Dragonlance Dragonlance Adventure & Prelude Details Revealed

Over on DND Beyond Amy Dallen and Eugenio Vargas discuss the beginning of Shadow of ther Dragon Queen and provide some advice on running it.

Running a Session Zero for Dragonlance: Shadow of the Dragon Queen

When starting a new adventure, it's a good idea to get on the same page as your party. Here's how to run a session zero for the upcoming Dragonlance adv...

www.dndbeyond.com

This epic war story begins with an invitation to a friend's funeral and three optional prelude encounters that guide you into the world of Krynn. Amy Dallen is joined by Eugenio Vargas to share some details about how these opening preludes work and some advice on using them in your own D&D games.

There is also information on the three short 'prelude' adventures which introduce players to the world of Krynn:

• Eye in the Sky -- ideal for sorcerers, warlocks, wizards, or others seeking to become members of the Mages of High Sorcery.
• Broken Silence -- ideal for clerics, druids, paladins, and other characters with god-given powers.
• Scales of War -- ideal for any character and reveals the mysterious draconians.

The article discusses Session Zero for the campaign and outlines what to expect in a Dragonlance game -- war, death, refugees, and so on.

​

 

[Remathilis]

I dont agree that it is. I believe freedom of choice, free will, the ability and protection of those things, is Good.

So, what's your opinion of Alex in A Clockwork Orange?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think that's what has sat poorly with me about Dragonlance; it feels like such a small setting. They want you to be Knights of Solomnia, Wizards of High Sorcery, members of the Order of the Stars, etc to the point where there is little alternative besides that. I've never felt a setting so bound to its archetypes as strongly as Krynn, and I feel a little like "if you're not basing your character on one of the Heroes of the Lance, you're doing it wrong."

Did you ever read any of the 3e material? They do a great job, IMO, of showing you what you can do with the setting.

 

[Eubani]

So, what's your opinion of Alex in A Clockwork Orange?

Well um choices were made, as for good well um

 

[Scribe]

So, what's your opinion of Alex in A Clockwork Orange?

The character is portrayed as a sociopath who robs, rapes, and assaults innocent people for his own amusement. Intellectually, he knows that such behaviour is morally wrong, saying that "you can't have a society with everybody behaving in my manner of the night". He nevertheless professes to be puzzled by the motivations of those who wish to reform him and others like him, saying that he would never interfere with their desire to be good; he simply "goes to the other shop".

A firmly CE character.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

At the very least, there should be a non-trivial number of people in Krynn that view the return of the gods in a distinctly negative light - as in full-on Athar "the 'gods' aren't worthy of our worship".

This. Exactly this. Dragonlance needs a faction like the Athar from Planescape, the Blood of Vol from Eberron, or the Iconoclasts from Theros. There needs to be a faction in-world that points out "hey, our 'good' gods are pretty messed up. Maybe people shouldn't be worshipping them".

None of Dragonlance's gods deserve worship because of their role in the Cataclysm. Just like none of the Forgotten Realms' gods deserve worship because of the Wall of the Faithless. And if the Wall of the Faithless was problematic enough to be errata-ed out of 5e canon, then something similar should happen with Dragonlance. The label of "Good" on one-third of Dragonlance's pantheon is at best just a label made up in-setting (probably by the gods themselves), and at worst is the setting lying about Good Gods existing in the world.

 

[Eubani]

This. Exactly this. Dragonlance needs a faction like the Athar from Planescape, the Blood of Vol from Eberron, or the Iconoclasts from Theros. There needs to be a faction in-world that points out "hey, our 'good' gods are pretty messed up. Maybe people shouldn't be worshipping them".

None of Dragonlance's gods deserve worship because of their role in the Cataclysm. Just like none of the Forgotten Realms' gods deserve worship because of the Wall of the Faithless. And if the Wall of the Faithless was problematic enough to be errata-ed out of 5e canon, then something similar should happen with Dragonlance. The label of "Good" on one-third of Dragonlance's pantheon is at best just a label made up in-setting (probably by the gods themselves), and at worst is the setting lying about Good Gods existing in the world.

