitter link? I'm getting a weird error message.

[Dire_Flumph]

Is anyone else having trouble viewing the twitter link? I'm getting a weird error message.

The release was also posted here: https://trhickman.com/dragonlance-classic/

[Rogar Demonblud]

I wonder who they view as the most beloved.

According to interviews back when Dragon was still publishing, Tasslehoff and Bupu.

[Forum Explorer]

According to interviews back when Dragon was still publishing, Tasslehoff and Bupu.

They mention that they'll have a 'strong new protaganist' so maybe we're getting a trilogy about Bupu's adventures.

[Dire_Flumph]

They mention that they'll have a 'strong new protaganist' so maybe we're getting a trilogy about Bupu's adventures.

Book One, Book More, Book Lots?

[JadedDM]

They mention that they'll have a 'strong new protaganist' so maybe we're getting a trilogy about Bupu's adventures.

That would explain why WotC tried to kill it.

[warty goblin]

Book One, Book More, Book Lots?

Lizard Cure Trilogy confirmed!

Seriously though, if Raistlin doesn't show up somehow, I'll eat my hat. For one thing, you can fit him in pretty much regardless of era, and still have it fit in established canon. For another, Raistlin.

[Forum Explorer]

Book One, Book More, Book Lots?

Yesssssss :smallbiggrin:


That would explain why WotC tried to kill it.

Best thing about Dragonlance is the atypical races. Gully Dwarves, Kender, Draconians (particularly Draconians), and Gnomes are my favorite parts for sure.

[JadedDM]

Best thing about Dragonlance is the atypical races. Gully Dwarves, Kender, Draconians (particularly Draconians), and Gnomes are my favorite parts for sure.

To elaborate on what I meant, apparently these books went through quite a few rewrites due to 'sensitivity issues.' There's a theory that's why WotC tried to kill it, because it just kept happening, and they figured it was easier to just pull the plug entirely than keep asking for more and more rewrites.

So if it really is a book with a gully dwarf protagonist, that would fit, as gully dwarves are...rather problematic.

(This is all assuming, of course, that these are the same books and not an entirely new trilogy being written from scratch, that is.)

[Forum Explorer]

To elaborate on what I meant, apparently these books went through quite a few rewrites due to 'sensitivity issues.' There's a theory that's why WotC tried to kill it, because it just kept happening, and they figured it was easier to just pull the plug entirely than keep asking for more and more rewrites.

So if it really is a book with a gully dwarf protagonist, that would fit, as gully dwarves are...rather problematic.

(This is all assuming, of course, that these are the same books and not an entirely new trilogy being written from scratch, that is.)

I really don't see how Gully Dwarves are problematic. They don't resemble or act like any sort of real world culture, so why can't you have a fictional race be stupid and ugly? Nobody complains how elves are all beautiful and intelligent. Seriously, when was the last time you say a stupid elf or one that had a bad acne problem?

The closest thing I can think of is House Elves from Harry Potter, but most people would argue those are just elves in name only.

[Keltest]

Book One, Book More, Book Lots?

Book One, Book Two, Book A Whole Bunch

[warty goblin]

Book One, Book Two, Book A Whole Bunch

Dragons of Rat Fondue, book 1 of the Lizard Cure Trilogy
Dragons of Endless Groveling, book 1 and 1, so 2, of the Lizard Cure Trilogy
Dragons of Ankle-Biting, book 1 and 1 and 1, so 2, of the Lizard Cure Trilogy.

Together they chronicle a complete gully dwarf epic, from the good times of rat fondue, to the bad times of groveling, to the desperate times of biting people in the legs. Followed by the good times of hobgoblin leg fondue.


(True fact, I own an actual recipe for Bupu's Rat Fondue.)

[JadedDM]

Gully Dwarves...don't resemble or act like any sort of real world culture...
It's not that they resemble any real world culture, but can be interpreted to be a mockery of the intellectually disabled.

[Forum Explorer]

It's not that they resemble any real world culture, but can be interpreted to be a mockery of the intellectually disabled.

Mentally disabled people don't act like Gully Dwarves either. That feels like a reach, and honestly more like someone wanting attention or to cast judgement on others than an actual statement of inclusiveness.

It's like saying that Gnomes are an insulting caricature of scientists.

[Mordar]

Mentally disabled people don't act like Gully Dwarves either. That feels like a reach, and honestly more like someone wanting attention or to cast judgement on others than an actual statement of inclusiveness.

It is cute that you think logic matters in this sort of instance. :smalltongue:

- M

[Rogar Demonblud]

And actually gully dwarves pretty much are how the mentally disabled are presented in fantasy fiction. The only thing missing is that they aren't treated as essentially disposable to be killed off whenever convenient.

There's a nasty ribbon of eugenics in the fabric of most fantasy settings.

And among other issues, JadedDM, the original plot had an extensive subplot regarding love potions (i.e. magic date rape drugs). How they are good, and necessary, and the recipient was actually happy to have been dosed, and...

Surprisingly, that was not what wrecked things last summer, as W&H had already been forced to excise that.

[JadedDM]

There's a nasty ribbon of eugenics in the fabric of most fantasy settings.
Indeed, I do believe the origins of gully dwarves is that they were a mix of dwarves and gnomes.

And I love Dragonlance, it's my favorite setting. But it has a ton of problematic elements in it that you could get away with in the 80's, but not today. Remember, this is the same setting where a Native American woman with blonde hair, white skin and blue eyes is chosen to save her people from their false, heretical beliefs.

