Dragonlance Dragonlance Shadow of the Dragon Queen shows up in the wild!

[Reynard]

Celestial warlock (along with Divine sorcerers) fits the ''returning gods'' theme of DL pretty spot on. They have less of an ''organized faith'' themes than the clerics, IMHO.

Goldmoon did not wear heavy armors, wading into melee with a mace and shield! A Celestial warlock with a boon of tome or talisman (the disks) would be a nice fit.

This underscores one of the problems with 5E: there is way too much baked in flavor in the classes. In reality, they are just toolkit packages of abilities and rules exceptions, but there is this layer of lore and aesthetic that you have to constantly scrape off if you want to, say, make a divine caster who has a direct line to god using the warlock. Given that, settings should come with specific subclasses for all the classes that reinforce the setting flavor, not force you to kludge together something that kind of makes sense if you squint with one eye.

 

[Velderan]

Butbutbut it doesn't tell my players orcs are banned! It tells them to play them as non-natives! Dragonlance is ruined!

I'm just surprised they went in the complete opposite direction and forever restricted player choices to whatever the tyrant DM decides to let them play. I hear the next OneD&D playtest document will consist of just 4 pregen characters that the DM will personally decide which player he will be kind enough to let them play. Heaven help you if you screw up roleplaying that character based on the extremely detailed backstory it comes with..

 

[Remathilis]

I'm just surprised they went in the complete opposite direction and forever restricted player choices to whatever the tyrant DM decides to let them play. I hear the next OneD&D playtest document will consist of just 4 pregen characters that the DM will personally decide which player he will be kind enough to let them play. Heaven help you if you screw up roleplaying that character based on the extremely detailed backstory it comes with..

Hyperbole aside, Dragonlance did not move the needle on WotC's stance on character options per setting:

Races may be limited, with an option to play non-natives with DM consent. Classes, feats and spells have not been restricted.

So far, Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Greyhawk (Saltmarsh), Spelljammer Wildmont, Strixhaven, and Ravenloft have not placed any restrictions on race. Dragonlance, Theros, and Ravnica have. Planescape certainly won't have restrictions due to its nature, and if past performances can predict future results, I wager some eventual Dark Sun book will remove some races but there will be nary a peep on removing classes. Steel your buttocks for when Athas allows paladins, warlocks and such.

 

[Morrus]

Anybody seen any Lord Soth stats yet?

 

[darjr]

Anybody seen any Lord Soth stats yet?

Not yet. Been asking and looking.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Or the mechanics of the feat could also be a way of representing a character with very little innate magical talent, but whose ambitious wizardly parents saw that he was exhaustively trained and taught and punished and disciplined and had the best remedial magic tutors etc etc since he was four years old, until he almost couldn't help learning a couple of spells, but who learned to loathe magic and the Orders in the process.

Different strokes for different folks I guess. I'd be much happier accepting something like this than, for instance, one of the zillion hexblade/paladin multiclass power builds that seem to be all over the internet.

Hmm - on the subject, what warlock patrons fit in Dragonlance? The Forestmaster could work for an archfey patron, and there's a few possible examples of undead patrons. But genies, celestials, great old ones etc aren't terribly Dragonlancey are they?

I've been trying to come up with ideas for that for a while. The Forestmaster sure. Powerful dragons? Lord Soth and similar top tier undead? Warlocks make a bit more sense for me in WotL-era Krynn than sorcerers, but there's not much in the setting already that makes sense as a patron.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, I could see it justified for a wild magic barbarian. The order might consider such a loose cannon safer inside the order. But it's more likely just a player trying to be contrary.

As for sorcerers, I would just treat them as wizards with slightly different mechanics in the Dragonlance setting. After all, when DL first came out, the class was "Magic User" and sorcerers fit that description!

Sorcerer fits the name, but not the class description (which clearly was for what we now call wizards).

 

[darjr]

Never mind, that looks like it isn't official. Still cool.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This underscores one of the problems with 5E: there is way too much baked in flavor in the classes. In reality, they are just toolkit packages of abilities and rules exceptions, but there is this layer of lore and aesthetic that you have to constantly scrape off if you want to, say, make a divine caster who has a direct line to god using the warlock. Given that, settings should come with specific subclasses for all the classes that reinforce the setting flavor, not force you to kludge together something that kind of makes sense if you squint with one eye.

If you don't put flavor in the PH, you're not going to catch the eye of new players. The flavorless PH I've seen some advocate for would not sell sufficiently IMO.

 

[Velderan]

Hyperbole aside, Dragonlance did not move the needle on WotC's stance on character options per setting:

Races may be limited, with an option to play non-natives with DM consent. Classes, feats and spells have not been restricted.

So far, Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Greyhawk (Saltmarsh), Spelljammer Wildmont, Strixhaven, and Ravenloft have not placed any restrictions on race. Dragonlance, Theros, and Ravnica have. Planescape certainly won't have restrictions due to its nature, and if past performances can predict future results, I wager some eventual Dark Sun book will remove some races but there will be nary a peep on removing classes. Steel your buttocks for when Athas allows paladins, warlocks and such.

90% of the locked thread arguments were hyperbole, mine was just a joke playing off of your joke. I agree 100% with what you said here though.