D&D 5E Do you like or dislike Song & Steeal Dragons being demoted to Folklore?

[Urriak Uruk]

They don't need to though - companies simply don't inherit that stuff. Look at the issue of Disney not paying royalties to writers (most notably Alan Dean Foster) who have written for franchises Disney later bought. I believe they eventually accepted a moral responsibility, but legally, Disney was right - the company that owes you money does not exist.

I don't entirely disagree, but I believe it's a little less black-and-white than that. I believe Disney is suing Steve Ditko's family and others for trying to get copyrights (that I assume would be legally predating Disney's ownership) so there's some debate on whether new ownership means a blank slate of responsibilities.

 

[LordEntrails]

Except no they had different physiology, like different breath weapons and other stuff.

To me, not meaningfully different. Like @Urriak Uruk said, just changing the breath weapon damage type is .. something any DM can do without flinching or even thinking about it. Now, if they had completely new capabilities, then they might add value. But again, they are the same as a other dragons, they just chose to live in disguise among the races. i.e. they are silver/bronze dragons that don't live in caves and that doesn't require a new stat block or write up.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

To me, not meaningfully different. Like @Urriak Uruk said, just changing the breath weapon damage type is .. something any DM can do without flinching or even thinking about it. Now, if they had completely new capabilities, then they might add value. But again, they are the same as a other dragons, they just chose to live in disguise among the races. i.e. they are silver/bronze dragons that don't live in caves and that doesn't require a new stat block or write up.

Which an unneeded retcon. Look if they had nothing useful to add they should have just not have the side bar in the book.

 

[Maxperson]

TSR is defunct, WotC has no legal obligation to inherit that deal.

WotC acquired TSR and when you buy a company, you also buy its contractual obligations.

 

[Quickleaf]

Well, I've actually listed to a Lore Your Should Know with Chris Perkins, and I remember him saying how he personally believed (at that time) previous editions went hog-wild with too many dragon types. I remember him even saying that he thought gem dragons were excessive, as he didn't like the idea that every alignment had to have its own dragon type.

So there was probably some internal tension at the D&D Team as to how many dragons should be statted before it started to look redundant and bloated. And although Song/Steel dragons may feel unique from a lore perspective, I don't see why they would be so special from a statistics perspective, so I'm not really surprised they didn't make it.

Yeah, I imagine there were some animated discussions about what to include.

However, my point was not that “steel dragons needs stats”, but rather that the sidebar in Fizban’s is anemic lore-wise & a better approach would be, if you’re going to do a retcon, at least do it well. And by “welI” mean some more in-depth lore building around what being a metallic “steel dragon” means in terms of the DM’s adventure backstory and giving the DM ideas for how to role play such as dragon.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

However, my point was not that “steel dragons needs stats”, but rather that the sidebar in Fizban’s is anemic lore-wise & a better approach would be, if you’re going to do a retcon, at least do it well. And by “we’ll” I mean some more in-depth lore building around what being a metallic “steel dragon” means in terms of the DM’s adventure backstory and giving the DM ideas for how to role play such as dragon.

I prefer this type of "door-open-a-jar" type of lore, that leaves open various interpretations. I especially prefer it for games like D&D or Warhammer, as it allows players to use it differently to customize their own games.

I get some folks want more precise definitions and backstory, but when you overexplain lore, I find it less interesting. I can add a level of mysticism much more easily when it is kept vague like this.

 

[Quickleaf]

I prefer this type of "door-open-a-jar" type of lore, that leaves open various interpretations. I especially prefer it for games like D&D or Warhammer, as it allows players to use it differently to customize their own games.

I get some folks want more precise definitions and backstory, but when you overexplain lore, I find it less interesting. I can add a level of mysticism much more easily when it is kept vague like this.

Agree to disagree If I want vague but evocative I’ll tune into Dael Kingsmill’s videos.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Yeah, I imagine there were some animated discussions about what to include.

However, my point was not that “steel dragons needs stats”, but rather that the sidebar in Fizban’s is anemic lore-wise & a better approach would be, if you’re going to do a retcon, at least do it well. And by “welI” mean some more in-depth lore building around what being a metallic “steel dragon” means in terms of the DM’s adventure backstory and giving the DM ideas for how to role play such as dragon.

It would have been better to not do it at all. This sidebar adds nothing positive to the game at all and angers people.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

A template isn't redundant. A lore is the bed Rick the game is made from.

No, the rules are the bed Rick of the game. The lore is just window dressing.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

It is extremely funny that a majority of folks (myself included) bothered to vote in a poll to say "meh, who cares."