[Lord Raziere]

And actually gully dwarves pretty much are how the mentally disabled are presented in fantasy fiction. The only thing missing is that they aren't treated as essentially disposable to be killed off whenever convenient.

There's a nasty ribbon of eugenics in the fabric of most fantasy settings.

And among other issues, JadedDM, the original plot had an extensive subplot regarding love potions (i.e. magic date rape drugs). How they are good, and necessary, and the recipient was actually happy to have been dosed, and...

Surprisingly, that was not what wrecked things last summer, as W&H had already been forced to excise that.

.....so yeah, is it any wonder why I don't like Dragonlance?

the more I hear about WotC stopping the authors from doing stuff the more I'm thankful they did so. yikes.

@ Forum Explorer: your rhetorical point just backfired, because you just articulated why I don't like tinker gnomes better than I ever could have. seriously, what culture, what people, what anything, is so stupid that they need an entirely different species to name a mountain? sure its a joke, but jokes age fast and poorly.

really I'm beginning to think this sort conflict of "but it was good for the time!" vs "but we don't like it now" is just the downside of corporations pushing to make everything long-running franchises: they either die as a beloved cult classic or live to see itself become a bloated villain of outdated values and impenetrable continuity.

[Forum Explorer]

It is cute that you think logic matters in this sort of instance. :smalltongue:

- M

Of course logic doesn't matter, it's people being judgmental. The trick is are the people being judgmental to make themselves feel better, or do they actually have a point?


And actually gully dwarves pretty much are how the mentally disabled are presented in fantasy fiction. The only thing missing is that they aren't treated as essentially disposable to be killed off whenever convenient.

There's a nasty ribbon of eugenics in the fabric of most fantasy settings.

And among other issues, JadedDM, the original plot had an extensive subplot regarding love potions (i.e. magic date rape drugs). How they are good, and necessary, and the recipient was actually happy to have been dosed, and...

Surprisingly, that was not what wrecked things last summer, as W&H had already been forced to excise that.

I'm not going to lie, a mentally disabled character does not spring to mind from any of the non-Dragonlance fantasy novels I've read. The closest I can think of is Smeagol, who was just as intelligent as anyone else, just completely obsessed with the ring. He was more of a druggie than mentally disabled.

I mean, the second trilogy literally had the Kingpriest's top advisor attempting genocide via eugenics as their plan. So I think it's a deliberate part of the setting.

[Rater202]

So my knowledge of the Dragon Lance series is limited to my reading the anthology collections--my favorite being Kender, Gully Dwarves, and Gnomes-- but I am not seeing Gully Dwarves as innately being insensitive to the mentally disabled.

I could easily see them being written that way, but I would honestly need to see the finished product before I can confirm if something actually is ableist.

There's a lot of "toxic white-knighting" going on. I kind of lost my interest in a lot of White Wolf stuff back when Beast the Primordial was coming out when a bunch of people cherry-picked the playtest document and argued that it vilified abuse victims when it actually vilified narcissists and sociopaths becuase it's theoretically possible(albeit highly unlikely) for someone to get down to integrity 4 from being repeatedly victimized(highly unlikely, the way the integrity system works) while completly ignoring that the document explicitly stated that, no matter how low your integrity was, only certain kinds of people become "Heroes" and then Onyx Path changed it... And then all the people who complained about victimizing abusers said nothing about the rewritten document actually justifying abuse.

Or the woman who responded to Venomverse: War Diaries, by writing a detailed article about how depicting a former track and field star who was rendered paraplegic in a bus accident being happy when she can walk again due to circumstances is ablest.

Or, more personally and going the other way, I was compared to one of those deaf supremacists who bullies deaf kids who uses a cochlear implant because I once argued that it makes perfect sense that a group of people who naturally have superpowers would take offense to a drug designed to target and destroy the part of the brain that lets them control their powers so they can't use them anymore existing in the first place, let alone being called a "cure."

Some things are obviously offensive, but for a lot of things, you have to actually look at the finished product and think critically about it instead of just jumping on it and condemning it at the first sign that something might be iffy.

The potential for a gully dwarf protagonist is one of those situations where it's not really fair to say anything until you've seen it.

[Keltest]

There have been a couple of books written from the viewpoint of gully dwarves already, at least partly, and the general takeaway i got was that they arent literally incapable of intelligence so much as they are easily satisfied and are fairly apathetic to philosophical and intellectual reasons. They just arent interested in figuring things out for the sake of it. If they can actually be motivated to apply themselves, they can be pretty crafty, they just dont feel the need to do it much.

Personally i feel any comparisons to real life groups are reaching pretty hard. There are plenty of other reasons to be unhappy with them existing, but "they have X trait that is considered bad!" is not a particularly good one.

[Forum Explorer]

@ Forum Explorer: your rhetorical point just backfired, because you just articulated why I don't like tinker gnomes better than I ever could have. seriously, what culture, what people, what anything, is so stupid that they need an entirely different species to name a mountain? sure its a joke, but jokes age fast and poorly.

really I'm beginning to think this sort conflict of "but it was good for the time!" vs "but we don't like it now" is just the downside of corporations pushing to make everything long-running franchises: they either die as a beloved cult classic or live to see itself become a bloated villain of outdated values and impenetrable continuity.

Well you brought up two points there:

1. If you are a scientifically minded person and are offended at Tinker Gnomes for their Mad Science tendencies, than to that I say toughen up. An inability to take a pretty harmless joke at your expense says a lot more about you than it does about the work in question.

2. If you think the joke is bad, and are sick of it, than sure. They are very much a joke race, and if that joke doesn't fly with you, that's fair enough. It's also very personal, plenty of people find them hilarious.


