Regarding months, I think that for books released the same year it help clarify that they weren't released simultaneously, but rather throughout the year in question. Not that it's all that big a deal but I think it's worth keeping in. Also, did Dragons of Summer Flames really come out in ninety-six? I'm only asking cuz it's such a huge jump. -- Ducker 00:30 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)

I don't know that it's true, but it seems perfectly logical with what I remember. The first three were a discrete trilogy, and no one expected a fourth, which was sort of a inferior sequel (from what others have said, I haven't read Summer Flames). So, I think there was a gap between the first three and the last one. Tuf-Kat

Yes, Summer Flame did come out in '96. It's not really part of the Chronicles, despite being labeled as such. It takes place about 30 years after the events of the Chronicles Trilogy, and it won't make sense unless you read other books after Chronicles and before Summer Flame. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 154.20.208.181 (talk • contribs) .

• Are you sure the first one I read was Summer Flame and it made sense to me.

I did some research and found out the release date for Dwarven Depths i made the edit as well as the link called lost Chronicles, i hope you all agree with it. Its a wizard of the coast link and has details on the story. Supersumoman

For most of Dragonlance's history, 'main storyline' has meant those books that were set in the world's 'present' and moved events forward. For example, until Dragons of Summer Flame, almost all novels were set before the Chronicles trilogy, often in ancient history -- I'm not sure exactly what this paragraph is trying to say. I'd like to edit it, but I'm reluctant to even start at this point. FrozenPurpleCube 02:08, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It means what it says, even though it is hard to understand. Most of the books after the Chronicles series were based before the events in Chronicles (Legends starts out after Chronicles, but most of that trilogy is based in the past). Hypernova2121 06:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the War of the Lance article should not redirect here, instead be a Dragonlance event explaining the war. I am considering writing that article in the near future, so don't be surprised if the redirection is broken. -- ReyBrujo 05:10, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Weis and Hickman are widely, if incorrectly, regarded as the creators (or owners) of Dragonlance." In some paperback editions of the Chronicles, there was a foreward by Margaret Weis in which she talked about the player who created the character of Raistlin. The adventure that inspired Chronicles was a module written by Tracy Hickman and first played at a convention in Utah, and Margaret Weis was one of the players (I think she played Tasselhoff). A careful reading of the story allows you to identify what spells and actions, by AD&D 1st Edition rules, were performed when, in the course of the adventure; sometimes right down to what die rolls occurred. The foreward talked about how the guy that played Raistlin was always speaking in a raspy voice, that made everyone hang on his every word; and that the group was so impressed with this one player's role-playing, that Weis and Hickman were convinced that they could publish and sell the story. I think the convention also sponsored that adventure as a "Tournament Module", but my memory is not clear on that.

Arqeynjl 08:24, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's not what convinced Weis and Hickman to write the novels. That decision was made by TSR executives before the modules were written. The idea behind the project was to create a series of modules and a corresponding series of novels at the same time. Yes, the way the module was played influenced what happened in the books, but not the decision to write them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 154.20.208.181 (talk • contribs) .

I don't remember who, but if I recall correctly, back in those years D&D players were saying things like "We have the dungeons, where are the dragons?". After writing some modules for TSR, Tracy was contacted by them to create a new branch where the dragons would be the main topic. While travelling by car to his new house, Tracy and his wife were discussing about knights fighting dragons on dragonback using special weapons. So, the creator is Tracy.

I just looked at his site, and he confirms this here. -- ReyBrujo 19:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Terry Phillips played Raistlin. Harold Johnson played Tasselhoff. I don't remember who played the others. MikeSims (talk) 04:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am planning on moving the list of books to List of Dragonlance novels. That way they could be categorized into the ‪Lists of books‬ and ‪Series of books categories for easier access. It would also allow to create articles about each of the trilogies, including pics and an introduction. If nobody complains, I will begin in a couple of weeks. -- ReyBrujo 19:59, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I started recopilating information about the books in that list. Some dates are confusing, as the paperbacks I have state a previous date of first release than the ones appearing in Amazon. With some luck, the list should be completed and as accurate as possible by the deadline. -- ReyBrujo 05:06, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with the suggestion of merging the Artifacts article here. It has no more place here than the lists of Creatures, Characters, Locations, or Novels. It's a bit shorter now, but mainly because I just created it as a stub while I was cleaning up the novels synopsis', and I haven't gotten a chance to flesh it out yet. Once it's had proper information added to it, it'll be more significant. --Maelwys 05:37, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that the artifacts article shouldn't be merged. The artifacts article concerns a detailed part of Dragonlance, it's not a summary that should be merged with this article.

