Dragonlance DRAGONLANCE LIVES! Unearthed Arcana Explores Heroes of Krynn!

Enevhar Aldarion said:

Yep. I interpret her response to the UA as surprise, as I doubt she has any more clue that was coming than we did.

Click to expand...

Some surprise yea. And some excitement and some decidedly non agreement with.

darjr said:

Her post is open on Facebook. About fey kender her and Shivam go back and forth a bit about it.

Click to expand...

Link or summary, please.

Azzy said:

Link or summary, please.

Click to expand...

Ima at the gym so I hope someone gets it for me.

AcererakTriple6 said:

Okay. I have a serious question for you and everyone else that now for some reason hates this new version of Kender. I want a serious answer, because I cannot fathom the logic behind this position besides disliking change for the sake of not liking change.

How in the world is "Kender are magic creatures from the Feywild that get magical pockets to produce items" in any way inferior to "Kender are magically cursed creatures to be kleptomaniacs that are constantly pulling things out of their pockets that they have no idea how they acquired them"? If they were always magical before . . . why in the world are you complaining about them being magical now as if it were a new thing? They just got rid of the part that made people hate them (kleptomania) and gave an excuse for them existing in the rest of the D&D worlds if the DM wants to include them. They moved the magic from "magical curse" to "magical Feywild pockets".

So . . . care to elaborate here?

Click to expand...

Shows what you know about the lore.

For one, as anyone should, there should be lore consistency with D&D. And there hasn't been since after 3e. WotC doesn't need to shove core aspects of the generic game into every single world. I thought each setting was supposed to be different? How does force-feeding Feywild material onto a race that has had dozens of novels dedicated to portraying their origin and lifestyle a good thing people are supposed to just accept? I find it illogical to mess with what was never broken or wrong.

It's like someone taking your pepperoni pizza the way you like it and just pouring tobasco sauce all over it for no reason other than "It's what we believe will sell better to the new customers and not old customers like you."

They were magical in origin only, other than that they're not really fey and never had a connection to them. They're simply kleptos which explains why they had random items on them. Nothing magical about it. Nothing Fey about it. But now they're literally "pulling rabbits out of hats" is ridiculous and a travesty to the fans of the setting. Even the Taunt is supernatural!? Really? It's not because they've spent centuries perfecting the art instead?

What I can't fathom is the logic that WotC needs to rearrange the lore on things that don't need changes to begin with. I say 99% of the edition war issues is because of them creating divisiveness amongst the base by messing with things in D&D that shouldn't be messed with. Improved upon, yes. Retcon? No.

I'm no Dark Sun fan, but ask a Dark Sun fan how they would feel if their setting got Feywild material suddenly shoved in Athas by WotC if they ever brought it back.

TruDnDPre4e said:

But now they're literally "pulling rabbits out of hats" is ridiculous and a travesty to the fans of the setting. Even the Taunt is supernatural!? Really? It's not because they've spent centuries perfecting the art instead?

Click to expand...

I like 5e quite a bit - and have been playing it now for years - but I've become increasingly dissatisfied with the apparent underlying design principal that, "anything cool is magic, and all magic works the same way".

Okay, yes, like Strixhaven, this nominally includes feats-in-backgrounds and (short) feat chains.

But note that this is limited. In both Strixhaven and this, the "background feats" are weaker or more limited than normal feats, and the "chains" all start with "background feats". (Modulo "Divinely Favored", which sure looks like a "background feat" for a not-included backgound).

So, another way of analyzing them is "somewhat beefed-up background features, that you (maybe?) can later take in a feat slot to represent having acquired the background in play", and "feats that are limited to people of specific backgrounds" (the "chained" feats).

TruDnDPre4e said:

They were magical in origin only, other than that they're not really fey and never had a connection to them. They're simply kleptos which explains why they had random items on them. Nothing magical about it. Nothing Fey about it. But now they're literally "pulling rabbits out of hats" is ridiculous and a travesty to the fans of the setting.

Click to expand...

I'm mixed on the new rabbit/hat ability. On the one hand the klepto thing was 90% of what the jerks used to be jerks with Kender and is why many hate the race. On the other hand the magical bag trick thing doesn't really make sense for the race. Nor does the Kender being fey.

TruDnDPre4e said:

Even the Taunt is supernatural!? Really? It's not because they've spent centuries perfecting the art instead?

Click to expand...

This needed to be supernatural in the first place. There's literally nothing a Kender who hasn't met me could say that would enrage me, and next to nothing one that knew me could say to enrage me. It was a nonsensical ability as originally written. As a magical taunt, though, it could work. I like this change.

What I strongly dislike is the loss of the Kender immunity to fear that is a core part of the Kender race. Kender aren't Halflings and the Halfling bravery ability utterly fails to suffice.

see said:

Okay, yes, like Strixhaven, this nominally includes feats-in-backgrounds and (short) feat chains.

But note that this is limited. In both Strixhaven and this, the "background feats" are weaker or more limited than normal feats, and the "chains" all start with "background feats". (Modulo "Divinely Favored", which sure looks like a "background feat" for a not-included backgound).

So, another way of analyzing them is "somewhat beefed-up background features, that you (maybe?) can later take in a feat slot to represent having acquired the background in play", and "feats that are limited to people of specific backgrounds" (the "chained" feats).

Click to expand...

No, the Strixhaven background Feats are variations of Magical initiate that are power equivalent, even with some bumpers on what options are open. Not weaker in any way.

Parmandur said:

No, the Strixhaven background Feats are variations of Magical initiate that are power equivalent, even with some bumpers on what options are open.

Click to expand...

Okay I was pretty sure the sentence I wrote included the words "or more limited". Looking at both my post above and your quote of it, I indeed read the words "or more limited".

So, now I just have to wonder, in what world are restrictions "on what options are open" not limitations?