Ehhhhh, that really depends on the work in question. We haven't seen it, and I don't really give much credence to rumors. The thing with Dragonlance is that the continuity is pretty self contained in each trilogy. Like, I read the second trilogy before I touched the first one, and I wasn't really confused by anything.

[Lord Raziere]

Well you brought up two points there:

1. If you are a scientifically minded person and are offended at Tinker Gnomes for their Mad Science tendencies, than to that I say toughen up. An inability to take a pretty harmless joke at your expense says a lot more about you than it does about the work in question.

2. If you think the joke is bad, and are sick of it, than sure. They are very much a joke race, and if that joke doesn't fly with you, that's fair enough. It's also very personal, plenty of people find them hilarious.


Ehhhhh, that really depends on the work in question. We haven't seen it, and I don't really give much credence to rumors. The thing with Dragonlance is that the continuity is pretty self contained in each trilogy. Like, I read the second trilogy before I touched the first one, and I wasn't really confused by anything.

HahhahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHA- other mad scientists have inventions work and aren't idiots so caught in describing everything exactly, that they'd never survive describing one mountain. My rule of thumb is that if a fictional species normal everyday behavior would earn them a darwin award, they never should've been written still living. joke character? fine. joke race? not cool.

[warty goblin]

HahhahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHA- other mad scientists have inventions work and aren't idiots so caught in describing everything exactly, that they'd never survive describing one mountain. My rule of thumb is that if a fictional species normal everyday behavior would earn them a darwin award, they never should've been written still living. joke character? fine. joke race? not cool.

So here's the thing, I work professionally with people who are unquestionably scientists, and as a statistician I'm either a scientist or a scientist enabler/accelerator. This is very much my actual wheelhouse.

And Dragonlance gnomes are a much better representation of scientific practice than any number of more standard and successful "mad scientists." Everything is a collaboration between lots of people with different specialties, everything is drowned in jargon and acronyms and is at best borderline unintelligible, things take weeks to months longer than it seems like they should, there are usually loads of committees and meetings and so on involved in the simplest things, and new methods fail constantly.

I really cannot stress the constant failure enough - innovations that actually work are a tiny minority, usually cobbled together from the smoking ruins of dozens to hundreds of prior efforts. Some of these failed ideas never make off the whiteboard, others go down after months of work due to the discovery of some previously unknown issue or fact. And some simply die because of institutional dynamics - stuck in committee is definitely a real thing. If your picture of science is that ideas are correct and new stuff works, you are mistaking the sausage for the sausage factory.

Sure the gnomes crank all this up to about 15 as the joke, but it's making fun of a real thing. The portrait of scientific discovery painted by, say, the Marvel movies is vastly more inaccurate because it flattens this huge collaborative effort into a bunch of irrelevant peons and one smart dude effortlessly doing stuff. If you want to get offended about fantasy portrayals of fake science for some reason, get pissed at Tony Stark being the walking embodiment of the "great man" theory of history and scientific progress.

Or, you know, just don't read the stuff you don't like.

[Rogar Demonblud]

My issue with the tinker gnomes is that they view succeeding at the invention as abject failure. They're less caricatures of scientists and more bureaucrats caught by the system to the point non-system events (like Hurricane Joe) don't matter.

And the less said about kender, the better for my blood pressure.

[Psyren]

I agree that Gully Dwarves don't add nearly enough to the narrative to make up for the problematic elements/baggage they bring with them. Besides, how many "quirky little people!" races does one setting really need?

But given that these are novels rather than a more mainstream adaptation, they can always make edits later if it gets popular enough.

[Lord Raziere]

So here's the thing, I work professionally with people who are unquestionably scientists, and as a statistician I'm either a scientist or a scientist enabler/accelerator. This is very much my actual wheelhouse.

And Dragonlance gnomes are a much better representation of scientific practice than any number of more standard and successful "mad scientists." Everything is a collaboration between lots of people with different specialties, everything is drowned in jargon and acronyms and is at best borderline unintelligible, things take weeks to months longer than it seems like they should, there are usually loads of committees and meetings and so on involved in the simplest things, and new methods fail constantly.

I really cannot stress the constant failure enough - innovations that actually work are a tiny minority, usually cobbled together from the smoking ruins of dozens to hundreds of prior efforts. Some of these failed ideas never make off the whiteboard, others go down after months of work due to the discovery of some previously unknown issue or fact. And some simply die because of institutional dynamics - stuck in committee is definitely a real thing. If your picture of science is that ideas are correct and new stuff works, you are mistaking the sausage for the sausage factory.

Sure the gnomes crank all this up to about 15 as the joke, but it's making fun of a real thing. The portrait of scientific discovery painted by, say, the Marvel movies is vastly more inaccurate because it flattens this huge collaborative effort into a bunch of irrelevant peons and one smart dude effortlessly doing stuff. If you want to get offended about fantasy portrayals of fake science for some reason, get pissed at Tony Stark being the walking embodiment of the "great man" theory of history and scientific progress.


and guess what?

you'd have a point, if this was an organization within the gnomes and if they regarded their rare successes as actual successes.

if they were surrounded by more sensible gnomes who took care of the more practical matters y'know, LIVING, of having a military, of raising their children, of surviving so that these people can do their silly joke of a process, of making sure the law works, of making sure all the basic necessities of their society works, that they have something OTHER than failure science to them. But they don't. as it stands their society makes no sense and would result in their collective deaths while they try to coordinate their defenses with overly long names for things taking up much of their time, too caught in their impracticalities to tend to sensible matters.

species are not their culture, and culture is not their species. extending these joke traits down to genetics is too far.