ddcc 20:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay a spellt neatral wrong and other words but anyway I read somewhere that they were going to have neutral Dragons. I think I spellt it right do you think we should mention it.

If you knew you spelled it wrong, why'd you point it out instead of correcting it? In any case, please remember to always sign your comments by typing ~ four times. Elijya 20:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because I forgot how to spell it now about those dragons. Jamhaw 20:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)jamhaw[reply]

Whhoa it worked I'll start signing things now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamhaw (talk • contribs) .

the neutral dragons were they actually planning on having them? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamhaw (talk • contribs) .

They already have a book where they get the hammer of Kharas it came out years ago! Jamhaw 20:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)jamhaw[reply]

Are you sure? The book Dragons of Dwarven Depths is coming out soon, and it supposedly deals with the recovery of the Hammer of Kharas. ddcc 04:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the information about the recovery of the Hammer of Kharas is found in a Dragonlance sourcebook. It has some years already. -- ReyBrujo 02:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope I'm tawking about a full blown novel it had a couple of no name characters and Tanis etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.174.135.175 (talk • contribs) .

By the way by noname i am talking about Non Recuring characters it has a red bearded guy on the cover at least the new one and it has been rerealeased last year I think. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamhaw (talk • contribs) .

I believe there are enough active Dragonlance editors to create a Wikiproject Dragonlance. However, I would like first checking who may be interested in joining. A Wikiproject would set some common rules for article formatting, and would better organize the articles (by setting naming conventions, determining notability for characters, expand articles, etc.) Suggestions? -- ReyBrujo 02:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd join if such a thing were to be created, but I'm also okay with just using this article as a "mainpage" for organizing any Dragonlance-related stuff... either way. --Maelwys 19:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also be interested, but since I have school I would be mostly editing during the weekends with some editing during the weekday. However, since summer vacation is soon (3days), I could work on it all summer. ddcc 05:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the talk page refers only to the article, so it is not really proper to discuss in this page stuff to be done in others. The other problem is that we are too few currently to maintain a good Wikiproject. Maybe in the future. -- ReyBrujo 00:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be on board. DoomsDay349 00:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest you bring this sort of thing up on the Dragonlance Mailing List and or Wizards COMmunity board for Dragonlance. I'd be willing to help look at articles about Krynnspace (the Spelljammer crystal sphere built around Krynn, for anyone who doesn't know). Big Mac 18:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Count me in! Well,I alone may not be much,but at least I can help...what are the rules anyway?dark matter 12:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a Template:DL character template to add information about Dragonlance characters in their articles. If you have ideas, please discuss them in the template talk page. -- ReyBrujo 18:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is a debatable topic, but as a fan of the series, I was wondering if anyone could create a recommended reading list, as far as historical purposes are concerned. I want to read the series, without worrying that some major event explained in book X should have been read after reading about said major event in book Y. Darkness Productions 16:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem with such list is that "recommended" is determined by the reader's taste. In example, we all know that, to understand the books, you should begin with Chronicles, then Legends, then maybe The Second Generation and finally Dragons of Summer Flame. However, other than that, it is debatable. I suggest trying to find an "official" reading order, or a suggested order by the authors. -- ReyBrujo 16:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This site [1] has a reading order that could be considered official because it is on the site of the publishers. To get to the list, you have to click on the box that says "start here". The page also has info on the books. Perhaps a link to this page could be used for the suggested reading list? DoomsDay349 02:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does this list contain 'all' of the books in the series, or just all of them in the 'main' reading line? Darkness Productions 16:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All of the books. -- ReyBrujo 16:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A new thought... the list at DL nexus is very good, very thourough...you can find it here[2]. I think it could be used along with the wizards.com list. I did, however, have one question about the DL nexus list that maybe someone could address... when the list says read the Age of Mortals supplements, does it mean read all of them? Because there's like 24 in there, and I don't think that the whole thing is neccessary...much as you can read to the classic core novels, Chronicles and Legends, and then go on without reading anything else in the classics. DoomsDay349 18:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A quick note to whoever updates that section... you don't have to link the same exact thing multiple times. In addition, the links go to non-existent pages, however the pages exist under different names. This could confuse some because they might make a page that already exists under this new name. It's alright, I'll fix it, but just keep it in mind. DoomsDay349 16:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why it was removed from here and I also don't understand the edit summary given to it. Someone clarify? DoomsDay349 20:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would just put it back up and see if it gets removed again, if so, message him on his talk page. ddcc 01:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, is there any reason to have it there? This article is about Dragonlance, the trademark and the games and books we can buy anywhere, not about the articles that need maintenance. That link would fit better a WikProject Dragonlance page. To give you an example, it is like adding, to the Election page, a link to the ArbCom elections. -- ReyBrujo 02:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dragonlance Nexus is listed as being unofficial in the links page, but according to the Wizard of the Coast community boards page it is still the offical Dragonlance website (maybe WotC don't update their own links much).

