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.

Screenshot 2022-11-11 at 11.27.17 AM.png


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.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

Eubani

Hero
A cataclysm that had Paladine opposing it would be a lot more palatable for many because if the God of Good is opposing it then it must be evil. If walking away from mortals gives them a chance at life without evil gods interfering, that is more tolerable than just heaping more punishment on after the cataclysm. It can be spun in a way that Paladine had faith in mortals that they can continue on and grow without the gods guidance.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Micah Sweet

Legend
A cataclysm that had Paladine opposing it would be a lot more palatable for many because if the God of Good is opposing it then it must be evil. If walking away from mortals gives them a chance at life without evil gods interfering, that is more tolerable than just heaping more punishment on after the cataclysm. It can be spun in a way that Paladine had faith in mortals that they can continue on and grow without the gods guidance.
That...is a different story.
 

Tales and Chronicles

Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix
A cataclysm that had Paladine opposing it would be a lot more palatable for many because if the God of Good is opposing it then it must be evil. If walking away from mortals gives them a chance at life without evil gods interfering, that is more tolerable than just heaping more punishment on after the cataclysm. It can be spun in a way that Paladine had faith in mortals that they can continue on and grow without the gods guidance.
In my head canon, the whole Balance thing for the gods is not about morality, its about general non-interference in mortal affairs. That's why they went with vague signs to warn the Priest-King instead of just showing as an avatar.

The Cataclysm itself wasnt sent by the gods, its when the Priest-King, deprived from his divine power turned to arcane magic, trying to find a loophole to use arcane to gain its divine powers back by....bringing in a fourth moon, Majora's Mask style and becoming the new god of magic. In his hubris, he received his moon right in the face :p
 

Scribe

Legend
A cataclysm that had Paladine opposing it would be a lot more palatable for many because if the God of Good is opposing it then it must be evil. If walking away from mortals gives them a chance at life without evil gods interfering, that is more tolerable than just heaping more punishment on after the cataclysm. It can be spun in a way that Paladine had faith in mortals that they can continue on and grow without the gods guidance.

Thats not Dragonlance.

If Paladine opposed the cataclysm, he would be allowing for the essential "1984"-ing of the population. Removal of Free Will, is the domain of Takhisis, head of the Gods of Evil.
 


Eubani

Hero
Thats not Dragonlance.

If Paladine opposed the cataclysm, he would be allowing for the essential "1984"-ing of the population. Removal of Free Will, is the domain of Takhisis, head of the Gods of Evil.
I am assuming that Paladine attempted to convince god and mortal alike to change course but failed. No removal of free will required just a more sensible approach like omens and messages that make sense and to the right people. Keep in mind the Cataclysm was largely a consensus of the gods where the gods of evil, neutrality and few edge case good gods outvoted Paladine who could not convince the other gods to take another course.
 


Getting what you want at all is, IMO, more important than getting it from WotC, who are in any case no better than any other publisher. Once I saw Ravenloft 5e, as disappointed as I was by it, I never expected WotC to make a version I liked better at some point in the future. I hoped DMsGuild would, and they certainly delivered.

You do you, I suppose. I don't understand it, but I don't have to.
The official version sets the baseline - from that I can incorporate whatever I want to include as I see fit.

But if the baseline doesn't work for me, I have to change it to make it usable, and then also change anything extra I want to incorporate that was designed with the official version in mind so as to be compatible with my customized version. The more work needed to fix the baseline, the more work needed to fix everything else. If the custom "remix" I ultimately end up with dramatically changes the Mages of High Sorcery, then a big, fancy, third-party sourcebook on the Mages of High Sorcery doesn't do me much good, does it?

At a certain point, the effort necessary to salvage Dragonlance becomes more than the setting is worth to me, and it will simply be rendered down into scrap to be repurposed elsewhere. Which is a shame, because again, there's a lot I actually like about it.

All I want is for the baseline Dragonlance setting to be usable for me. I can take it from there. But if I have to rebuild the setting from scratch, then it's not worth the effort.
 
Last edited:



Steel_Wind

Legend
I am quite unable to recognize the validity of a disconnect where many posters here seem unable to change a published setting so that it fits their view of what they would prefer to run.

You can just change it, right? There's no debate, no lobbying, no hand wringing or pearl clutching involved. You are the DM. You just change it so it's what you prefer. POOF

How is this controversial?

It seems that there are WAY more posters on ENWorld more engaged and invested in complaining about what they don't like -- and not enough just shrugging and changing stuff so that they do like it.

I'm mystified about this, tbh. At this point? This is persuasive evidence that there are many here who don't really want to run it -- they just prefer to complain on ENWorld or Reddit or what have you. I can't take this sort of grumbling seriously.
 

Scribe

Legend
It seems that there are WAY more posters on ENWorld more engaged and invested in complaining about what they don't like -- and not enough just shrugging and changing stuff so that they do like it.

I'm not sure this is it. I mentioned this in respect to a few posters here, but I think we probably agree on more than we disagree, but the discussion between a few details, the debate and trying to at least understand the perspective of the other, is how/why forums provide value.

To me. :)
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
I am quite unable to recognize the validity of a disconnect where many posters here seem unable to change a published setting so that it fits their view of what they would prefer to run.

You can just change it, right? There's no debate, no lobbying, no hand wringing or pearl clutching involved. You are the DM. You just change it so it's what you prefer. POOF

How is this controversial?

