WotC Dragonlance: Everything You Need For Shadow of the Dragon Queen

WotC has shared a video explaining the Dragonlance setting, and what to expect when it is released in December.

World at War: Introduces war as a genre of play to fifth edition Dungeons & Dragons.

Dragonlance: Introduces the Dragonlance setting with a focus on the War of the Lance and an overview of what players and DMs need to run adventures during this world spanning conflict.

Heroes of War: Provides character creation rules highlighting core elements of the Dragonlance setting, including the kender race and new backgrounds for the Knight of Solamnia and Mage of High Sorcery magic-users. Also introduces the Lunar Sorcery sorcerer subclass with new spells that bind your character to Krynn's three mystical moons and imbues you with lunar magic.

Villains: Pits heroes against the infamous death knight Lord Soth and his army of draconians.

Notes --

• 224 page hardcover adventure
• D&D's setting for war
• Set in eastern Solamnia
• War is represented by context -- it's not goblins attacking the village, but evil forces; refugees, rumours
• You can play anything from D&D - clerics included, although many classic D&D elements have been forgotten
• Introductory scenarios bring you up to speed on the world so no prior research needed

 

[doctorbadwolf]

If you didn't have something and suddenly now you do, there has been a change. You may not care about the change, or think it's a minor change, or even a good change, but objectively something has changed. The setting is now different than it was before.

Okay. Unless you think change is inherently negative, the bare fact that something changed is just meaningless nitpicking. This is like people crying havok over Harry Potter's eyes being the wrong color. Actually no, this matters even less than that change.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

In my opinion, their worldbuilding is scant and insufficient

How? In what way are their setting books scant and insufficient? Eberron, Wildemount, Theros, and Ravnica have entire chapters dedicated to explaining how to build adventures in the setting and gazetteers explaining the setting. I'm not a fan of Theros or Ravnica, but the books are amazing at telling you how to play in the world. Eberron and Wildemount are even better at it. How in the world are the "worldbuilding" insufficient in those worlds?

, and most of their recent books have been, to me, bad.

Spelljammer and Strixhaven I'll readily admit are lacking in objective ways that make them worse setting books than the other 5e setting books. Most criticisms of Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft aren't based on the quality of the book and based on nostalgia for the previous version.

Their plans for 6e are also, as far as we can know, to me, bad.

They're not bad, you just don't like them.

I don't hate WotC. I'm just angry that they stopped making product I like.

Even if you are just angry/upset that they stopped making products that you like (which they didn't, they just started making products geared at other people too, you've already admitted that you like some recent books), you're letting it infect the discussions of books that haven't come out yet and books that you've admitted to liking.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

We actually know quite a bit about how WotC is planning to handle Dragonlance. The book itself may just be a little adventure in an out of the way part of the world with PC options, but they've explained what Dragonlance is to them, and I don't like it.

Settings mean different things to different people. Getting angry at a company for not thinking that "Orcs are banned" is an important part of a setting in your mind seems ridiculous to me. Wait until the book is actually out to criticize it. You got upset about Radiant Citadel before it came out and learned to change your mind about it after it came out. Judge a book after you can read it.

 

[Maxperson]

Okay. Unless you think change is inherently negative, the bare fact that something changed is just meaningless nitpicking. This is like people crying havok over Harry Potter's eyes being the wrong color. Actually no, this matters even less than that change.

A lot of us disagree. Adding in all the things Krynn flat out doesn't have alters the feel of the setting, which isn't a minor thing.

 

[Maxperson]

The traditional isn't better than the new, all things being equal. Tradition is neutral in value.

Traditional is the only thing that can be new with regard to a setting right now. We already have a ton(all of them) kitchen sink settings. Giving us yet another one is not new.

I'd love to actually get something new for a change when it comes to a setting.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

A lot of us disagree. Adding in all the things Krynn flat out doesn't have alters the feel of the setting, which isn't a minor thing.

"The feel of the setting" can be altered in minor ways. Like by not making a mention of a race that used to be banned in it. Or by including that race as an option.

Orcs didn't exist in Dragonlance because Draconians were their version of Orcs. But now Orcs have changed. So the reason why they weren't included in the first place isn't a valid reason for why they wouldn't be included anymore.

Now, I don't particularly care if Orcs are included or not. I don't like the vast majority of the Dragonlance setting or the novels. But I do think that freaking out about the option of playing them being included or not outright banned is stupid and childish. It's like saying that the Lord of the Rings movies suck because they didn't include Tom Bombadil.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

A lot of us disagree. Adding in all the things Krynn flat out doesn't have alters the feel of the setting, which isn't a minor thing.

Are they, though? If the majority of DL games won't feature PCs of those races, because those races have never had any impact on the history of the world, how is it not a minor thing?

Not only that, you're making an assumption based on one comment in a video promoting the book. A statement that isn't even specific enough to glean any specific information from. He said you'll be able to play familiar options, just make a character, and learn the setting in play. Which sounds fantastic, but also just doesn't necessarily say what you keep claiming as fact.

But mostly, the lack of orcs has never effected the setting in any way.

 

[Kai Lord]

Dragonborn have never been addressed officially either way.

Drow have been seen before on Krynn. In most cases it's considered a kender tale. Wild Elves had a Spelljamming vessel with drow on it crash.

There are ways to include them. Dragonborn could be the proto-draconians from Taladas.

Or just another name for the Dragonspawn created by the Dragon Overlords. Or perhaps the offspring of a Draconian and a Dragonspawn.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

A lot of us disagree. Adding in all the things Krynn flat out doesn't have alters the feel of the setting, which isn't a minor thing.

and plenty of us disagree. Changing the races only alters the feel if it matters and we don't even have a reason to say they aren't in the setting other then "it was 30 years ago"

 

[Dragonhelm]

Where did they come from? Everyone else on Krynn has an actual origin, in the setting.

When in doubt, use the Graygem!