Either way, I believe that Wizards of the Coast originally decided to abandon Dragonlance. Apparantly it was only the dedication of people on the DL mailing list followed by the people running Dragonlance Nexus that brought it back from the dead. I believe that the authors of Dragonlance worked closely with the fan community.

I think that the low point in the history of the Campaign Setting should be touched on in the 'History' section of this article. And if Dragonlance Nexus and the Dragonlance Mailing list helped get this setting back into print, they should be mentioned as well. I would edit this myself, but I don't have enough background knowledge to make sure the thing gets done properly. (I know this is touched on in the Dragonlance Nexus article, but people might not bother to read that unless it is mentioned here.)

Big Mac 19:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, from what I understand, Dragons of Summer Flame was the end of the series, thus it is not as much as WotC abandoned it as it had already finished. -- ReyBrujo 22:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably should get an article, huh? --Masamage 07:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More information. -- ReyBrujo 15:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It states that Keifer Sutherland has the lead role as Raistlin Majere, but is Raist considered the LEAD role? (or would that be Tanis?) Just wondering if it could be worded as "Keifer Sutherland Headlines the cast as Raistlin" or some such? (or am i just quibbling?) -TheActorAPB —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.42.116.70 (talk • contribs) .

Well, we won't know until we read the reviews of the movie. It is not uncommon for one of the secondary characters to become protagonism based on fan response (Raistlin, Drizzt, etc). -- ReyBrujo 23:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Dragonlance' category is contained in the 'series of books' category. This latter also contains a category called 'series of fantasy books', which in turn contains 'Dragonlance novels'. Uh oh! --Masamage 18:33, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, wait, 'Dragonlance novels' are also in the 'Dragonlance' category. It still seems silly that 'Dragonlance' isn't inside the fantasy section, though. --Masamage 18:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one has replied, I'm copying it to here: Shouldn't the items in the list be changed in to the {{cite book}} format so that it looks better, and that if blocks of refrences need to be added to an article, they can just be copied from here? ddcc 00:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a decent idea to me --Soulforge19 22:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if I agree with the statement that Dragonlance is supposed to have a post-apocalyptic feel. Is this something the authors said? I'm just not seeing it, not even in the original books. To me, "post-apocalytpic" is something more akin to "The Day After" or "Threads" or the "Mad Max" movies. Even "Blade Runner". Many of the stories take place after an apocalyptic event, true, but Krynn quickly bounces back and repopulates. I think it's just the wrong term for describing the books. Am I alone in this? --Soulforge19 18:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never liked it. -- ReyBrujo 18:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So who put it there? ddcc 00:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I can see what they meant, at least in the first book. I read that as a reference to how everyone is still miserable about the Cataclysm. It's definitely a misleading phrase, but in good faith, I think. --Masamage 16:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I think it was added by an anonymous, a lot of time ago, and I think I left it there because it made sense. However, by now I understand a source is needed for that, otherwise it is pure speculation. -- ReyBrujo 17:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed it. ddcc 14:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should have stayed. A common theme in heroic literature and definitely fits these books. Agrippina Minor 00:05, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Says who? --Pak21 08:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even though we are not many editors, we have advanced quite a lot. When I started here, there were few articles (every Hero of the Lance, including some copyvios, every deity, and some articles like this one and the Night Sky of Krynn). Nowadays we have over 100 articles, advancing every day. For that, I want to thank everyone!

