Dragonlance What Happened To The New DRAGONLANCE Trilogy?

[PabloM]

Did you notice the "classic" sign above the dragonlance logo? Will it be a new stamp that indicates a return to the 1e/2e era?

 

[Maxperson]

Did you notice the "classic" sign above the dragonlance logo? Will it be a new stamp that indicates a return to the 1e/2e era?

The tweet did say, "We’re returning to old friends while introducing a new heroine to the classic world of Dragonlance." Sounds like a return to the War of the Lance era to me.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

 

[DarkCrisis]

Did you notice the "classic" sign above the dragonlance logo? Will it be a new stamp that indicates a return to the 1e/2e era?

I responded to Tracy Hickmans FB post about if DL will be changed to WotCs modern views of D&D and he said they write Krynn they always have.

Which makes me think that WotC wanted changes and they didn't thus the who lawsuit thing and they settled with it being "Classic" now. I'm willing to bet there is a disclaimer at the front like the AD&D material has now.

You will notice these announcments are from the authors and not from WotC, which also tells me they are trying to stay somewhat distant from it.

 

[Ibrandul]

Did you notice the "classic" sign above the dragonlance logo? Will it be a new stamp that indicates a return to the 1e/2e era?

I have a different guess:

• WotC is going to do a total reboot of the setting (this part is a near-certainty)
• The new series was designed to provide a link from old lore to new, with an in-world explanation for the reboot along the lines of the Star Trek Kelvin timeline's link to that franchise's main timeline
• WotC then decided it would be better to just abandon the old timeline altogether (too confusing to have a tie-in trilogy that relies on lore they're wiping away anyway, too many "problematic" elements, plus perhaps other motives), so they tried to pull the plug
• The lawsuit was settled in such a way that the new trilogy can be published, but with "Classic" branding to differentiate it from "new, improved" WotCDL

 

[darjr]

One guy. The lawsuit was because of one guy at WotC and he was resigned from WotC.

 

[Maxperson]

One guy. The lawsuit was because of one guy at WotC and he was resigned from WotC.

He was resigned, as in forced out? Or is that supposed to be "he has resigned?"

 

[darjr]

He was resigned, as in forced out? Or is that supposed to be "he has resigned?"

It looks to me like the prior.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

One guy. The lawsuit was because of one guy at WotC and he was resigned from WotC.

Yeah, it's never just one guy. I get this dude is the one who made the call, but a big company like WotC doesn't just sue because one guy thinks it's the right call. He had to have some support to have moved ahead with it.

Of course, the lawsuit clearly became untenable and they reversed and the guy resigned. But the idea that only one guy had concerns with the Dragonlance IP and is solely responsible is silly... what's true is that he became the fall guy for the whole fiasco.

 

[darjr]

Yeah, it's never just one guy. I get this dude is the one who made the call, but a big company like WotC doesn't just sue because one guy thinks it's the right call. He had to have some support to have moved ahead with it.

Of course, the lawsuit clearly became untenable and they reversed and the guy resigned. But the idea that only one guy had concerns with the Dragonlance IP and is solely responsible is silly... what's true is that he became the fall guy for the whole fiasco.

WotC didn’t sue. The authors did.

And the one guy literally made the call over one phone conversation. On his own.

Now I’ll grant you, WotC et all should have balked at that right away.