[Keltest]

My issue with the tinker gnomes is that they view succeeding at the invention as abject failure. They're less caricatures of scientists and more bureaucrats caught by the system to the point non-system events (like Hurricane Joe) don't matter.

And the less said about kender, the better for my blood pressure.

I dunno, if the point is the journey rather than the outcome, "it just works" seems like the worst possible way for it to end. There's no more journey, nothing to improve or figure out or solve. Nowhere to go.

[Palanan]

Tiny bit more information here (https://goodereader.com/blog/e-book-news/book-1-of-the-new-dragonlance-trilogy-to-be-released-this-year), mainly the provisional titles.

Did the writing style ever change much between the first books and later titles? I don't mean content, but the quality and craft of the writing. To make a comparison from another genre, Tom Clancy became a much better writer over the course of his career, and I'm wondering if Weis & Hickman showed the same evolution. I'd be more willing to at least glance at these books if I knew the writing had improved.

[Mordar]

Tiny bit more information here (https://goodereader.com/blog/e-book-news/book-1-of-the-new-dragonlance-trilogy-to-be-released-this-year), mainly the provisional titles.

Did the writing style ever change much between the first books and later titles? I don't mean content, but the quality and craft of the writing. To make a comparison from another genre, Tom Clancy became a much better writer over the course of his career, and I'm wondering if Weis & Hickman showed the same evolution. I'd be more willing to at least glance at these books if I knew the writing had improved.

It seems strange to me that someone who appears to hold the authors in disdain...or at least perceives them as substandard and not otherwise worth that individual's time...would be inclined to look at this thread, much less the books.

Can you share why you would be inclined to give them a look? Legitimately curious, and have a couple guesses but don't want to bias the response.

Thanks
- M

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Mordar
It seems strange to me that someone who appears to hold the authors in disdain....

I don't. Please don't read too much into my question. I'd like to know others' impressions of how the writing style may have changed over the course of earlier novels, full stop.

[Mordar]

I don't. Please don't read too much into my question. I'd like to know others' impressions of how the writing style may have changed over the course of earlier novels, full stop.

For the record, my guesses were one of two - that the setting had sufficient attraction to outweigh feelings about the authors' skill, or that a sufficient number of people with similar interest appear to support the work so it was worth a second try.

Which Clancy work(s) do you rate as his lessers and his betters? Read a number of them in a small time span, and not necessarily in authorial order, so am curious.

- M

[Rogar Demonblud]

Earlier in Clancy's career, he still had editors who did their job. Those books ended up being much tighter with less wanking off about miltech. Later on everything started bloating up and you had whole chapters that could be excised to speed up the story, plus plots that got increasingly ridiculous.

I never noticed any changes in W&H's writing. It stayed at pretty stock write-for-hire up through the last I read (Summer something or other).

[Dire_Flumph]

I don't. Please don't read too much into my question. I'd like to know others' impressions of how the writing style may have changed over the course of earlier novels, full stop.

It's degrees, I think they've improved over the years, but the fantasy genre in general has seen a much greater improvement, especially in the last 20 years or so.

I was honestly surprised, for example, how much I enjoyed the War of Souls Trilogy. I picked up the first one in a bargain bin expecting practically nothing but nostalgia, but I thought that they had gotten a lot better at creating interesting characters there and developing the original ones. The worldbuilding was much better (The Ansalon of the original books is pretty bland as a setting), as well as managing to take the general Fifth Age mess and working it into something that fit better with the original Saga. But I wouldn't recommend them to someone coming in new to the fantasy genre over a wealth of better options.

Comparing to other fantasy authors I read around the same time in the 80's? They improved a lot more than say, David Eddings or Terry Brooks did IMO. Edit: Or R.A. Salvatore

[Rodin]

It's degrees, I think they've improved over the years, but the fantasy genre in general has seen a much greater improvement, especially in the last 20 years or so.

I was honestly surprised, for example, how much I enjoyed the War of Souls Trilogy. I picked up the first one in a bargain bin expecting practically nothing but nostalgia, but I thought that they had gotten a lot better at creating interesting characters there and developing the original ones. The worldbuilding was much better (The Ansalon of the original books is pretty bland as a setting), as well as managing to take the general Fifth Age mess and working it into something that fit better with the original Saga. But I wouldn't recommend them to someone coming in new to the fantasy genre over a wealth of better options.

Comparing to other fantasy authors I read around the same time in the 80's? They improved a lot more than say, David Eddings or Terry Brooks did IMO.

How would you compare the later trilogy to Dragons of Summer Flame? All I remember about it is disliking how the characters were written compared to the original sextet of novels. That was the last Dragonlance novel I ever read, although I'm sure it didn't help that I'd managed to read most of the other novels in the franchise and was starting to hit the really bad ones.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Dire_Flumph
Comparing to other fantasy authors I read around the same time in the 80's? They improved a lot more than say, David Eddings or Terry Brooks did IMO.

The Eddings comparison is especially apt, since I was thinking of his novels in particular. They were decent enough to hold my interest as a teenager, but I doubt if I could read them again today.


Originally Posted Dire_Flumph
But I wouldn't recommend them to someone coming in new to the fantasy genre over a wealth of better options.

Hmm. Which of those better options would you recommend?

[Dire_Flumph]

How would you compare the later trilogy to Dragons of Summer Flame? All I remember about it is disliking how the characters were written compared to the original sextet of novels. That was the last Dragonlance novel I ever read, although I'm sure it didn't help that I'd managed to read most of the other novels in the franchise and was starting to hit the really bad ones.