At this size, however, we can't just keep going in a synchronized way by discussing only here. User:ReyBrujo/Base/Dragonlance was useful as a quick index for knowing which articles do exist and some tasks to be done, but we can't discuss in depth changes that may affect a number of articles (in example, novel layout, character article format, requests for new articles and templates, etc). Thus, I have created the Wikipedia:WikiProject Dragonlance, where all these discussions will (hopefully) be centralized. A WikiProject, along with a Portal, are the two best ways of getting new members to help us with our tasks.

Note that the WikiProject hasn't "launched" yet (it is not linked from the parent WikiProjects), as it is just setting up. I have written some information, but the page is still lacking a lot of important information. You can visit other WikiProjects to get some ideas about which sections we should add. If this goes well, we should be able to keep a better communication between all us! -- ReyBrujo 04:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How exciting! :D I don't know how much time I'll have to participate, but I'm tickled that a project has started for this. I'll definately hang around. (And, of course, let me know if you have any Project-running questions. ^^ Though really it isn't too hard.) --Masamage 18:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great job, and thanks a lot for starting it! DoomsDay349 20:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No need to propose a lock; it was by one person. I've reported them to the admins. --Masamage 16:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it were two people, we might have cause for worry. No worries here, though, it was a moronic IP trying to be funny...incidentally, those edits make me want to puke. If this continues, and from another IP, then we might have to try to protect...but I hope it won't come to that. DoomsDay349 20:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it a little odd that the creator(s) of the series is(are) not mentioned in opening paragraph? Themindset 00:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, rather. --Masamage 01:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

can we add something about the critical reception the series has had? maybe some reviews? Magic Pickle 16:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know how to get a picture of the original Dragonlance logo? The one on the older, 1st edition Dragonlance books. Before the covers got all fancy :). It would be good for the article. DoomsDay349 05:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this? I can crop and etc. Ddcc 05:10, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah; that would be good. Have at it! DoomsDay349 05:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dragonlance-Logo-Orig.gif. Ddcc 21:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Talking about the Dragonlance logo, which is it, now? I mean, it used to be the one with the dragon, then it became the one with the lance, and now it seems to be the dragon one again! Which is it?bob bobato (talk) 23:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lead doesn't quite explain Dragonlance well enough. I think perhaps a rewrite of it is in order, but to what I am not sure. I like:

Dragonlance is a large series of fantasy novels, with over 100 novels printed. It was originally created by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman. Hickman and his wife created the basic idea while driving in their car on the way to TSR for Hickman to take a job. At TSR, he met his future partner Margaret Weis, and they gathered a group of associates to play a Dungeons & Dragons tabletop roleplaying game. The adventures of that game became Dragons of Autumn Twilight, and that novel was the first in the Chronicles Trilogy, the core novels of Dragonlance. Dragonlance has such unique creatures as kender and draconians. The majority of the novels take place in the various regions of Ansalon, a small continent, though some have taken place on the lesser known continent of Taladas, north of Ansalon.

