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

 

[Xamnam]

throwing a fit about it before the book even comes out to verify if they're in it is immature and shows the worst signs of grognardism

I don't think that's a kind or fair characterization of the people on the other side.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Again, they're doing what they're doing because they think it will make them the most money. I've seen nothing that indicates otherwise.

They're a company in a capitalistic socioeconomic system. Making money is always priority number one. If they don't make enough money, the game goes bankrupt and/or a new edition starts. And they've recently figured out, smartly, that making the most people happy makes the game more profitable. Which is good for the company (because money) and good for the hobby (because more people are happy).

I cut my teeth on 2e settings, which are pretty much as you described. That is what I want, from settings. A coherent story that doesn't get re-written based on the weather vane of what's hot right now. Clearly they were popular enough that WotC is trading on their nostalgia now.

I see no evidence that those settings were popular because of the metaplots. In fact, I've a ton of people complain that multiple 2e settings (Planescape, Dark Sun) were ruined by the metaplots. Even "good" D&D metaplots are bad because they make the setting harder to learn (especially for newer DMs and players) and the nature of metaplots introduces the possibility of the setting being ruined.

I'll also note that there are plenty of licensed games out there that people enjoy without feeling they need to re-write the setting. No one (including Paramount) is demanding that the writers of Star Trek Adventures re-write the history of the franchise to conform to some new "standard".

I'm not familiar with Star Trek (I know, what kind of a nerd am I?). Settings should be designed for roleplaying games in mind. Not to be interactive fanfiction. (Not that liking interactive fanfiction is wrong . . . it's just wrong for D&D.)

As an aside, I can't think of any D&D setting that hasn't gone through some major upheaval since it was published (well, maybe not Birthright) - FR (Time of Troubles, Spellplague), Dragonlance (War of Souls, whatever SAGA was inspired by), Dark Sun (death of the Dragon), Ravenloft (Grand Conjuction), Greyhawk (Greyhawk Wars).

Star Trek is also a very bad example considering the "Kelvin universe". And they're about to release a Discovery supplement, which is very controversial with its retcons among Star Trek fans (yeah, I'm one).

Eberron.

Eberron has novels. But they're not canon. There is no metaplot in Eberron. Things have changed a bit (mainly in 4e, but 5e reversed most of those changes), but 5e Eberron has not advanced the metaplot of 3.5e Eberron because there is no metaplot.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They're a company in a capitalistic socioeconomic system. Making money is always priority number one. If they don't make enough money, the game goes bankrupt and/or a new edition starts. And they've recently figured out, smartly, that making the most people happy makes the game more profitable. Which is good for the company (because money) and good for the hobby (because more people are happy).

I see no evidence that those settings were popular because of the metaplots. In fact, I've a ton of people complain that multiple 2e settings (Planescape, Dark Sun) were ruined by the metaplots. Even "good" D&D metaplots are bad because they make the setting harder to learn (especially for newer DMs and players) and the nature of metaplots introduces the possibility of the setting being ruined.

I'm not familiar with Star Trek (I know, what kind of a nerd am I?). Settings should be designed for roleplaying games in mind. Not to be interactive fanfiction. (Not that liking interactive fanfiction is wrong . . . it's just wrong for D&D.)

Eberron.

Eberron has novels. But they're not canon. There is no metaplot in Eberron. Things have changed a bit (mainly in 4e, but 5e reversed most of those changes), but 5e Eberron has not advanced the metaplot of 3.5e Eberron because there is no metaplot.

Eberron doesn't have a story. It has a state of affairs that pretty much never changes.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I don't think that's a kind or fair characterization of the people on the other side.

I think that the fact that people have made a big deal about the possibility of Orcs being added since (spends a few minutes looking) page 4 confirms my view.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think that the fact that people have made a big deal about the possibility of Orcs being added since (spends a few minutes looking) page 4 confirms my view.

It certainly confirms that there are people who care about this stuff, or at least understand those who do.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Eberron doesn't have a story. It has a state of affairs that pretty much never changes.

Because it gives you the tools to make the story at your table. Because this is a roleplaying game and you're supposed to use your imagination to make a collective story with your table.

And it has novels. And tons of backstories/histories to the world and its characters that can and do inspire characters.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

It certainly confirms that there are people who care about this stuff, or at least understand those who do.

It also confirms that some fans of the original books/setting care more about complaining about how modern D&D might change things than actually waiting until the book comes out to complain about it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because it gives you the tools to make the story at your table. Because this is a roleplaying game and you're supposed to use your imagination to make a collective story with your table.

And it has novels. And tons of backstories/histories to the world and its characters that can and do inspire characters.

Part of the design of the 2e settings was to have a story that changes over time. If you prefer a setting where that isn't the case, like Eberron, that's great. Play that setting, or one of your own, or even Dragonlance with whatever changes you want to make at your table. But there is no reason to force the old settings to conform to that standard that isn't financially motivated.

 

[ersatzphil]

jokes aside (see above) the difference is the DM can give a reason other then "Cause the guy that wrote it said so" or "Cause I said so"

I run games with limits ALL THE TIME. I take whole classes and races and throw them away for a campaign here or there... I once ran Human only Martial only with the caveats of using the middle earth book to round out the classes and allowing half elf half orc teifling and dragonborn STATS as '___ touched' but they looked were raised and had the life span more or less of a human.

You know what seperates what I did and this no orc rule? I can give a reason other then 'cause I said so'

I dunno - at the end of the day, I don't know what separates "Krynn doesn't have any orcs in it" from "Hey gang, I have some ideas for a 'Thieves Guild' campaign, make some criminal characters". If I'm planning a game where you're expected to commit crimes left and right, a rogue of whatever stripe would be a good fit, but why not play a wizard fallen on hard times with the 'criminal' background? Why not play a fighter with the 'orphan' background who works as an enforcer for the criminal enterprise?
However, if I'm planning that campaign, a 'monastic paladin' character might not be a great fit for the game. That character might be both awesome and fun to play, but not every character is a right fit for every campaign. To be completely honest, given that 5e has 140+ races in it (I stopped counting when Van Richtens came out), I don't know that excluding one or two races from a setting is really that big of a deal.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Part of the design of the 2e settings was to have a story that changes over time.

Which ruined a lot of settings that were originally good.

If you prefer a setting where that isn't the case, like Eberron, that's great. Play that setting, or one of your own, or even Dragonlance with whatever changes you want to make at your table. But there is no reason to force the old settings to conform to that standard that isn't financially motivated.

No, there is. Because metaplots are bad for D&D. They make it harder for new players to get into the setting and introduce the risk of the original concept of the setting being completely destroyed.

5e's current way of doing things is more user-friendly and makes continuity easier. The Death Curse only exists if the PCs are playing Tomb of Annihilation. Elturel being sucked into the Nine Hells only happens if the PCs are playing Descent into Avernus. Auril is freezing Icewind Dale only if the PCs are playing Rime of the Frostmaiden. The players don't have to keep track of all of the different calamities ravaging Toril, they just have to keep track of the one important to their adventure. 5e actually works because it doesn't have a metaplot (I'm ignoring the Second Sundering, because it was the edition transition of 4e to 5e).