D&D (2024) Wargamer Takes Shot At WotC for Not Respecting Forgotten Realms Canon.

[mellored]

Don't get me wrong, I want a full warlord class. But we will never get it.

I posted this in the original thread but best I think might happen...

New background
Purple Dragon Knight:
Ability Scores: Str / Int / Cha
Skills: Persuasion, History
Tools: ??
New Origin Feat: Gain Commander's Strike from the Battle Master. You can use it at-will, but the Superiority Die is 0.

Dragon Rider:
-same as current UA, but allow different dragon types

Banneret: something like...
3:
-Help as a bonus action
-Second Wind adds THP to other's
7:
-Tactical Shift to other's
-Help can replace an attack.
10:
-Give Indomitable to other's.
-Help can debuff saving throw.
15:
-Give Action Surge to others.
18:
-All allies gain 1 HP, 40THP, and can stand. Once per long rest.

 

[TheSword]

I really like Cormyr and the novels that detailed it. I’m a massive Forgotten Realms fan.

But I have zero problem with this change. I see nothing that would stop the senior purple dragon knights (which this class represents - it isn’t all purple dragons) from making an alliance with a gem dragon. They’re not fanatics - like all knights they’ve just slain a few dragons over the centuries.

 

[Jensaarai]

It's honestly kinda misinformative to present this as if wargamer.com, and game journalists in a more general sense, are protesting what WotC did with the PDK...

 

[pukunui]

I don't think that is my quote. I don't think I said that.

You are correct. It was @Valetudo who said that (in post #64). The quote attribution has somehow gotten messed up in @Mistwell's post.

 

[pemerton]

The details on Cormyr and what may have happened with the Purple Dragon Knights are coming in the Fall campaign book: not sure why anyone would assume there won't be an explanation for the new dragon riders there. But it wasn't part of the mechanics playtest packet.

Sure. But the playtest packet has a bit of fiction - namely, that these Purple Dragon Knights ride dragons.

That's why I find it so odd for someone to say that the existence of a class of sub-class does not change the fiction.

 

[Deadstop]

If Cormyr is not updated then the fiction has not changed. The existance of a class or subclass does not change the fiction.

But … if the subclass is supposed to represent the Purple Dragon Knights of Cormyr, then the subclass does constitute an update to their lore, even if we might desire further explanation.

If the subclass represents a whole other group of people who ride amethyst dragons and also call themselves Purple Dragon Knights, then the canon of the Cormyrian group is unblemished.

“The people publishing the canonical lore described the Purple Dragon Knights of Cormyr differently in a subclass, but failed to update PDKoC lore” is not an option.

 

[Mistwell]

I don't think that is my quote. I don't think I said that.

I don't know what happened with the quote function. It's an exact quote but looks like it's attributable to someone else, though embedded in a quote with your name, which is weird. Sorry about that

 

[pemerton]

But … if the subclass is supposed to represent the Purple Dragon Knights of Cormyr, then the subclass does constitute an update to their lore, even if we might desire further explanation.

If the subclass represents a whole other group of people who ride amethyst dragons and also call themselves Purple Dragon Knights, then the canon of the Cormyrian group is unblemished.

“The people publishing the canonical lore described the Purple Dragon Knights of Cormyr differently in a subclass, but failed to update PDKoC lore” is not an option.

100% this, as per my two posts to the same effect not far upthread.

 

[Zardnaar]

Wasn't the Cormyr purple dragon a black one with purple tinge?

 

[MGibster]

Lore developments are not disrespectful of canon. Just because the purple dragon knights haven’t been known for taming dragons before, doesn’t mean they can’t gain a reputation for doing so. That’s how linear chronology works.

You make it really difficult to have an unreasonable conversation when you insist on being reasonable. I can't help but agree with you. As the years roll on by people and organizations change. Imagine William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke and arguably one of the greatest knights the British ever had, suddenly arriving in the 21st century. What do you think he'd make of Sirs Richard Branson and Patrick Stewart? Do these guys even know how to ride into battle or slay a dragon? (I assume medieval knights slew dragons.)

While I expect WotC to respect lore, it would be unreasonable on my part to expect settings to remain unchanged. There were no Dragonborn when the Forgotten Realms made it debut but I don't see a problem with adding them. I don't even see a problem with WotC just pretending the Dragonborn were always there.

But what do I know? I'm practically a heretic. Most all D&D settings play exactly the same to me. The Forgotten Realms might as well be Greyhawk as far as I'm concerned. Take that, lore lovers!