That lead look good? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DoomsDay349 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 7 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Looks alright. Maybe not so much summary on life of Hickman & Weis, just straight that originally created by then. then created during D&D tabletop roleplay. Has unique creatures, not "such" unique (NPOV!). Ddcc 21:17, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took out the "unique creatures" sentence and posted as is. The bit about Tracy Hickman in the car with his wife is interesting and essential, IMO. DoomsDay349 22:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Being relatively ignorant of the whole series and only having played Dugeons and Dragons once or twice many moons ago, I would suggest you rethink the lead. You jump right into the genesis of the idea and make assumptions that your reader knows more about the subject than they might. For example, I looked up TSR in Wikipedia and was able to guess which of the disambiguated articles applies. And the story of its invention belongs lower after we know a bit more what they discovered (maybe even in a section of its own below). What is the series about? From the lead, I don't know. (John User:Jwy talk) 00:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am concerned that this article describes dragonlance in the first scentence as "a large series of fantasy novels". While I agree that the novels have become the largest and most important part of the setting there is much more to Dragonlance beyond this. From what I can see the first published Dragonlance item was actually a D&D game module (in March 84), which is before the first novel had been published. (Though a short story by Margret Weis was published in Dragon magazine the same month) New game material continues to be published to this day. - Waza 23:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is very true. I'll update it, but remember that whereas one might consider Forgotten Realms to be a gaming with a novel supplement, whereas Dragonlance is a novel series with a gaming supplement. DoomsDay349 20:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree that is what it has become, in the case of Dragonlance the novels have become the primary thing, but the idea did actually begin as a game, and the game is still a part of it to this day. - Waza 11:06, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very much so. I'm very involved in the fan community, and I know a great deal of people who have bought sourcebooks and even the Age of Mortals adventures just for novel enhancement. DoomsDay349 18:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Today I noticed that someone had nominated the Dragonlance timeline article for deletion within 5 days. I disagree with that, but think that the article needs major attention to remain on Wikipedia. This article fails to properly explain the history of the Dragonlance Saga and I think that the content of the timeline article needs to be cleaned up an incorporated into this one in order for readers to be able to understand the fictional history of Krynn.

I'd like to see the article kept, but merged into this one and cut down in size. But for the moment, I'd like to see it saved from deletion to allow people time to fix the problems. If you want to see the Dragonlance timeline saved from deletion so that it can be fixed and merged into this one then please visit its proposed deletion page.Big Mac 04:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Ahem*. Votestacking much? (I've seen all your other messages too.) I'm not gonna post a no spam message, but consider your wording carefully. DoomsDay349 04:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm not sure merging a gigantic timeline into a small article on Dragonlance is going to help the article. I would rather see it left alone and clean up. Ddcc 06:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dragonlance-Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem solved. DoomsDay349 05:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since we've got content on the 4th Age, do we need to expand to 5th Age? Ddcc 17:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that was my original intent. I just never got around to it. DoomsDay349 18:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can tell you that Fifth Age, the books and the SAGA game system, were released for Gen Con 1996. That's why I was asked to play Raistlin for the unveiling. MikeSims (talk) 04:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I get the impression this is the result of two seperate edits which don't fit together properly.

"It was originally created by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman while driving in their car on the way to TSR, Inc. for a job application. At TSR, he met his future partner Margaret Weis"

This doesn't seem to make sense - did she meet him at TSR, or was she in his car on the way there? Ben —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.156.4.52 (talk • contribs).

True, Laura and Tracy Hickman planned that in the car, Margaret was not there when the original idea came. -- ReyBrujo 01:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

until Time of the Twins, almost all novels were set before the Chronicles trilogy, often in ancient history

---

Considering that Chronicles were the very first books out, how does that work? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.241.144 (talk • contribs)

The Chronicles were the first books to be written, but they were set at a certain, specific point in Krynnish history. Many of the later books take place at points in history before the War of the Lance--that is, they're prequels. --Masamage ♫ 05:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Except, what books came out between Chronicles and Legends? According to what I remember (verified by what's listed on the List of Dragonlance novels page), none of the preludes or other trilogies came out until AFTER the Legends. So what books is this referring to? --Maelwys (talk) 15:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...Huh, looks like you're right. In that case, I have no idea. --Masamage ♫ 00:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then, I've removed that sentence as being completely nonsensical. --Maelwys (talk) 01:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! :)

This article has been selected for possible inclusion on the Wikipedia 0.7 DVD release. If there is anything you can do to help this article (fact check for sources and citations, check grammar and spelling, providing creator commentaries, finding useful quotes in interviews and product reviews, detailing publication history, rewriting in-universe text to out-of-universe text, and general cleanup here and there) now would be the time!