It seems that there are WAY more posters on ENWorld more engaged and invested in complaining about what they don't like -- and not enough just shrugging and changing stuff so that they do like it.

I'm mystified about this, tbh. At this point? This is persuasive evidence that there are many here who don't really want to run it -- they just prefer to complain on ENWorld or Reddit or what have you. I can't take this sort of grumbling seriously.
Okay, hold on a second. I think something needs to be established before we go any further here.

This is criticism.

The fact that, in terms of the game aspects can be changed has no bearing on critique of the work as presented.
 

Steel_Wind

Legend
Okay, hold on a second. I think something needs to be established before we go any further here.

This is criticism.

The fact that, in terms of the game aspects can be changed has no bearing on critique of the work as presented.
And I think -- by page 59 of this thread -- something else needs to be established:

This stopped being "criticism" 35+ pages ago.

There is a difference between criticisim and endlessly complaining for the sake of doing so. You are discussing a newly published game world with a lengthy history in both novels and setting/modules that goes back 38 years.

It's like complaining about a 2x4 length of lumber for being 3 inches too long, no matter how you try to fit it into the frame!

Voo-bah, Voo-bah, Voo-bah...thud

Just make the adjustments and you are good to go. Except a thread discussing a game product isn't about the game product anymore or about using the game product -- it's about complaining about the premise of the game product, endlessly.

That's my take-away from all of this. And if you don't see that many others might see it the same way? You are too close.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Okay, hold on a second. I think something needs to be established before we go any further here.

This is criticism.

The fact that, in terms of the game aspects can be changed has no bearing on critique of the work as presented.
It's also the lore equivalent of the Oberoni Fallacy. "It doesn't matter if the lore is bad, because you can change it!"

No, it matters. Especially when the improvements are quite small and would greatly improve the quality of the setting.
 


Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Thats not Dragonlance.
That...is a different story.
But it's better. I don't really care if it's not Dragonlance to you. If "good gods drop mountains on innocent people and abandon the world in its time of need" is essential to the identity of Dragonlance, maybe it needs to stop being "Dragonlance" for this particular part of its lore.
If Paladine opposed the cataclysm, he would be allowing for the essential "1984"-ing of the population. Removal of Free Will, is the domain of Takhisis, head of the Gods of Evil.
Killing people is removing their free will. In fact, in the real world, it's the ultimate form of removing someone's free will. If he took a part in dropping a mountain on a city, then he already did a ton of "Free Will removal".
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Especially when the changes you want are quite small, and would greatly improve the quality of the setting for you personally.

It needs to be understood, that there is no One True Way here.
No. It would make the story better. Not just something I would prefer. If I were altering Dragonlance to be something I'd prefer, my changes would be far more extensive. What I like and what I think is a better story are different things. Changing the Cataclysm makes it a better story. This isn't a "that's just your opinion, man" moment. This is an aspect of the setting that has problems and would benefit from being changed.

Dragonlance is flawed. Every D&D setting is. There are changes that would make it objectively better. The same applies to every setting.
 

Scribe

Legend
Killing people is removing their free will. In fact, in the real world, it's the ultimate form of removing someone's free will. If he took a part in dropping a mountain on a city, then he already did a ton of "Free Will removal".

Free will, within the context of DL, is freedom to choose. It is not freedom from consequence, it is not freedom from Old Testament style judgment.

Freedom to choose, is Good. Its probably one of the most basic 'Goods' in existence. Takhisis doesnt want choice, she wants obedience and worship. The Priesthood of Istar had resorted to Thought Police, this was discussed several pages/days ago. They had, by all accounts become Evil, but were also trying to WIPE OUT Evil.

They were warned. They lost their powers. They kept going. Messages went unheeded. The true faithful were brought up, and as discussed to the very end here, the 'flood event' happens.

This should all make sense to, not AGREEABLE, but at least be understood from a certain theological world view.

No. It would make the story better. Not just something I would prefer. If I were altering Dragonlance to be something I'd prefer, my changes would be far more extensive. What I like and what I think is a better story are different things. Changing the Cataclysm makes it a better story. This isn't a "that's just your opinion, man" moment. This is an aspect of the setting that has problems and would benefit from being changed.

Dragonlance is flawed. Every D&D setting is. There are changes that would make it objectively better. The same applies to every setting.

Nah, it literally is a "just your opinion, man" moment. There is no One True Way, and I hope Planescape makes it out of Wizard's offices before that changes.
 

The official version sets the baseline - from that I can incorporate whatever I want to include as I see fit.

But if the baseline doesn't work for me, I have to change it to make it usable, and then also change anything extra I want to incorporate that was designed with the official version in mind so as to be compatible with my customized version. The more work needed to fix the baseline, the more work needed to fix everything else. If the custom "remix" I ultimately end up with dramatically changes the Mages of High Sorcery, then a big, fancy, third-party sourcebook on the Mages of High Sorcery doesn't do me much good, does it?

At a certain point, the effort necessary to salvage Dragonlance becomes more than the setting is worth to me, and it will simply be rendered down into scrap to be repurposed elsewhere. Which is a shame, because again, there's a lot I actually like about it.

All I want is for the baseline Dragonlance setting to be usable for me. I can take it from there. But if I have to rebuild the setting from scratch, then it's not worth the effort.
I apologize if you've stated it elsewhere, but what are the pros and cons of the setting for you?
 

Visit Our Sponsor

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top