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

 

[Micah Sweet]

. . . . I'm saying that's how it is in 5e. The base cosmology of 5e (and it actually has been around since 2e) was that almost all of the D&D worlds are connected to the Multiverse. Krynn is explicitly connected to it. Plasmoids are from Krynn's Moons from 2e Spelljammer. The Dragonlance setting is connected to Spelljammer so it never would have made sense for a DM to say that there is 0% chance of Orcs ever existing on Krynn.

And my point is that the "historical limitations of the setting" are both outdated and completely unnecessary to include in a book. Mythic Odysseys of Theros never goes out of its way to say "Hey, Orcs, Kobolds, and Dwarves don't exist in this world so don't let your players play them", because it tells you which creatures are native to the world through the setting book's material and provides ways for strange/unique players of different races to exist in the world (Planeswalkers, Nyxborn created by the Gods, Anvilwrought created by Purphoros). The setting makes it clear that the theme is "Ancient Greece" so Orcs and Beholders probably won't fit in the world, but it also gives justifications of both the DM and Players to include them if they want to. Eberron does something similar where it has a list of major races, but also gives ways for other races and monsters to exist (Mordain the Fleshweaver, the Mournland, Xen'drik, etc). And this way is a superior type of worldbuilding to "these races are banned because we say so". It makes it clear that things are left up to the DM and helps them use their imagination to customize the world.

And sometimes the "quirks of the setting" are bad or outdated. Banning orcs is outdated because the reason they were banned in the first place no longer applies to the modern iterations of Orcs (because Draconians became the main always evil race that serves the villain). I have no opinion on Tieflings existing in the world, to me it makes sense if the Great Wheel is the world's cosmology, but 5e has said that Dragonborn can be used as Draconians.

The game has changed a lot in the past 38 years since Dragonlance first came out. So the setting should change to fit the modern game. Some things that used to work well (banning Orcs to make way for a new always evil mook race) don't work as well in 5e. The quirks of the setting that you're complaining about being changed (or theoretically being changed because we don't actually know that Orcs will be present in the world) are such minor parts of the world that it honestly baffles me that you care this much about it and leaving it up to the DM encourages player and DM creativity when making the setting/adventure their own.

Saying one style of worldbuilding is superior to another sounds an awful lot like stating a subjective preference is actually objective fact. Is that what you intended?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Dragonlance was more influenced by Star Wars than LoTR.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's an oversimplification. Krynn was created before Spelljammer, and it was incorporated into the Spelljammer setting by the Spelljammer creator against the wishes of the Dragonlance creators, who had always envisioned it as completely separate from the core D&D cosmology.

So, you could say that Krynn is part of the Spelljammer setting, but Spelljammer is not part of the Krynn setting.

Or, it's up to the DM.

True. Eberron fans also seem pretty dead-set on their setting being separate from everything else. Do the same rules of "everything is part of the multiverse" apply there too?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

True. Eberron fans also seem pretty dead-set on their setting being separate from everything else. Do the same rules of "everything is part of the multiverse" apply there too?

It's up to the DM.

 

[Micah Sweet]

WotC is releasing five new books next year. Which one would you want to be replaced by a Sharn Book? By a Theros adventure path? A Spelljammer vessel supplement?

Any of them. They can replace 6e in 2024 with that stuff too.

 

[bedir than]

True. Eberron fans also seem pretty dead-set on their setting being separate from everything else. Do the same rules of "everything is part of the multiverse" apply there too?

According to Baker, yes

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Its not about controlling other people's tables. Its about having a standard, and preserving a setting's identity, which means what it doesn't have just as much as what it does have. Theros and Ravnica, which keep getting brought up, are pretty clear about what the setting includes. If someone wants to play a tiefling in either, and the table is fine with it, there's no problem. But those settings don't include them by default, and neither does DL.

If the setting's identity is ruined by including a race very similar to ones already present in the world and present in several similar "generic fantasy" worlds, then the setting has failed to give itself a strong identity. Eberron was still Eberron after they added Dragonborn and Tieflings. Exandria would still be still Exandria if you chose to include Harengon. Saltmarsh is still Greyhawk after they added Tieflings in 5e. If your image of the identity of a setting is so restrictive that the option of adding Orcs as a possible race/monster in the same world as Goblins/Hobgoblins, then either the setting failed or you are too attached to the unimportant minutia of the setting and are making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[Micah Sweet]

According to Baker, yes

How does that square with the cosmology? It's pretty different as I recall.

 

[Umbran]

Stop making this a political issue no one is interested in ...

Mod Note:
With respect, you were the one to bring up the politics with, "It has been done for a myriad other types of minority groups whether it be with NPCs or the artwork."

Please don't pretend otherwise.

More hyperbolic rhetoric, have fun.

If you want to be constructive in this discussion, you'll need to do better than bringing up a subject you should know would bring up controversy, and then dismiss everyone who mentions that thing that you brought up.

If you didn't want to have a discussion of how that analogy is relevant, you should not have made the analogy. Now, if you don't want to have that discussion, owning that you brought up an analogy you cannot defend is better than being dismissive about it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If the setting's identity is ruined by including a race very similar to ones already present in the world and present in several similar "generic fantasy" worlds, then the setting has failed to give itself a strong identity. Eberron was still Eberron after they added Dragonborn and Tieflings. Exandria would still be still Exandria if you chose to include Harengon. Saltmarsh is still Greyhawk after they added Tieflings in 5e. If your image of the identity of a setting is so restrictive that the option of adding Orcs as a possible race/monster in the same world as Goblins/Hobgoblins, then either the setting failed or you are too attached to the unimportant minutia of the setting and are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Again, not really an objective fact, and insulting to boot. People have different preferences, and "importance" is deeply subjective. I wouldn't want tieflings in a LOtR rpg, and I wouldn't want orcs in Dragonlance. If you do at your table, more power to you.