Also, if you'd like to nominate more articles to be selected for this project, or just wish to discuss the release in general, please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 16:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't sure if this was the best place to put the info back into the article or not, but I thought it was worth a try. I understand that Dragonlance is often thought of as a book series first and game system second, but the main article says almost nothing about the game campaign setting, which is where it got its start. The fact that adventures were published 2 years before the first novel, yet that date appeared nowhere.

Dragonlance is one of only two settings that have been represented in every version of D&D from AD&D on. This in important and valid information to include, I think.

Obviously, someone needs to double-check what I wrote, and a printed source found for the info about 2010 (this was reported to me recently from 3 seperate game supply stores). -IanCheesman (talk) 21:01, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - there definitely ought to be some D&D info in the article. :) BOZ (talk) 04:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I completely re-wrote this section, and would appriciate some suggestions and thoughts. Previously it was a recapping of the Chronicles and the Legends trilogies, and little more. With the series as massive as it is, I thought this would help and make it easier to read and for people to get an overall view. - IanCheesman (talk) 04:32, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. :) In our recent push to get D&D articles up to Good Article status, we have been successful with Gary Gygax and Wizards of the Coast. My original intention was to move immediately on to Dragonlance and then Forgotten Realms. However, looking at both of them (and Drow, the only other article in the 0.7 CD selection), I realize that they are both hardly referenced at all, and even then are referenced mostly to primary sources. I know that they both have as much potential to get to GA as the EGG and WotC articles, but due to lack of sourcing and relying on in-universe info, they are both a long way off.

What we need are reliable sources, with which to source the info in these articles. If you have a book or magazine or something and can do the sourcing work yourself, then great. If you can point me to a website, then I can do the work. We need creator interviews, product reviews, publishing and sales information for the product lines, etc. Feel free to discuss here, or on the WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons talk page. :) BOZ (talk) 20:47, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, this is out of date! We're now over 10 GA's and counting, and trying to make this one the next one. :) Ah... progress! BOZ (talk) 23:33, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a problem with the forum posting. Starting with WP:V forum postings can never be citations on wikipedia, even if we assume they could, there is nothing in that users profile to establish anything to indicate they are who they say they are [3].--Crossmr (talk) 04:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Independant source that describes all dragons - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 19:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Poems. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 19:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Readers aren't discriminatin. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 19:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Laurana and Raistlin - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 21:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My personal preference would be to keep the original. I'm not so sure about the statement that the second logo appears on more products than the first, although I have seen it numerous times. BOZ (talk) 23:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay; I'm pretty much neutral on the issue (I just like the second one more ;) ). However, I don't think that we can have both of them because of WP:NFCC. -Drilnoth (talk) 23:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at WP:NFCC, and I see no problems with keeping both logos on the page. Both have been used for years, and many, many books and supplements. Of the 100s of DL "things" in my house, over 1/3 have the old logo, and an even higher % of items at used book stores (for instance) have the old logo also. The logos are different enough that one is not obvious if you only see the other, especially with the huge variety of logos on the fantasy book market.

