D&D 5E The October D&D Book is Fizban’s Treasury of Dragons

As revealed by Nerd Immersion by deciphering computer code from D&D Beyond!

Spoiler

Fizban the Fabulous is, of course, the accident-prone, befuddled alter-ego of Dragonlance’s god of good dragons, Paladine, the platinum dragon (Dragonlance’s version of Bahamut).

Which makes my guess earlier this year spot on!

UPDATE -- the book now has a description!

D&D 5E - Fizban's Treasury: The Dragon Book Now Has A Description... And A Feat

Courtesy of Amazon, we now have a description for Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, the October D&D hardcover. The book introduces gem dragons, dragon-themed player options, and plenty of draconic lore! This joins September's The Wild Beyond the Witchlight, and November's Strixhaven: Curriculum of...

www.enworld.org

D&D 5E - My guess for the other D&D book this year... Draconomicon!

We know the fifth major product this year will be James Wyatt‘s as-yet unannounced project, and we know it will be coming out this year between Witchlight and Strixhaven. Wyatt co-wrote the Draconomicon for 3E. There have been two recent dragon-themed Unearthed Arcanas — dragon-themed...

www.enworld.org

Fizban the Fabulous by Vera Gentinetta

 

[CasvalRemDeikun]

Um, actually . . . while it's been a while since I've read that last Dragonlance book . . . I'm pretty sure Fizban/Paladine didn't die, but was depowered and is no longer a god. He continues to wander the face of Krynn in old man wizard form. When Takhisis was killed, Paladine needed to be removed to preserve the "balance" . . . but simply took mortal form and gave up godhood forever.

Right. But he isn't Fizban anymore, he is a mortal elf. Fizban no longer exists. Paladine, the Dragonlance version of Bahamut, is no more.

 

[darjr]

An Ory of metallic dragons
A Gloss of chromatic dragons
A Brilliance of gem dragons

 

[Charlaquin]

Dark Sun is more popular among old gamers, but it makes fundamental use of problematic elements, like slavery, which WizCo likely wants to avoid
Dragonlance doesn't have the same ick factor and it has a bunch of popular novels that can be reissued to gain attention. And it's easy enough to reboot and reimagine

I agree with most of what you said here, but the idea that Dark Sun has more “ick factor” than dragonlance speaks to a fundamental misunderstanding of what “problematic elements” WotC is trying to avoid these days. The fact that slavery exists in Athas does not make it too problematic to touch - in fact, so long as slavery is presented as an injustice for heroes to fight against, it’s not problematic at all. There are some elements of Dark Sun that WotC might want to soften, but this is absolutely not one of them. On the other hand, Dragon Lance has stuff like gully dwarves which are very much the kind of thing WotC wants to move away from, and I imagine they would likely shy away from the mormon allegory as well.

 

[Steel_Wind]

That's one interpretation of events. But as I recall, the lawsuit itself says that WotC objected to elements of the proposed story and, after going back and forth several times with Weis/Hickman, apparently gave up on the process.

That's not what happened. You may recall it that way -- but if so -- your recollection is simply wrong. (I'm inviting you to back-pedal gracefully.)
Moreover, there were explicit apologies made over the depiction of Drow. We don't have to have an argument about that, right?

WotC requested changes to Dragons of Deceit for "sensitivity reasons" (including the use of a love potion - the rapey but not too rapey (well yes, still very rapey sine qua non of any fantasy witch's shop), the changes were made as requested and WotC approved the manuscript for publishing and payment of their 2nd milestone by Penguin Random House (Del-Rey). Where you got the idea that W&H gave up is wholly nonsense. They didn't. They continued to write and when WotC refused to approve further milestone drafts of Vol 2 -- Weiss and Hickman sued them. During a pandemic.

That is about as far from "giving up" that I've seen practicing law for 26 years.

I might also add that there aren't many statements of claim I read that persuade me utterly that the case is ripe for summary judgment. This complaint was one of the few that did. WotC had no defense to that claim in contract. ZERO defense to that claim. The only defense WotC might have had was as to quantum of damages. Which is why they settled it and those books are coming out.

As for Gully Dwarves, well that's one spin. It isn't the one I would ever admit to, either. Nor should W&H or WotC -- or anybody else.

That said, my guess is that Gully Dwarves aren't in Dragons of Deceit - and if they were - W&H would have been asked to remove them. Whatever it is that Weiss and Hickman were asked to remove, they did. WotC approved it.

You need to go back and read the complaint. It's here: DocumentCloud

 

[overgeeked]

Subclasses, spells, magic items, lots of monsters, setting info, rules for making dragons more impressive in game. (Decades of Dragon magazine articles show there's an unending appetite for this, in whatever edition.)

I miss Dungeon and Dragon.

