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

[pukunui]

It isn't just that. There's a simple logic to it.

If we like what is happening, we don't need anyone to change anything. There is no particular need to speak on the matter.

If we don't like what is happening, then at minimum we have to let someone know if we want to see any change. There is an incentive to speak.

Yes, absolutely. I actually had a similar sentiment in my post, but I edited it out. Not too sure why.

 

[Umbran]

WotC asked for feedback. It's not INTERNET RAGE to give them that feedback.

Great. Though seeing as I didn't use the phrase "INTERNET RAGE", or anything similar to that, I am not sure why you are telling me.

This is literally a question WotC has provoked, intentionally, to see if something works. Telling them it doesn't work like that is valid, useful, and, indeed, part of what we should be doing as a community.

Then, by all means, tell it to THEM.

EN World is not a WotC subsidiary. This site does not constitute a reliable forum for giving feedback to WotC. They have their own channels for that. I highly recommend you use them.

If something sucks, we can say it sucks. Let people have their opinions on the thing people were asked their opinions on.

Yeah, Banana, that works both ways - you get to have an opinion, and I get to have an opinion on your opinion. And we can have opinions on opinions on opinions. It is opinions all the way down!

Moreover, this is an internet discussion site. If you want to write something, and not get responses that might differ from what you like, boy howdy did you come to the wrong place!

 

[Stormonu]

WotC asked for feedback. It's not INTERNET RAGE to give them that feedback.

This is literally a question WotC has provoked, intentionally, to see if something works. Telling them it doesn't work like that is valid, useful, and, indeed, part of what we should be doing as a community.

If something sucks, we can say it sucks. Let people have their opinions on the thing people were asked their opinions on.

And, IMO, it does suck. It's not what I want out of a purple dragon knight any more than "brutal, fiend-worshipping madmen" is what out I want out of a kender. Yeah, you probably can justify it in the lore, if you control the lore, but it's more about missing the opportunity for a cool kind of character that's already right there. Just, frickin', do the cool thing that it already is.

Sorry if that opinion hurts the feelings of a WotC designer or whatever, but they can also pick their battles, and they don't really have to pick this one.

I'd certainly be for a Dragonrider / Dragon Pet subclass.

But not at the mauling of an existing bit of lore.

If they explained that during the 100-year jump the Purple Knights had allied themselves with dragons (purple or otherwise) and had become Dragon Knights of some sort, I would probably be fine with it. But to just do it to flanderize the organization? Nah, not a fan. There's plenty of other folk on FR that would be chomping at the bit to have dragon companions that don't need to be tied to a specific organization.

Besides, this really seems something that would be more fitting to Dragonlance anyways.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Great. Though seeing as I didn't use the phrase "INTERNET RAGE", or anything similar to that, I am not sure why you are telling me.

"we give ourselves aneurisms" isn't exactly a fair understanding of what people who don't like this are doing, is it?

Then, by all means, tell it to THEM.

EN World is not a WotC subsidiary. This site does not constitute a reliable forum for giving feedback to WotC. They have their own channels for that. I highly recommend you use them.

"Don't talk about it here on the D&D discussion site, tell them directly instead" is a pretty weird thing to tell someone on this D&D discussion site.

Yeah, Banana, that works both ways - you get to have an opinion, and I get to have an opinion on your opinion. And we can have opinions on opinions on opinions. It is opinions all the way down!

Moreover, this is an internet discussion site. If you want to write something, and not get responses that might differ from what you like, boy howdy did you come to the wrong place!

Sorry, was I telling folks to pick their battles or telling them to use official channels only? I don't think I was.

Is this the battle that you want to pick? That folks shouldn't criticize this bit of D&D here on a D&D discussion site? Or would you agree that it's OK to criticize this bit of D&D here on this D&D discussion site and that folks are not unreasonable to do so?

 

[Henadic Theologian]

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

People Saud the same thing about a big proper Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book, yet here we are. It's always possible.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Exactly. Neither the new version of the subclass, nor the associated fiction, has been published yet. How can you claim the subclass isn't supported by new fiction when the book in which it will appear hasn't come out?

Until we get the context & lore, we can only go on historical lore.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

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.

And that is the problem, lore is deeply tied to this subclass with major changes and no context, they should have given us some context as to how a largely anti dragon military national military force became a global dragon force, that is a huge change with no explanation.

 

[Parmandur]

And that is the problem, lore is deeply tied to this subclass with major changes and no context, they should have given us some context as to how a largely anti dragon military national military force became a global dragon force, that is a huge change with no explanation.

No published explanation, yet. They were looking to see of people thought the dragon pet Fighter was cool. Hopefully it got good ratings, but we will find out.

 

[Will Brandiman]

Back in 3.x almost all my games were set in Cormyr and the surrounding areas, so my players and I were all very familiar with the lore of the Purple Dragons. This subclass doesn't feel like it was written by someone who knew anything about them. It feels more like they were handing out assignments at WotC and when someone said "Anyone want to do the Purple Dragon Knight?" the author thought it sounded cool and said yes.

I have nothing against a dragon-pet subclass, but we already have one of them. If they're going to update the Purple Dragon Knight however, I'd really prefer it if they didn't just try to ram new lore onto it just because the name sounds cool.

 

[Staffan]

IMO, RPG lore is flexible anyway. The lore isn't "real" until it hits my table. Before that, it's all malleable. That doesn't mean that a change to the lore can't be bad (e.g. if they should decide that all dragonmarked houses in Eberron are non-profit organizations that use their abilities for the general good of the world), but it's all in service of making a better game anyway and if you can change lore for that purpose, you should (see also: the latest edition of Deadlands retconning an end to the US civil war in 1871, while previous editions had it still ongoing in the then-current year of 1879).

Stealing the name of an order of knights for a different order of knights that ride on dragons? ¯\(ツ)/¯