Keeping in mind I haven't read Summer Flame since it came out, mid-90's I think, and my recollections might be a bit off:

YES, much better than Summer Flame.

Summer Flame was pretty much where I figured I was done with Dragonlance and it was fine as a final send-off. I wasn't fond of Usha (sp?) at all as a character, thought Palin was drawn as a fairly bland generic hero, and the story I remember being horribly compressed, with time skips that were very jarring. I don't know the publication history, but I would not have been at all surprised if this had been a planned trilogy that got compressed into a single book by higher up mandate. For that reason (and that it was only one book), I'm not sure how much I'd hold it against W&H themselves and how much to blame TSR, especially since Kang's Regiment was out at about the same time and was a much more enjoyable read.

[Rogar Demonblud]

IMS, it was written to end the setting, which was selling horribly. Dragonlance as a whole was profitable, but only because of the books; much of the game material never sold out the first printing.

[Dire_Flumph]

The Eddings comparison is especially apt, since I was thinking of his novels in particular. They were decent enough to hold my interest as a teenager, but I doubt if I could read them again today.

Even the author has been very frank about what the Belgariad is, an epic fantasy built of shop worn tropes like they were LEGO bricks. But I have a very soft spot for the Belgariad, and I still enjoyed a reread I did a few years ago after the author's passing. After that though? The Elenium was an interesting evolution in parts, the Malloreon was readable. Past that and the words "diminishing returns" are all that come to mind.


Hmm. Which of those better options would you recommend?

Oh geez, that is the kind of question I'm almost guaranteed to have a better answer for a few hours later. My fantasy reading has been taken up the last year+ by the Malazan series which I would be hesitant to quickly recommend especially for someone coming into the genre but I feel is probably the gold standard for fantasy worldbuilding.

I mean, the easy ones are Hobbit/Lord of the Rings, Song of Ice and Fire, Discworld.

It would depend on the person, but stuff I'd recommend off the top of my hat for most people I knew would be say Robin Hobb (Farseer, Liveship books), CS Freidman (Coldfire Trilogy). I'm a big fan of Joe Abercrombie's First Law Trilogy, but it's deconstructionist and dark and that's not for everyone. Tad Williams's Memory, Sorrow and Thorn Trilogy is a classic that has stood up to a few rereads for me as well.

The Lies of Locke Lamora by Scott Lynch is another easy recommendation for new folks to the genre, for younger readers I've been listening to the Bartimaeus books on audio with my son lately and loving them a lot. I'd hold off on a recommendation for the Kingkiller Chronicle (Patrick Rothfuss) until I can see where book 3 goes.

That's top my head, but I know coming back here I'll have remembered a bunch more. Or other people will have made recommendations that I can't believe I forgot.


Pratchett. For modern fantasy, Butcher's Dresden books. (I'm less sold on the Codex series than most).

The Dresden books have been on my to read list for years, but I had the misfortune of reading book one of Codex Alera first and that soured me on the author for awhile.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Pratchett. For modern fantasy, Butcher's Dresden books. (I'm less sold on the Codex series than most).

[Forum Explorer]

Tiny bit more information here (https://goodereader.com/blog/e-book-news/book-1-of-the-new-dragonlance-trilogy-to-be-released-this-year), mainly the provisional titles.

Did the writing style ever change much between the first books and later titles? I don't mean content, but the quality and craft of the writing. To make a comparison from another genre, Tom Clancy became a much better writer over the course of his career, and I'm wondering if Weis & Hickman showed the same evolution. I'd be more willing to at least glance at these books if I knew the writing had improved.

Hmm. Dragons of a Summer Flame was just a low point in general.

Besides that, I want to say the characters are better developed and all of them are actually developed (no one gets the Riverwind treatment), and the setting is better fleshed out. However I feel they write themselves into a corner more often, and have lost a lot of subtlety. Like the War of Souls ends in a literal Deus Ex Machina that has most of the main characters' efforts amount to nothing. And a good half of Dragons of an Hourglass Mage is just a complete mess of contradicting older works and just being weird.

[Tvtyrant]

I thought the Minotaur Wars were pretty decent in the latter stuff, although I disliked War of Souls as a whole. Taking the dragons out made the series a lot better IMO.

[Rogar Demonblud]

The minotaur series was probably Richard Knaack, since he seems to be the only one who uses them.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Dire_Flumph
It would depend on the person, but stuff I'd recommend off the top of my hat for most people I knew would be say Robin Hobb (Farseer, Liveship books), CS Freidman (Coldfire Trilogy). I'm a big fan of Joe Abercrombie's First Law Trilogy, but it's deconstructionist and dark and that's not for everyone. Tad Williams's Memory, Sorrow and Thorn Trilogy is a classic that has stood up to a few rereads for me as well.

Aha, thanks. Robin Hobb, C.S. Friedman and Tad Williams are old favorites. I’ll have to dig out my copies of Memory, Sorrow and Thorn and see if they grab me for a reread.


Originally Posted by Forum Explorer
And a good half of Dragons of an Hourglass Mage is just a complete mess of contradicting older works and just being weird.

Even the title is a bit of a head-scratcher for that one.

I never read past the first trilogy, and haven’t heard of most of the later books mentioned here. But I’ll be interested in a preview of the new books, if and when that becomes available.

[Rogar Demonblud]

AIUI, the last trilogy was filling in some of the stuff skipped from the modules when they wrote the original trilogy. Hourglass Mage is the Spring Dawning companion piece, and thus deals with the Silvanesti nightmare thing and Raistlin.

