Dragonlance Dragons of Fate Dragonlance Novel Cover Revealed

The cover and description of Dragons of Fate, Margaret Weis' and Tracy Hickman's second novel in the new Dragonlance novel trilogy have been revealed on Amazon, with a release date of August 1, 2023.

A courageous heroine trapped in the distant past is determined to return to her own time--without changing the shape of the world forever--as the New York Times bestselling Dragonlance series continues in the thrilling sequel to Dragons of Deceit.

A clash of powerful magical forces sets off the Graygem of Gargath, sending Destina and her companions deeper into the past than she intended--to the age of Huma Dragonsbane and the Third Dragon War. Now, after the Device of Time Journeying shatters, they must find another way back to their own era, before the Graygem alters history irrevocably and the Third Dragon War ends in defeat for the forces of good.

With the battle raging on, Destina tries desperately to make amends and prevent disaster. Raistlin and Sturm encounter their heroes, Huma and Magius, and must reconcile the myths with the men. Meanwhile, Tasslehoff--shocked that the Knights of Solamnia have never heard of dragonlances--sets out to find the famed weapons.

But as the forces of the Dark Queen close in on the High Clerist's Tower, Destina's party must return to their own timeline together--or not at all.

The first book in the trilogy, Dragons of Deceit, came out earlier this year.

 

[ECMO3]

Destina believed that because the same thinking that led to a knight objecting to Laurana leading them told her it wasn't possible. Characters believed incorrectly plain and simple,

DOD does not just say Destina "believes incorrectly" that female knights are not allowed. The book states that female knights are not allowed.

Uh.. no? Did you actually read the book because it clearly explains why Sturm was alive and alternate canon wasn't it. lol

Yes I did and it doesn't actually explain it explicitly. You are left with some things that probably explain why he is alive but it is not explicitly explained and things are both changed and unchanged.

Yep, I'm well aware they had to make changes at WotC's request. I can make an educated guess at what at least 2 of the storyline edits were that WotC would have likely asked for.

I don't know what the changes were or what the main issue preventing publishing was, but I suspect that the plotline that women could not become knights was the chief complaint by WOTC.

I suspect this because WOTC stated that the book would never be approved and that no changes could fix it, thereby triggering the lawsuit. I can't think of anything else in the book that would drive them to that conclusion.

I mentioned Gully Dwarves above and perhaps that is something WOTC asked them to remove as well, but I am not convinced of that and I think they might have removed that on their own before even writing the first draft. IMO the Gully Dwarf controversy is probably not the irreconcilable flaw in their book that led WOTC to want to shelve the entire project.

My belief is the lack of female knights was/is the irreconcilable element. I don't know that by I believe it.

Finally even if your theory is correct, I will point out that this admission of women would happen at the END of the War of the Lance and there are no restrictions on female knights in SODQ, when that happens at the BEGINING of the War of the Lance. I am in fact playing a Kender female Knight right now! The quote you mention, and subsequent admission to the knighthood, would have happened AFTER SODQ takes place. So as of right now there are two different WOTC cannons for Knights early in the war - one in SODQ and one in DOD.

 

[Velderan]

DOD does not just say Destina "believes incorrectly" that female knights are not allowed. The book states that female knights are not allowed.

Characters in my quote did not mean Destina. Characters meant a lot of people such as her father and others in leadership positions within the knighthood. Let me try this a different way, the prevailing belief by many in a position of authority at the time of Destina's story was that women could not be a knight because of their interpretation of the Measure. This did mean it was impossible. Interestingly we never are actually told exactly what the Measure says, at least not that I can think of. Much like how lawyers exist in modern days to argue what the words in a law actually say, it appears Solamnic "lawyers" argued something in it could be interpreted as forbidding it so it made the path forward that much harder at the start of the War of the Lance.

I don't know what the changes were or what the main issue preventing publishing was, but I suspect that the plotline that women could not become knights was the chief complaint by WOTC.

I couldn't even begin to speculate what triggered WotC to say they wouldn't be approving any more drafts going forward. My best guesses on 2 things that may have been put into the story at their request was:

Spoiler: Dragons of Deceit minor plot discussion

Destina being the daughter of mixed race parents to help promote diversity in the book. There's also the part where she was in Thorbardin on her way to try to retrieve the Graygem from the Theiwar. She commented on them being evil and the dwarf she was with pointed out how there are people in Solamnia that commit evil acts so don't think she comes from a perfect place and how the Theiwar are not all evil, just struggling to get by so their city was dangerous for that reason. I'm paraphrasing a bit, but basically it supports WotC's no race is entirely evil concept they've been trying to get through.

