- The structure of the Knights of Solamnia did not match existing game material.
- There was thinly-veiled allegories to political figures of the time.
- The inclusion of gunpowder.
What do you think?
I wasn't aware you hated the series, but given the things listed I can't blame you. I've never read the series, or most DL novels so I can't really comment on the overall quality of the series. That said, I think we get a little more forgiving with age. Gunpowder really doesn't bother me; I think dislike of it in the game can be overblown but IMHO so long as its treated as an oddity, rarely seen outside of pistols and the rare canon (almost mythical artifacts), I don't have a problem. Heck, a tinker gnome "invented" nukes (even if conceptually as a joke) so guns are the least of the problems
I also haven't read the books. I think I must have missed them even coming out. However, I did read a few reviews online, so my comments will be based on that. What you are saying here is true Big Mac, but that is mainly the difference between the knights in the rulebooks vs the Chronicles and Legends trilogies. Rise of Solamnia it seems is set after the War of Souls. Actually that should give us even more leeway for having them be different from the rulebooks.Big Mac wrote: ↑Sun Aug 18, 2019 3:16 pmI've not read the Rise of Solamnia trilogy, but I do recall the depection of the Knights of Solamnia in the Chronicles Trilogy not matching up with what I was expecting from Dragonlance Adventures.
The rulebook had given me an idealised "perfect" version of the Knighthoods, complete with a rank structure, while the novels gave me an organisation that was on the brink of falling apart.
Well, there is a disagreement in the early sources.