The whole population was angry and blaimed the gods and stopped worshipping them, centuries later forgot them largely.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The whole population was angry and blaimed the gods and stopped worshipping them, centuries later forgot them largely.

And that should not have been framed as a bad thing. And the people that decided to keep on not worshipping the "Good" Gods after their return should have been the good guys of the stories.

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

The whole population was angry and blaimed the gods and stopped worshipping them, centuries later forgot them largely.

Except, you know, the elves who lived through it and are still around to tell all the people rediscovering the gods of their forefathers exactly what went down and why they might ought to be skeptical of the gods' intentions.

 

[Eubani]

Except, you know, the elves who lived through it and are still around to tell all the people rediscovering the gods exactly what went down.

There is always exceptions, the Elves in this case largely kept to themselves. In fact the whole of Ansalon was insular and stand offish.

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

There is always exceptions, the Elves in this case largely kept to themselves.

Might even be some dwarves and gnomes too - I forget exactly how the lifespan charts play out. And if not, definitely some only a generation removed who would have learned all about it.

 

[Scribe]

And if the Wall of the Faithless was problematic enough to be errata-ed out of 5e canon, then something similar should happen with Dragonlance.

Yeah, but it wasnt problematic.

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

Yeah, but it wasnt problematic.

The Athar would disagree.

 

[Scribe]

The Athar would disagree.

Thats fine, disagreement, and things to disagree over, both in game, and out of game, is...largely the point.

If we didnt have those things, what a bland and boring experience the game must be.

 

[Remathilis]

A firmly CE character.

Right. So is taking away his free will and making him act in a moral way a good or bad act. If free will is always good, then taking away Alex's free will would be evil. But Alex is willfully evil, and thus stopping him and making him act moral is good...

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Except, you know, the elves who lived through it and are still around to tell all the people rediscovering the gods of their forefathers exactly what went down and why they might ought to be skeptical of the gods' intentions.

Were the Elves just as quick to accept the return of the "Good" Gods as the other races in the novels? Because, IMO, I feel like they would be an ideal candidate for Dragonlance's "antitheistic" faction. They're old enough to remember the Cataclysm. It's just logical that they would be more inclined to reject the gods that had a part in it.

 

[Eubani]

Were the Elves just as quick to accept the return of the "Good" Gods as the other races in the novels? Because, IMO, I feel like they would be an ideal candidate for Dragonlance's "antitheistic" faction. They're old enough to remember the Cataclysm. It's just logical that they would be more inclined to reject the gods that had a part in it.

The elves didn't stop worshipping them despite being put on block. Same with Dwarves an Reorx.

 

[Scribe]

Right. So is taking away his free will and making him act in a moral way a good or bad act. If free will is always good, then taking away Alex's free will would be evil. But Alex is willfully evil, and thus stopping him and making him act moral is good...

Wild...honestly.

You put him in prison. You do not remove free will. lol

I mean I play LE characters. A lot. Have for decades. I do so not because I believe its GOOD.

I mean are we honestly proposing that mass brainwashing, 'there is only One True Way' is the solution to lifes problems?

EDIT: I am honestly hoping I am misinterpreting your comment's and the logical conclusion here, because I dont believe what you are suggesting, is in any way shape or form GOOD, but is actually a line of thought that leads to the kind of authoritarian, big brother, 1984, DYSTOPIA that we are seemingly on track for.

Please, let me be wrong here.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Yeah, but it wasnt problematic.

Yes, it was. The fact that Good Gods tolerated/supported it was definitely problematic. Any god that is fine with it existing is evil.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

You put him in prison. You do not remove free will. lol

Taking away someone's agency to go and do what they want is removing their free will.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The elves didn't stop worshipping them despite being put on block. Same with Dwarves an Reorx.

Yeah, that seems dumb. IMO, if the Elves knew their role in the Cataclysm (and they should have at least suspected, if not known, due to the Gods leaving after the Cataclsym), they wouldn't/shouldn't have worshipped them.