[Keltest]

The minotaur series was probably Richard Knaack, since he seems to be the only one who uses them.

It was, and it very much has his style written into everything. YMMV on whether that's a bug or a feature.

[Forum Explorer]

Aha, thanks. Robin Hobb, C.S. Friedman and Tad Williams are old favorites. I’ll have to dig out my copies of Memory, Sorrow and Thorn and see if they grab me for a reread.



Even the title is a bit of a head-scratcher for that one.

I never read past the first trilogy, and haven’t heard of most of the later books mentioned here. But I’ll be interested in a preview of the new books, if and when that becomes available.

I absolutely hated Robin Hobb's Forest Mage, and that got me to avoid pretty much all of his other works. And while I liked Tad William's Otherworld series, you could've cut out an entire book's worth of pages in side plot stuff that barely relates to the main characters.

Anyways, I think the second trilogy is the best. The third trilogy was nice, but had the problem of Mina really being overrated. The 'Lost Trilogy' had a great first book, and good second book, and a bad third book. As much fun as Dragons of an Hourglass Mage was, it didn't really work in context of pretty much anything else.


AIUI, the last trilogy was filling in some of the stuff skipped from the modules when they wrote the original trilogy. Hourglass Mage is the Spring Dawning companion piece, and thus deals with the Silvanesti nightmare thing and Raistlin.

No, none of the nightmare thing is dealt with. Hourglass Mage is purely what Raistlin does after abandoning the party in Spring Dawning. Like I said, it's fun, but it really contradicts what happens in Spring Dawning and the War of the Twins trilogy. And itself a little bit too.

[GloatingSwine]

I absolutely hated Robin Hobb's Forest Mage, and that got me to avoid pretty much all of his other works.

If there's a chance you're going to like a Robin Hobb book, it'll be Assassin's Apprentice/Farseer Trilogy.

She's hit and miss though. I've never met a living human who read past the first book of Liveship Traders on purpose.

[bguy]

Anyways, I think the second trilogy is the best. The third trilogy was nice, but had the problem of Mina really being overrated. The 'Lost Trilogy' had a great first book, and good second book, and a bad third book. As much fun as Dragons of an Hourglass Mage was, it didn't really work in context of pretty much anything else.

I would largely agree with this assessment, though I would rate the original trilogy as the best (the second trilogy relied a little too heavily on plot contrivances to make the story work), and I would rate the second of the 'Lost Trilogy' books as better than the first.

[JadedDM]

Even the title is a bit of a head-scratcher for that one.
They chose a specific naming theme for their books, and they are sticking to it, through the Abyss or high water! :smalltongue:

(I'd be willing to bet this new trilogy will also be entitled "Dragons of X," as well.)

[Tvtyrant]

It was, and it very much has his style written into everything. YMMV on whether that's a bug or a feature.

In what way? I honestly have never looked at the name on a setting based fantasy book, so I don't really know what else he has written.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by JadedDM
I'd be willing to bet this new trilogy will also be entitled "Dragons of X," as well.

Indeed it will; check out the short article I linked in post #31 above, which gives provisional titles.

And Ansalon must have one hella population of herbivores to support all these dragons. :smalltongue:

[Keltest]

In what way? I honestly have never looked at the name on a setting based fantasy book, so I don't really know what else he has written.

Its sort of difficult to explain, doubly so because its been a hot minute since I've read it. He kind of likes to be self-referential between his other works, and has certain types of characters he likes to write, like a melancholic protagonist. He's written for the Diablo books as well (as in the Blizzard game) and you can see some of the same trends. I like his style, so its a selling point for me, but I'm given to understand not everybody does.

[Tvtyrant]

Its sort of difficult to explain, doubly so because its been a hot minute since I've read it. He kind of likes to be self-referential between his other works, and has certain types of characters he likes to write, like a melancholic protagonist. He's written for the Diablo books as well (as in the Blizzard game) and you can see some of the same trends. I like his style, so its a selling point for me, but I'm given to understand not everybody does.

I can see that. Minotaur Kaladin is a real thing for sure. I'm more fond of broody mcbroken guy then brutal metal for soul doom guy so it works for me.

[Kish]

I really don't see how Gully Dwarves are problematic. They don't resemble or act like any sort of real world culture, so why can't you have a fictional race be stupid and ugly? Nobody complains how elves are all beautiful and intelligent. Seriously, when was the last time you say a stupid elf or one that had a bad acne problem?

The closest thing I can think of is House Elves from Harry Potter, but most people would argue those are just elves in name only.
There are elves in the Dragonlance books who aren't stupid?

(Also, I suspect the sensitivity issue with gully dwarves is: miscegenation results in children who are universally moronic, cowardly, and filthy.)

[warty goblin]

I'd make a strong argument for The Soulforge and Brothers in Arms being near the top of the Dragonlance heap. They're a lot smaller scale than the various trilogies, which gives a nice look at Ansalon when it isn't being burned to the ground, and they have some pretty solid character stuff in them. They also do a good job of keeping Raistlin relatively ambiguous, rather being a helpless backstory victim who just needed a couple extra hugs, or going full born evil Young Voldemort. She gives Raistlin enough space to choose to become who and what he becomes, and he could easily have chosen differently.

(This is a point I'd give Margaret Weis in general, she does villains from their own perspective very well. I also appreciate that she pays attention to why people might stick with an evil character, and gives them reasons more complex than just wanting power or being generically evil or whatever. I quite like the first of the Sovereign Stone novels because the whole thing is just the villain's backstory through the eyes of loyal sidekick. I can't think of many comparable novels, and none that do a better job of it.)

