D&D 5E D&D Gem Dragons Are Officially Back

So if you're (not) like me and you don't have the time or patience to watch Spoilers & Swag, you may have missed this awesome reveal... Gem Dragons are back! And I don't just mean back in a third-party book like Matt Colville's Strongholds and Followers (great book, check it out), I mean back officially for D&D 5e.

In case you don't know, Gem Dragons are the third-wheel of dragonkind... they are not Good (Metallic) or Evil (Chromatic), they are Neutral. This makes them easily overlooked in the struggle of good vs. evil, but they've popped up here and there in previous editions.

But it looks like Gem Dragons have returned, first to promote the sale of a very expensive sapphire dice set. This little paper fold-out is included (screenshots below), complete with lore for gem dragons and a statblock for the Adult Sapphire Dragon specifically.

Of course, if you don't want to buy a pricey set of dice for a statblock... you're in luck, as Nathan Stewart reveals that everybody else will get access to it "early in 2020, where we [WotC] will have some fun ways to get that out there." So it looks like some product will be released including the Neutral Dragons, a new adventure or maybe a new monster book!

Feel free to speculate, here's the images;

 

[Marandahir]

If we get any new dragons, I actually hope it is closer to the Catastrophe Dragons. My own personal homebrew has been to make Dragon's almost elementals, so there are no "red" or "white" dragons, but Dragons who are like living volcanoes or glaciers.

So, seeing that concept actually acted it would be useful.

Shouldn't be too hard to port Catastrophic Dragons from 4e Draconomicons & Dragon Magazine, even if they never make them officially for 5e.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Shouldn't be too hard to port Catastrophic Dragons from 4e Draconomicons & Dragon Magazine, even if they never make them officially for 5e.

Oh sure, and I've done a few things like give damage auras or other things from 4e to make the dragons feel a bit more threatening.

But, I'd be curious to see if they got new 5e mechanics that I could steal.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

We'll, they seem to be aiming for a release every Quarter, and almost got there this year, except for the delay for Theros. I expect a Q1 release of something is probable, but if I were to bet on a new MM, it would be Q2 or Q4 (wildcard Q1, I'm going with a compilation like Saltmarsh or another licensed book).

I would think it unlikely that we would get two rules supplements in a row. I'm also inclined to think an Adventure Anthology would be a good fit for the first book of 2021. But I wouldn't be surprised by another surprise setting book. The latest UA, with it's "gothic" subclasses seems too late for Tasha's, so it could point to a Ravenloft or Innistrad book in the works.

 

[Erdric Dragin]

Im guessing the gem dragons come out after psionics debut?

IF there's a Psionic debut. After 4 editions of being the sometimes forgotten step-child of D&D, WotC looks like they're taking the uncreative, lazy method of retconning (once again) their entire line by ignoring Psionics 99.99% this time as if it doesn't exist instead of just doing their job, which is designing, and making a fresh set of 5e psionic material.

Pretty sure by 6th Edition, you say Psionics and they'll reply "What's psionics......?" while glancing sideways.

 

[Cadence]

IF there's a Psionic debut. After 4 editions of being the sometimes forgotten step-child of D&D, WotC looks like they're taking the uncreative, lazy method of retconning (once again) their entire line by ignoring Psionics 99.99% this time as if it doesn't exist instead of just doing their job, which is designing, and making a fresh set of 5e psionic material.

Pretty sure by 6th Edition, you say Psionics and they'll reply "What's psionics......?" while glancing sideways.

Do the psionics need to be totally different from spells, like in 1e, or is just making the classes and what the powers do feel different enough to make it good?

I'm picturing something like PF1's Occult book:
Occult Classes <- rules to click on
Psychic Magic <- about psychic magic in general
Review – Occult Adventures (Pathfinder) <- descriptions of the classes in a review

 

[Parmandur]

IF there's a Psionic debut. After 4 editions of being the sometimes forgotten step-child of D&D, WotC looks like they're taking the uncreative, lazy method of retconning (once again) their entire line by ignoring Psionics 99.99% this time as if it doesn't exist instead of just doing their job, which is designing, and making a fresh set of 5e psionic material.

Pretty sure by 6th Edition, you say Psionics and they'll reply "What's psionics......?" while glancing sideways.

I mean, they have Psionic spells and Subclasses coming this Fall. They spent years hashing out what people wanted, and here they come.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Do the psionics need to be totally different from spells, like in 1e, or is just making the classes and what the powers do feel different enough to make it good?

I'm picturing something like PF1's Occult book:
Occult Classes <- rules to click on
Psychic Magic <- about psychic magic in general
Review – Occult Adventures (Pathfinder) <- descriptions of the classes in a review

I think that for a lot of people, the appeal/core/whole point of psionics is that they're not spells. Even if they do the exact same things, psionics being something other than magic is the entire reason to include it.

 

[Cadence]

I think that for a lot of people, the appeal/core/whole point of psionics is that they're not spells. Even if they do the exact same things, psionics being something other than magic is the entire reason to include it.

Is it the name "spells"? Or do you need to avoid the entire pseudo-Vancian set-up and what Warlocks have?

PF kept the name spells but the power source and components are different, and the lists are different.

 

[Parmandur]

I think that for a lot of people, the appeal/core/whole point of psionics is that they're not spells. Even if they do the exact same things, psionics being something other than magic is the entire reason to include it.

Yet WotC market playtesting found the opposite to be the case, hence why Psionics have complete transparency with magic in D&D now.

 

[jgsugden]

Yet WotC market playtesting found the opposite to be the case, hence why Psionics have complete transparency with magic in D&D now.

What market testing found is that there is no consensus. Psionics have taken a variety of forms in the game and none of them has universal love - thus people are of mixed reactions, with some hating the concept, others wishing for a 1E style experience, others looking for a 4E, and many just looking for something new that really captures the feel of comic book psionic powers.

For me, I'd make psionics:

a.) Everything at will. If you have a power, you can use it at any time. Many powers would have the concentration mechanic, though.
b.) You get power points to power up your powers to do more extreme things. Rather than spending points though, I'd have you roll dice to determine how many power points something is going to cost to enhance. This would give you those moments of struggle where you're not certain how long you can hold out.
c.) Psionics would be a different type of magic - dispel magic and counterspell would not work against them as easily.