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

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I don't care about Batman or Superman, please stay on topic. Now I understand why your table ended up arguing so much in your superhero game.

you said I don't understand what a retcon is. I just explained it

 

[Velderan]

you said I don't understand what a retcon is. I just explained it

From reading your other post, you don't seem to have a full understanding of it then. TSR not mentioning the word "orc" once in a product and not specifically saying PCs can make anything in the 1E PHB when they said players can bring their own characters if they want and then later on in a future product by the same authors adding additional language that does not contradict previously written lore is not a retcon, period. Saying Tanis was actually a drow is a retcon.

Most likely, there will be some retconning in SotDQ. Soth's involvement will likely require some level of retconning for example.

 

[Xamnam]

Retcon doesn't necessarily imply contradiction. It can, it's frequent, but as I myself just learned, not inherent.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

From reading your other post, you don't seem to have a full understanding of it then. TSR not mentioning the word "orc" once in a product and not specifically saying PCs can make anything in the 1E PHB when they said players can bring their own characters if they want and then later on in a future product by the same authors adding additional language that does not contradict previously written lore is not a retcon, period. Saying Tanis was actually a drow is a retcon.

Most likely, there will be some retconning in SotDQ. Soth's involvement will likely require some level of retconning for example.

You don't understand retcon is anything added that effects the past.

Saying no orcs after 2 years of allowing 1/2 orcs is a retcon

 

[DarkCrisis]

again, this means for 2 years we(the entire community) played DL without worrying if someone played a half orc... but now it's aHUGE deal if someone plays one.

and I am going to take a more modern look and the creators of Krynn are not in any way part of this reimagining. Your argument is good for someone who wants to use the DLA book from 1e, but doesn't hold water for someone useing the original adventures+PHB, or the modern PHB+ adventure... now COULD wotc say "no orcs" sure but I dubt they will unless they feel there is a reason.

how is PHB+ 1st adventure nothing else NOT back to basics?

Like I said if you want go by the 1st module ONLY which says nothing about Orcs (and half-orcs) one way or the other (and none appear in it) and disregard what the novel shows months later not to mention what Weis/Hickman have to say. Then sure.

Seems more like its taking it back to "D&D Basic" but not "Dragonlance Basic". Which really at that point, the world your playing in doesn't really matter. I mean take out the mention of "Steel Pieces" and there ya go...

Heck if you dont use the pre gened Heroes of the Lance then you can throw out Knights of Solomnia andThe Towers of High Sorcery, (and Kender over Halflings) as that background info had no baring on module 1 at all and only gets mentioned as background info for the characters.

 

[DarkCrisis]

You don't understand retcon is anything added that effects the past.

Saying no orcs after 2 years of allowing 1/2 orcs is a retcon

Where are you getting 2 years? Are you saying with the release of AD&D? Between DL Module 1 and the DL novel is 7 months. Then a few years until the source book

 

[mamba]

then why was that information withheld form DMs for 2 years? It seems like restricting a phb option should be a high priority in a new adventure.

I cannot answer that, but the decision to not have orcs and have draconians fill in instead was most likely made in 1982. That certainly is when draconians were part of the original pitch (which is the closest I came to finding anything about 'no orcs')

https://trhickman.com/dragonlance-selling-dream/

https://trhickman.com/dragonlance-legacy-proposal/

 

[mamba]

so for 2 years they just assumed no player lost a character and made a new one, that no one made a character using the PHB that has a portion of the rules needed to run the adventure, and that no one had inserted there own adventurers

Maybe, maybe someone did play a half-orc in DL in 1986. Does that make orcs or half-orcs canon ? No, it definitely does not.

Canon is what is explicitly included, not what is not explicitly excluded (in the first year publications at that), otherwise Superman is also DL canon.

 

[Micah Sweet]

now show ANY difference between orcs are off screen and orcs don't exist. I can show that in Dark Sun, I can show that with Time Lords in Star Trek, but not Wokkies in Star Trek. The why of "someone who is no longer part of the company said it cause he wanted it" is no better then "the DM said it cause he wanted it"

You don't think the creators of a setting hold any weight? Keith Baker isn't important to Eberron? Ed Greenwood and the Realms? Is it just who legally holds the IPt o you?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm sorry but no. They did not. There is nothing to show that they would not have had orcs had one of the players sat down and said "I am playing a half orc assassin out of the PHB" the first time it comes up is 2 years later. it is a retcon

If it doesn't change history, it's not a retcon.