[bguy]

There are elves in the Dragonlance books who aren't stupid?

Laurana and Dalamar at least. They are two of the most capable characters in the entire story.

[warty goblin]

Laurana and Dalamar at least. They are two of the most capable characters in the entire story.
Gilthanas is relatively useful, since he and Silvara get the information on how the draconians are being made, which gets the metallic dragons into the war. Granted he has the general appeal of a puppy who made a mess on the rug, and all this happens offscreen, but it is a kinda big deal.

And Alhana is pretty solid as well.

[Keltest]

Laurana and Dalamar at least. They are two of the most capable characters in the entire story.

Dalamar is arguable. He makes a bunch of questionable calls and never really gets any payoff for the risks, but he keeps taking them.

[bguy]

Dalamar is arguable. He makes a bunch of questionable calls and never really gets any payoff for the risks, but he keeps taking them.

I don't know.

He went straight from being an apprentice mage to the Master of the entire Order of the Black Robes with his own Tower of High Sorcery as his reward for spying on Raistlin. That's a pretty good payoff for the risks involved.

[Forum Explorer]

There are elves in the Dragonlance books who aren't stupid?

(Also, I suspect the sensitivity issue with gully dwarves is: miscegenation results in children who are universally moronic, cowardly, and filthy.)

Plenty of them. Most have been named already.

I don't remember anything about Gully Dwarves resulting from crossbreeding in the main books. Actually I don't remember it ever going into the origin of Gully Dwarves.

In any case, the Gully Dwarves are considered their own clan for basically all of Dwarven history. And there's other examples of crossbred dwarves who are nothing like Gully Dwarves (for example Sequest), so if you do have a source saying that's where they come from, it is demonstratively wrong.


Dalamar is arguable. He makes a bunch of questionable calls and never really gets any payoff for the risks, but he keeps taking them.

He gets an entire tower of magic and is one of head mages of magic on the continent.

[JadedDM]

I don't remember anything about Gully Dwarves resulting from crossbreeding in the main books. Actually I don't remember it ever going into the origin of Gully Dwarves.

In any case, the Gully Dwarves are considered their own clan for basically all of Dwarven history. And there's other examples of crossbred dwarves who are nothing like Gully Dwarves (for example Sequest), so if you do have a source saying that's where they come from, it is demonstratively wrong.
Not sure who Sequest is; can't find any reference to that name anywhere.

That being said:


The tale of the Greystone of Gargath tells of how the dwarves and kender came into being. In the years that followed, a few intermarriages between gnomes and dwarves occurred in isolated communities across Ansalon. Surprisingly, the children of such marriages proved to be of an entirely new race, with their own particular characteristics. The members of this new race lacked all the better qualities of their parents. Further intermarriages were banned by dwarven and gnomish societies.


Gully dwarves are fertile crossbreeds of outcast dwarves and outcast humans. They appeared at the time of the Greystone. The hybrid unfortunately lacked the best traits of both parents. Nothing these deficiencies, the humans and dwarves banned further intermarriages.


According to the Iconochronos, gully dwarves are the result of breeding between gnomes and dwarves in the years following the transformation of the gnomes by the Graygem of Gargath. The gnome-dwarf half-breeds appeared to inherit the worst qualities of both races.

So it varies, sometimes they are from human/dwarf hybrids, other times from dwarf/gnome hybrids. But that's three sources, from the official campaign setting sourcebooks for 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition. (There are no conversions into 4E and 5E.)

[Forum Explorer]

Not sure who Sequest is; can't find any reference to that name anywhere.

That being said:







So it varies, sometimes they are from human/dwarf hybrids, other times from dwarf/gnome hybrids. But that's three sources, from the official campaign setting sourcebooks for 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition. (There are no conversions into 4E and 5E.)

Sequest is a dwarf who is half hill dwarf and half dark dwarf.




And none of those are actually any of the novels. It's not something the authors came up with or something you'd be aware of without being a big D&D player.

[JadedDM]

So he's half-dwarf and half...dwarf? That just makes him a dwarf. Which book is he from?

And sorry to break it to you, but those three books I listed all have Weis' and Hickman's names on them (except the 3E one, which only lists Weis as an author).

[Forum Explorer]

So he's half-dwarf and half...dwarf? That just makes him a dwarf. Which book is he from?

And sorry to break it to you, but those three books I listed all have Weis' and Hickman's names on them (except the 3E one, which only lists Weis as an author).

The Doom Brigade.


That proves nothing, considering that Dragonlance is written by a team of people, and Weis and Hickman don't have the final say on what goes out to print. They only control what parts they personally write. And considering that it never makes it into any of their other work, and that it keeps changing and that it doesn't really make any sense in the first place, I'm disinclined to believe that it is something they intend to be part of the setting.

[JadedDM]

Ahhh, okay, you're talking about Selquist. Yeah, he's not a half-dwarf, he's just a dwarf. That's like saying someone who's Solamnic on their mother's side and Ergothian on their father's side is half-human.

And you can believe whatever you want, but your argument makes no sense. Do you really think Weis and Hickman have 100% creative control of the novels but not the sourcebooks? On the 1st Edition version (Dragonlance Adventures), not only is Weis' and Hickman's names on the cover, but the book's dedication is to Hickman's wife, Laura (it reads, "To Laura Curtis Hickman, my wife, for whom worlds were created.")