 

[Parmandur]

I agree with most of what you said here, but the idea that Dark Sun has more “ick factor” than dragonlance speaks to a fundamental misunderstanding of what “problematic elements” WotC is trying to avoid these days. The fact that slavery exists in Athas does not make it too problematic to touch - in fact, so long as slavery is presented as an injustice for heroes to fight against, it’s not problematic at all. There are some elements of Dark Sun that WotC might want to soften, but this is absolutely not one of them. On the other hand, Dragon Lance has stuff like gully dwarves which are very much the kind of thing WotC wants to move away from, and I imagine they would likely shy away from the mormon allegory as well.

A better comparison might be Ravenloft: plenty of problematic elements there, and WotC tackled it with aplomb. I could see them doing the same for Dark Sun. Some of y'all didn't read Theros to find out what has happening in some of the city states, and it shows.

 

[Zaukrie]

They could mine Dragon and Dungeon and write a whole book on making dragons more interesting in the game......

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

While 5e's books are full of callbacks and lore drops, they quite rightly understand that it has to appeal to people in the here and now. If Dragonlance is to work as a new release, it needs something more than the original Dragonlance saga to hang its hat on (and I say this as someone who got his copy of Dragons of Autumn Twilight signed by Margaret Weis).

I'll readily admit to hoping that Fizban's Treasury of Dragons means we'll eventually see a full Dragonlance return, but while I want something that evokes the best in the original works, it needs to be something that will also appeal to new kids (i.e., people that didn't grow up reading Dragonlance in middle school).

Yeah, I'm not sure "this was a big selling novel 40 years ago" is a compelling argument.

No one's saying we need to make movies of James Michener's "The Covenant," James Clavell's "Noble House" or Jonathan Irving's "Hotel New Hampshire" in the 21st century, despite each being NYT best sellers the same time period ago.

At a certain point, even an omnipresent cultural icon is no longer relevant. It's hard to overstate how dominant Michener, Clavelle and Irving were, once upon a time. Millennials and Generation Z would find them unreasonably hard trivia answers nowadays, and even many Generation X folks would struggle with them.

The more I think about it, the more I think Fizban's including a bunch of settings, with maybe 20 pages on Krynn might be the way to go. Republish the setting in 5E in that sense, see if demand increases -- meaning it's not the same people who were asking for it two years ago -- and make decisions after that.

 

[Mind of tempest]

While 5e's books are full of callbacks and lore drops, they quite rightly understand that it has to appeal to people in the here and now. If Dragonlance is to work as a new release, it needs something more than the original Dragonlance saga to hang its hat on (and I say this as someone who got his copy of Dragons of Autumn Twilight signed by Margaret Weis).

I'll readily admit to hoping that Fizban's Treasury of Dragons means we'll eventually see a full Dragonlance return, but while I want something that evokes the best in the original works, it needs to be something that will also appeal to new kids (i.e., people that didn't grow up reading Dragonlance in middle school).

that seems logical.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

That's not what happened. You may recall it that way -- but if so -- your recollection is simply wrong. (I'm inviting you to back-pedal gracefully.)

Since we fundamentally agree on what happened, we can move in lock step.

Moreover, there were explicit apologies made over the depiction of Drow. We don't have to have an argument about that, right?

It happened but it's irrelevant.

WotC requested changes to Dragons of Deceit for "sensitivity reasons" (including the use of a love potion - the rapey but not too rapey (well yes, still very rapey sine qua non of any fantasy witch's shop)

Bill Cosby had been sentenced to three to 10 years for the real world equivalent. I'm not sure "it's not too rapey" is an argument worth making.

the changes were made as requested and WotC approved the manuscript for publishing and payment of their 2nd milestone by Penguin Random House (Del-Rey). Where you got the idea that W&H gave up is wholly nonsense. They didn't.

Cool. That's not what I said. I said that WotC gave up on it and refused to keep going, which is what triggered the W&H lawsuit.

As for Gully Dwarves, well that's one spin. It isn't the one I would ever admit to, either. Nor should W&H or WotC -- or anybody else.

Unless WotC or W&H ever come out and say explicitly what happened, which is exceedingly unlikely, it's all speculation. But lots of people have issues with Gully Dwarves and other "ha ha, these people are so genetically inferior" stuff in Dragonlance. Even the hint of that sort of condescension and prejudice gets bigger companies than Hasbro to drop properties.

If WotC is going to sign off on a new Dragonlance book in 2020 and a draft of it shows up with problematic elements, it seems very unlikely that they wouldn't say "hey, maybe we should change this or remove it." Which matches what little we do know (rather than guess) about happened: WotC wanted changes, didn't feel W&H made them completely, W&H felt their changes were sufficient, WotC effectively walked away from the project without properly killing it and paying out to W&H. (Which was crappy behavior on WotC's part and apparently part of a pattern.)

That said, my guess is that Gully Dwarves aren't in Dragons of Deceit - and if they were - W&H would have been asked to remove them. Whatever it is that Weiss and Hickman were asked to remove, they did. WotC approved it.

And then WotC, at some point, decided they didn't want to go forward with the project any more.

At this point, it's all speculation. Having been involved in the writing/editing process my entire professional life, I see a breakdown in the revision process. But it's possible that WotC walked away for some other reason.

No one who wasn't a party to the suit is likely to ever really know.