Maybe some re-wording of the captions for one (or both) logos is needed to explain better why there are two? - IanCheesman (talk) 23:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two logos doesn't really fly as far as NFCC is concerned, unless we can find something describing them (which I doubt we can). Also, a fat article can support maybe three non free images, and I'd rather spend it on something else. Maybe a map of Krynn, a picture of Raistlin, or some novel covers. No preference between logos. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 01:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found the free File:Raist spell.jpg. Then, with one logo and the campaign setting book, we should have a good image selection. -Drilnoth (talk) 02:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds good to me. If it's really contentious, we can leave it up to the GA reviewer. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 02:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is fanart allowed?? News to me! --Masamage ♫ 08:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eh... it's kind of in a grey area. -Drilnoth (talk) 14:33, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think that's one thing we can leave up to the reviewer. I like what's been going on with the article so far! Good to see other people taking notice as well; Dragonlance has more than enough potential to go all the way up to FA, but one step at a time... :) BOZ (talk) 18:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you guys think this image is better than File:Dragonlance CS Cover.jpeg? - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 03:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if we're allowed four images, I think we should choose the best ones. Instead of just Raistlin, it would be cool to have a group shot, for instance. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 03:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is that the cover of the original release? If so that would be better than what we have. As for a group shot, I think that that would be great if you can find one. -Drilnoth (talk) 03:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's the original sourcebook. I actually bought one of those new in the 1980s. I'll add it tomorrow, and also look for a group shot. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 03:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! -Drilnoth (talk) 03:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was one of the first three D&D books I got circa 1989 - along with the 2E DMG & PHB - for my birthday. :) BOZ (talk) 04:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a cool gift. These articles really remind me of my age. I started playing a bit after D&D changed to AD&D. Then I stopped soon after AD&D second edition came out. I lost all my books when I moved a couple of years ago. It's too bad, I think my first printing of Deities and Demigods is a colletable now. One of these days I want to get some monochrome cover versions of the old modules like G1-3. They're like 20 bucks on ebay. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome image find, there! -Drilnoth (talk) 18:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it's true, but I don't have refs for this section that was there before we started. Could probably use some of it with a rewrite, though. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 21:04, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The world of Dragonlance was the first fictional world to be professionally produced as a role-playing game world with product tie-ins (novels, role-playing modules, figurines, etc.) during its release. Before Dragonlance, fictional role-playing worlds evolved from the amateur creations of the games' players (the most notable example being the Greyhawk campaign setting), or from previously existing fictional settings (I.C.E's MERP) or campaign settings based in the real world. The success of the Dragonlance series encouraged role-playing game producers to invent and market additional fictional game worlds, such as the Ravenloft game world.

This link http://devilsdue.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=section&id=9&Itemid=93 makes my google chrome have me confirm I want to proceed because it sees a threat. Then, if I continue, my AVG antivirus says it has detected a threat, then I'm automatically forwarded to some spam search page. Maybe I have a virus on my computer, but I've experienced this on two computers. http://devilsdue.net/ seems fine, though, so I don't know what's up. I'm also not sure it supports the statement (although I can't look at the page long). - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 22:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The page is the Devil's Due publishing page. It lists comics which are on hiatus, and all the upcoming Dragonlance ones are among them - so it does support the statement. I can only assume you are getting a false positive, which AVG is notorious for, but it's idiotic to keep undoing the update back and forth so I won't bother. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donners (talk • contribs) 01:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I asked here. If they say it's OK, I'll just stop clicking on that link. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has now been removed yet again, I see. I would think that the apparent ending of the series would have some relevance to an article on said series, but I am beyond caring. Donners (talk) 00:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor said it was a dead link. I removed it because it shouldn't go in the lead. If you want to add it in the correct way, I don't think anyone will object. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 02:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dragonlance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080630011218/http://www.news.com.au:80/couriermail/story/0,23739,23913678-5004582,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23913678-5004582,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dragonlance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111023032331/http://www.pyramaze.com:80/music.php to http://www.pyramaze.com/music.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110322025234/http://www.dragonlance.com/ to http://www.dragonlance.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:01, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Dragonlance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919114815/http://www.dragonlance.com/features/articles/10031.aspx to http://www.dragonlance.com/features/articles/10031.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070910004539/http://www.sffworld.com/interview/187p1.html to http://www.sffworld.com/interview/187p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070526103906/http://www.dragonlance.com/features/articles/10040.aspx to http://www.dragonlance.com/features/articles/10040.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pyramaze.com/music.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090208220342/http://www.dvdtown.com/reviews/dragonlance-dragons-of-autumn-twilight/5522 to http://www.dvdtown.com/reviews/dragonlance-dragons-of-autumn-twilight/5522

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]