You can limit 'canon' to things only specifically spelled out in the original novels, if you want, but that means most of the gods don't exist (Majere, Zivilyn, Hiddukel, to name a few), as well as a number of races (like the phaethons, ursoi, and kyrie, among others), and several nations, as well (not to mention the entire continent of Taladas).

[Keltest]

He gets an entire tower of magic and is one of head mages of magic on the continent.

I mean sure, but he also gets some gaping chest wounds that never heal, which is worse than the other heads of the black robed order got, and the tower itself is sort of small consolation given that as head of the black robes, he would have access to similar resources in the other tower.

Maybe ive just missed some books, but its really unclear what he actually got from studying under Raistlen as opposed to any other black robed archmage.

[JadedDM]

I mean sure, but he also gets some gaping chest wounds that never heal....
I don't know, he seemed pretty proud of those gaping chest wounds. Kept showing them off to everyone he met. :smalltongue:

[Forum Explorer]

Ahhh, okay, you're talking about Selquist. Yeah, he's not a half-dwarf, he's just a dwarf. That's like saying someone who's Solamnic on their mother's side and Ergothian on their father's side is half-human.

And you can believe whatever you want, but your argument makes no sense. Do you really think Weis and Hickman have 100% creative control of the novels but not the sourcebooks? On the 1st Edition version (Dragonlance Adventures), not only is Weis' and Hickman's names on the cover, but the book's dedication is to Hickman's wife, Laura (it reads, "To Laura Curtis Hickman, my wife, for whom worlds were created.")

You can limit 'canon' to things only specifically spelled out in the original novels, if you want, but that means most of the gods don't exist (Majere, Zivilyn, Hiddukel, to name a few), as well as a number of races (like the phaethons, ursoi, and kyrie, among others), and several nations, as well (not to mention the entire continent of Taladas).

Sure sure, but until you went into more detail I didn't even think they had anything on Half-dwarves.


No, I acknowledge they don't have 100% control over their novels either. This thread started off with people talking about how their editors forced them to take things out. There are even things that are explicitly not their work in those novels. They do however have more control over it, and Weis and Hickman do a really good job of slipping background information into the main story. Even if you've only ever read the main trilogies, you'd know that kender were creating by the Greygem for example.

Also yes, all of those Gods do get an appearance during the War of Souls and I think you can find references to their constellations in other trilogies as well.

While Gully Dwarf pasts have been talked about, they've always been talked about as if they were always just dwarves. No character in canon, nor in the author comments I've read, have said that Gully Dwarves are a crossbreed, even when explicitly talking about the past of Gully Dwarves. As far as I'm aware, that's unique to the RPG books and them alone.

But the biggest thing is that it doesn't even make sense. Half-elves are incredibly rare, so much so they couldn't fill a city with their numbers and most half-elves go through their life never meeting another half-elf. Gully Dwarves are relatively common. There are entire cities of them, they can field military divisions, and their clans can be found all around the world. The idea that they are half-dwarves are ridiculous when you compare them to half-elves, which are formed from much less isolationist species than dwarves.



I mean sure, but he also gets some gaping chest wounds that never heal, which is worse than the other heads of the black robed order got, and the tower itself is sort of small consolation given that as head of the black robes, he would have access to similar resources in the other tower.

Maybe ive just missed some books, but its really unclear what he actually got from studying under Raistlen as opposed to any other black robed archmage.

Well Dalamar has been studying for a remarkably short time compared to other wizards. He's pretty young compared to the other black robed archmages we see.

[Keltest]

As far as gully dwarves go, i believe the idea of them being a crossbreed is in-universe speculation, and that the actual origin is unknown. Worth noting is that dwarves will absolutely deny any relation to gully dwarves to non-dwarves, but their internal politics still have a seat for the Aghar clan on the council and in their militaries.

[Tvtyrant]

I always thought the point of Dalimar is he is in love with ambition. He idolizes two of the Majere's because of their consuming ambitions, and betrays them for his own.

[Dire_Flumph]

And you can believe whatever you want, but your argument makes no sense. Do you really think Weis and Hickman have 100% creative control of the novels but not the sourcebooks? On the 1st Edition version (Dragonlance Adventures), not only is Weis' and Hickman's names on the cover, but the book's dedication is to Hickman's wife, Laura (it reads, "To Laura Curtis Hickman, my wife, for whom worlds were created.")

Hickman (and later Weis) were on the Dragonlance team at TSR who collaboratively came up with the Dragonlance modules that the books were based off of. It wasn't 100% their creation and they certainly didn't have 100% control of the novels or RPG material. I actually got to meet Hickman in the early 90's and some of the directions Dragonlance had been taken in even back then didn't sit well with him.


You can limit 'canon' to things only specifically spelled out in the original novels, if you want, but that means most of the gods don't exist (Majere, Zivilyn, Hiddukel, to name a few), as well as a number of races (like the phaethons, ursoi, and kyrie, among others), and several nations, as well (not to mention the entire continent of Taladas).

Those gods as well as other canon details actually predate the novels. They were part of the source material for the world created by the Dragonlance team. They were first published in, I believe, sourcebook DL5 Dragons of Mystery, which has Hickman & Weis' name on it as well as the other members of the team. Don't recall if DL5 came out before or after Dragons of Autumn Twilight. The races you mention all appear in the original modules as well if I recall.

[JadedDM]

Don't recall if DL5 came out before or after Dragons of Autumn Twilight. The races you mention all appear in the original modules as well if I recall.
Technically, DoAT came out first, but not by much. It was released in November of 1984. Dragons of Mystery (DL5) was released a month later, in December of 1984.