I can't imagine either of these were likely huge sticking points from either camp, so I'd be surprised if either of them were the cause of the lawsuit.

I mentioned Gully Dwarves above and perhaps that is something WOTC asked them to remove as well, but I am not convinced of that and I think they might have removed that on their own before even writing the first draft. IMO the Gully Dwarf controversy is probably not the irreconcilable flaw in their book that led WOTC to want to shelve the entire project.

It's possible WotC asked them to not include them, but the gully dwarves also didn't really fit into the story being told so they might have just not mentioned them because they didn't need to.

My belief is the lack of female knights was/is the irreconcilable element. I don't know that by I believe it.

And that's as good of a theory as any. I can appreciate you clarifying it's a belief and not an objective fact.

Finally even if your theory is correct, I will point out that this admission of women would happen at the END of the War of the Lance and there are no restrictions on female knights in SODQ, when that happens at the BEGINING of the War of the Lance. I am in fact playing a Kender female Knight right now! The quote you mention, and subsequent admission to the knighthood, would have happened AFTER SODQ takes place. So as of right now there are two different WOTC cannons for Knights early in the war - one in SODQ and one in DOD.

1e and 2e game material never mentioned females not being able to be knights at any point in time, so of course the 5e game material isn't going to mention something that was a plot point in a novel. Even if WotC wasn't trying to promote inclusivity, they simply weren't going to have that anyhow because it makes no sense to include that in a game.

 

[mamba]

as of right now there are two different WOTC cannons for Knights early in the war - one in SODQ and one in DOD.

In other words, WotC’s 5e DL adventure and everything else

I have no issue with women becoming knights, but you playing a Kender knight feels very wrong. A free-spirited Kender and a rigid knighthood are pretty much at polar opposites.

Obvioulsy you can play whatever you choose, but that to me is much more of a hurdle to clear than a female knight

 

[ECMO3]

In other words, WotC’s 5e DL adventure and everything else

I have no issue with women becoming knights, but you playing a Kender knight feels very wrong. A free-spirited Kender and a rigid knighthood are pretty much at polar opposites.

Obvioulsy you can play whatever you choose, but that to me is much more of a hurdle to clear than a female knight

Well it is not as whacked as it sounds. You can do a lot with backstory and without going into it here, I would argue she is not rigid, is a Knight and it makes sense thematically.

 

[Steel_Wind]

DOD does not just say Destina "believes incorrectly" that female knights are not allowed. The book states that female knights are not allowed.

I don't know what the changes were or what the main issue preventing publishing was, but I suspect that the plotline that women could not become knights was the chief complaint by WOTC.

I expect so as well. Meanwhile, WotC was finishing up its design on Shadow of the Dragon Queen where the main NPC in the first few chapters of SotDQ, Becklin, is a female Knight of the Crown before the War of the Lance has even spread to Solamnia.

It's an inconsistency between the rules, module, and the novel. shrug Yes, it probably was what touched off the termination of their license as some within WotC asked for a change that wasn't made and they got pissed off.

We'll never know for sure, not unless one of the parties tells us. It doesn't really matter. I just hope that SotDQ does well in the marketplace.

 

[AJCarrington]

For those interested, the artist is Philipp A. Urlich; he has posted this image on ArtStation. In his description, "The silver dragon is the official D&D 5e design originally by Todd Lockwood."

 

[LiquidSpin]

Man, this series has gotten weird.

Wait, weird? It’s all fantasy mixed with imaginary creatures and magic. Trust me the story is good and if you haven’t read the first novel yet I highly recommend.

 

[LiquidSpin]

For those interested, the artist is Philipp A. Urlich; he has posted this image on ArtStation. In his description, "The silver dragon is the official D&D 5e design originally by Todd Lockwood."

Thanks for sharing the link! Nice to see the cover art in a higher resolution. I love the background scenery, colors and silver dragon but for me the characters faces look too cartoony and what I mean by that: They look to be aimed to attract kids more than adults. Just my interpretation. The artist is amazing and incredible but I guess I’m just used to seeing Larry Elmore’s work over the years.

 

[Dire Bare]

For those interested, the artist is Philipp A. Urlich; he has posted this image on ArtStation. In his description, "The silver dragon is the official D&D 5e design originally by Todd Lockwood."

After looking through his gallery . . . Urlich is an amazing landscape painter! Absolutely gorgeous! His figures on the other hand, are lacking. For me, at least.

 

[Velderan]

After looking through his gallery . . . Urlich is an amazing landscape painter! Absolutely gorgeous! His figures on the other hand, are lacking. For me, at least.

Agreed, I really like the scenery in his art! I'm not a huge fan of how the people in his art looks but I also have no idea what parameters he's being given to work with.