To Whom It May Concern, I am writing blog is because I am a ticked off at the moment. Please forgive me going all over the place and in hopes that you will understand. I played Dragonlance when it first came out. I also read the books the books that also came out as well. When I saw the Dragonlance Shadow of the Dragon Queen came I got very excited and wanted to play. Got the book and some family together and decided to play. HOWEVER!! I wanted to create an NPC to play to cause some chaos for the other players. So I picked up the Shadow of the Dragon Queen book turned to page 21because I wanted to create a Gully dwarf. Hill dwarf....check Mountain dwarf...check. Odd that the gully dwarf in not mentioned. So before the new players handbook came out I was able to use the Dragonlance rules to recreate a Dragonlance characters. Now not sure why because DnD Beyond will now will not let you create them anymore. Fine if it is me missing on a step in creating a character, I will take that it but it seems kind of strange when you were able to and now especially it will not let you when you have this module to play. So, I broke out my Dragonlance player's book that was printed in 1987. And there it is...how to create a gully dwarf character and then I got to looking at the other races as well and the Minotaur race was missing from the Dragon Queen as well. OK, I can understand the Minotaur race missing because they really came in from later in the books. BUT!!! the gully dwarves!!! OH HELL NO!!! They were in the first book of the series and one female help Raistlin to find a book that helped him later....No sir!!! Shame on you all leaving out the gully dwarves as playable characters. I want my gully dwarves back!!!
Ha, i remember Gully Dwarf for better or worse from way back when playing AD&D 2nd Edition, i know that Dragonlance: Shadow of the Dragon Queen doesn't speak about them at all. I guess they preferred to only speak of the dwarf subraces that featured in the book and avoid all others. At the same time, Gully Dwarves were not portrayed in bright way to say the least and that they were not given full stats by WoTC is understandable.
Sure they would have need some rework to bring them in more positive way, but part of me think this book could have been a good opportunity for WoTC to actually do so.
I'd be curious to know what you came up with for your 5E version.
PS If it ever interest you, Tasselhoff's Pouches of Everything has 5E stats for the Gully Dwarf.
Iirc they weren't really characterized beyond "stupid, craven hick dwarves" with the usual unfortunate implication that this is an inherent characteristic of that type of dwarf, so it's not surprising they were quietly cancelled from 5e. Personally, if I wanted to reintegrate the term into the setting, I'd make it slang for rustic dwarven communities similar to something like "hillbillies" and the stereotype more just being the typical prejudice about country bumpkins and the like.
I read a lot of Dragonlance novels as a kid: the school library had a bunch of them. And I don't remember the gully dwarves being treated as much more than ablist jokes most of the time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening,
To Whom It May Concern, I am writing blog is because I am a ticked off at the moment. Please forgive me going all over the place and in hopes that you will understand. I played Dragonlance when it first came out. I also read the books the books that also came out as well. When I saw the Dragonlance Shadow of the Dragon Queen came I got very excited and wanted to play. Got the book and some family together and decided to play. HOWEVER!! I wanted to create an NPC to play to cause some chaos for the other players. So I picked up the Shadow of the Dragon Queen book turned to page 21because I wanted to create a Gully dwarf. Hill dwarf....check Mountain dwarf...check. Odd that the gully dwarf in not mentioned. So before the new players handbook came out I was able to use the Dragonlance rules to recreate a Dragonlance characters. Now not sure why because DnD Beyond will now will not let you create them anymore. Fine if it is me missing on a step in creating a character, I will take that it but it seems kind of strange when you were able to and now especially it will not let you when you have this module to play. So, I broke out my Dragonlance player's book that was printed in 1987. And there it is...how to create a gully dwarf character and then I got to looking at the other races as well and the Minotaur race was missing from the Dragon Queen as well. OK, I can understand the Minotaur race missing because they really came in from later in the books. BUT!!! the gully dwarves!!! OH HELL NO!!! They were in the first book of the series and one female help Raistlin to find a book that helped him later....No sir!!! Shame on you all leaving out the gully dwarves as playable characters. I want my gully dwarves back!!!
Ha, i remember Gully Dwarf for better or worse from way back when playing AD&D 2nd Edition, i know that Dragonlance: Shadow of the Dragon Queen doesn't speak about them at all. I guess they preferred to only speak of the dwarf subraces that featured in the book and avoid all others. At the same time, Gully Dwarves were not portrayed in bright way to say the least and that they were not given full stats by WoTC is understandable.
Sure they would have need some rework to bring them in more positive way, but part of me think this book could have been a good opportunity for WoTC to actually do so.
I'd be curious to know what you came up with for your 5E version.
PS If it ever interest you, Tasselhoff's Pouches of Everything has 5E stats for the Gully Dwarf.
Iirc they weren't really characterized beyond "stupid, craven hick dwarves" with the usual unfortunate implication that this is an inherent characteristic of that type of dwarf, so it's not surprising they were quietly cancelled from 5e. Personally, if I wanted to reintegrate the term into the setting, I'd make it slang for rustic dwarven communities similar to something like "hillbillies" and the stereotype more just being the typical prejudice about country bumpkins and the like.
I read a lot of Dragonlance novels as a kid: the school library had a bunch of them. And I don't remember the gully dwarves being treated as much more than ablist jokes most of the time.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Honestly....I didn't come up with 5E version, I just used the original from Dragonlance players book as follows:
STR: 4d4 +2 Min: 6 Max: 18, INT: 2d4+1 Min:3 Max: 9, WIS 2d4+1 Min:3 Max: 9, DEX 4d4+2 MIN: 6 MAX: 18, CON 3d4 MIN: 3 MAX: 12, CHR: 2d4+1 MIN: 3 MAX: 9
Why reinvent the wheel again, yea I know the mechanics.....but hey that's why we have homebrew!!!