Considering the likes of the Silver Arm of Ergoth, artificers - as creators of magic items - seem a shoe-in for elves, humans and dwarves. Artillirists & the Steel Defender may need tweaking (the Defender being more a magic golem and less clockwork; the Artillirist I draw a blank on - Dragon magic maybe?) or have those options be limited to gnomes.
Yes, I suppose you could have Theros Ironfeld as an artificer.
During the period when the clerics where broken you might expect people to turn to alchemy for healing.
I think they may have existed in some DL sources, basically as non-Mr Nevermind gnomes
They were known as mad gnomes. You meet a non tinker gnome npc in one of the original modules.
Rock gnomes cover mad gnomes pretty well (and we can assume all PC gnomes are mad, by the Mt. Nevermind definition).
Probably a good idea to not refer to them as mad, even if it's meant as an inversion.
I'm curious if they will mention gully dwarves ever again in 5E. They were briefly mentioned in Tales from the Yawning Portal as a way to make Sunless Citadel take place in Krynn (replace kobolds with gully dwarves while not explaining what they were for those who might not know). Guessing they'll just leave them in the past without addressing them one way or the other, which is probably for the best.
If they really feel like they have to for continuity purposes, they should just have them be a cultural group composed of exiles and outcasts from the other dwarven nations (or the descendants thereof) like Tolkien's petty dwarves, with no impact on stats or anything else. It would simply be a backstory element for your hill or mountain dwarf PC, with perhaps the suggestion that some other dwarves have spread nasty rumours about them in the past or something.
Easy to explain/add-in if Artificer Gnomes are a thing.
Completely not what I expected (I expected them to say nothing one way or the other), but definitely gives me a little more hope they're going to treat the setting better.
No, even as far back as Dragonlance Adventures, it was mentioned that both traditional (Minoi) and Tinker (Gnomoi) exist in Ansalon, though the Minoi are fewer in number. Also, the Bilo Gnomes, a third group, exist in Taladas.
If I did a kender turned haregon I would want someone to take rabbit feed and make a breakfast cereal so i could keep 'handling it'
those were the two I was pushing as I was told I was killing the setting
My money was that WotC would choose the latter option and just shadow-ban non-traditional monsters and races, but I think the fact they have to replace halflings with kender gives them the out to mention some of the other classic omissions. So my guess is that SotDQ will detail the classic races, mention a few canonical non natives, and be silent on all the supplemental stuff and monsters.
The fact the DDB article mentions anything beyond here's a kender now makes me wonder just how much world lore will actually be in the adventure book. To me, Schneider made it sounds like some lore would be explored as the group encountered the situation where they might need to know something about it so I didn't expect much in the beginning about race for example. If the lore makes up a decent chunk of the book, then the Spelljammer 5E format might have made more sense to allow easier access to player facing information. We'll see I guess.
Don't get me wrong, I don't expect more info than what this article mentioned.
The good thing is that they don't have to use 64 pages for monsters. They already have draconian's in Fizbans Treasury of Dragons. Death Knight is in the MM now, and so on. Maybe they'll reprint Draconians here? not sure, but we won't get 64 pages of monsters. and that's fine by me.
