Originally Posted by
Segev
You're missing my point.
Why is this FTD choice "more generic" or "generalized" in a way that necessitates changing what the Dragonlance source material said? If you want to include more dragon types, that's fine and dandy; you still should make sure that the Dragonlance source lore is consistent with it. If, for example, the Dragonlance Source Lore says that a Draconian made from a Gold Dragon has the midas touch (I know it doesn't say that, but bear with me), then when you make it more general to include additioanl dragon types, you retain the "petrifying touch" draconian type, and specify that it comes from gold dragons plus whatever others you group with it that aren't present in Dragonlance's lore. Maybe with some special text that the petrification takes the form of the dragon's associated material.
That way, you have no "wait, what?" questions about why gold draconians no longer have the midas touch. In this example.
To "generalize" something in a way that breaks the original, less general lore, requires that there be something in extrinsic lore you need to find a way to reconcile. You might drop some overly-specific things that don't work in general, but you shouldn't just make up new stuff that breaks with existing source material for no reason and then say, "Generaization!" as your excuse.
What makes the new stuff "more general" than the old stuff in a way that requires the old lore be broken to accommodate it? Why couldn't the old lore have been used to make the basis of the more general lore, such that backwards compatibility is maintained?
"It's more general" is actually a false statement, because nothing about the new abilities is somehow more general, except by declaring it to apply to non-Dragonlance draconians. It could have been equally general if it were the exact same abilities as Dragonlance draconians...unless I'm missing something. (I confess to not being well-versed in Dragonlance lore. I am only reacting to how poor I find the argument of, "It's more general!" to be in this case.)