WotC Dragonlance: Everything You Need For Shadow of the Dragon Queen

WotC has shared a video explaining the Dragonlance setting, and what to expect when it is released in December.

World at War: Introduces war as a genre of play to fifth edition Dungeons & Dragons.

Dragonlance: Introduces the Dragonlance setting with a focus on the War of the Lance and an overview of what players and DMs need to run adventures during this world spanning conflict.

Heroes of War: Provides character creation rules highlighting core elements of the Dragonlance setting, including the kender race and new backgrounds for the Knight of Solamnia and Mage of High Sorcery magic-users. Also introduces the Lunar Sorcery sorcerer subclass with new spells that bind your character to Krynn's three mystical moons and imbues you with lunar magic.

Villains: Pits heroes against the infamous death knight Lord Soth and his army of draconians.

Notes --

• 224 page hardcover adventure
• D&D's setting for war
• Set in eastern Solamnia
• War is represented by context -- it's not goblins attacking the village, but evil forces; refugees, rumours
• You can play anything from D&D - clerics included, although many classic D&D elements have been forgotten
• Introductory scenarios bring you up to speed on the world so no prior research needed

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The PCs were not the only ones who would be fighting in the War of the Lance. The vast majority of the armies facing the invading darkness would be 0-1st level folks, so orcs would be right in line with what they would encounter as front line troops. Also, DL1 had goblins and hobgoblins for the PCs to face, so orcs would not have been out of place in that module.

The only way goblins, hobgoblins and orcs differed from each other in 1st edition is goblins averaged 3.5 hp, orcs averaged 4.5 and hobgoblins averaged 5.5.

And the point is that the 0-1st level ordinary folks where completely overwhelmed by a monstrous foe. That's why heroes where required. So including monsters that even commoners could beat rather undermined the effect. I don't think there is anything weaker than a hobgoblin in DL1. Toade (who first appears in DL2) was a goblin, but he was a non-combatant character.

 

[AnotherGuy]

There is a newer community of D&D players that were brought in through 5e. They have different views of what the game is and should be than many of the players that have been around since Dragonlance was originally published.

And yet no one is saying the new blood is bad for the game.
As the for their supposed different views - all I see here is the older generation speaking on their behalf on what should and shouldn't be.

And newer players are less likely to be "setting purists" for Dragonlance, because they probably don't know much about the setting.

This is a way to introduce them to the setting and its quirks.
You're assuming new players are unable to deal with an option to play native races to Krynn.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

And yet no one is saying the new blood is bad for the game.
As the for their supposed different views - all I see here is the older generation speaking on their behalf on what should and shouldn't be.

People are saying that new ideas or rethinking older ideas is bad for the setting.
I'm 21 years old. I don't know how old you are, but I'm probably half the age of the average poster on this site.

This is a way to introduce them to the setting and its quirks.
You're assuming new players are unable to deal with an option to play native races to Krynn.

That's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that the book doesn't need to ban the races especially because it might be more fun at certain tables of newer players. The "quirks" might not actually be as important as setting purists believe/pretend they are.

 

[Hussar]

No women, only Man

Well, they do have stats for Trollops. Yeeesh.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

People are saying that new ideas or rethinking older ideas is bad for the setting.

New ideas are fine. It's throwing out old ideas without a good reason to do so that is not.

I'm 21 years old. I don't know how old you are, but I'm probably half the age of the average poster on this site.

You are less than two fifths of my age.

That's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that the book doesn't need to ban the races especially because it might be more fun at certain tables of newer players. The "quirks" might not actually be as important as setting purists believe/pretend they are.

The important thing is that the setting is grounded, and that most people who live there have never seen a non-human, aside from rare encounters with dwarves or kender. It's a world of humans and real-world animals. There aren't monsters round every corner. The monsters only come with the war, in the evil armies.

And of course, there is nothing fun about orcs. They are just ugly rubber mask humans in any setting. If a player really wants to go for something different, then something truly alien, like a plasmoid or thri-kreen, would work much better.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

New ideas are fine. It's throwing out old ideas without a good reason to do so that is not.

Not banning parts of the PHB isn't "throwing out old ideas". It's "including newer ideas at tables that want them".

The important thing is that the setting is grounded, and that most people who live there have never seen a non-human, aside from rare encounters with dwarves or kender. It's a world of humans and real-world animals. There aren't monsters round every corner. The monsters only come with the war, in the evil armies.

So what? Taladas is just a small part of Krynn, which is a part of the broader D&D Multiverse. An Orc or other race typically not found in Draognlance could come from another continent or planet.

And of course, there is nothing fun about orcs. They are just ugly rubber mask humans in any setting. If a player really wants to go for something different, then something truly alien, like a plasmoid or thri-kreen, would work much better.

There are plenty of people that like playing Orcs. You don't like them, fine. I personally don't feel strongly about them in most settings (I enjoy Eberron's Orcs and my homebrew version of them). I'm just saying that the book doesn't need to ban any races in order for it to still be Dragonlance.

 

[Ixal]

Not banning parts of the PHB isn't "throwing out old ideas". It's "including newer ideas at tables that want them".

Including orcs like every other setting is as far away from being a new idea as possible.
And people who want them can houserule them. Just like you did with your Eberron orcs.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Not banning parts of the PHB isn't "throwing out old ideas". It's "including newer ideas at tables that want them".

No. It's throwing out old GOOD ideas. Orcs add nothing to the setting, and ripping off Middle Earth is one of the oldest ideas in D&D. The PHB is a list of things the DM CAN include, not a list of things that MUST be included.

And if the DM really wants to include orcs, they could do that in 1982, and they can do that in 2022. But there is no good reason to do so, the setting is better without them.

There are actually a whole bunch of newer races that do fit the setting, such as goblinoids, autognomes and minotaurs.

So what? Taladas is just a small part of Krynn, which is a part of the broader D&D Multiverse. An Orc or other race typically not found in Draognlance could come from another continent or planet.

Sure, but what would be the point of that? If you want to come from another planet, you might as well play a proper alien.

There are plenty of people that like playing Orcs. You don't like them, fine. I personally don't feel strongly about them in most settings (I enjoy Eberron's Orcs and my homebrew version of them). I'm just saying that the book doesn't need to ban any races in order for it to still be Dragonlance.

The word "ban" is not the right word. Orcs are not native to the world of Krynn. That's the lore, not the law. There is no thought police that come around and arrest a DM who decided to allow them anyway.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Including orcs like every other setting is as far away from being a new idea as possible.

Again, you're either misreading me, or misrepresenting my argument. I don't want the new book to include orcs. I also don't want it to outright exclude the possibility of the DM including them. Rule 0.

And people who want them can houserule them. Just like you did with your Eberron orcs.

??? Orcs have always been a part of Eberron. And I'm aware that they can homebrew them. I'm saying that homebrewing the setting to the table's preferences should be encouraged.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

No. It's throwing out old GOOD ideas. Orcs add nothing to the setting. The PHB is a list of things the DM CAN include, not a list of things that MUST be included.

And if the DM really wants to include orcs, they could do that in 1982, and they can do that in 2022. But there is no good reason to do so, the setting is better without them.

There are actually a whole bunch of newer races that do fit the setting, such as goblinoids, autognomes and minotaurs.

And the book shouldn't say whether or not any of those races are banned. It could just detail the ones that are assumed to exist there and leave the door open for tables to tailor the world to their preferences.

Sure, but what would be the point of that? If you want to come from another planet, you might as well play a proper alien.

Because some people might enjoy playing with them. You wouldn't, but there are people whose opinions of orcs are higher than yours. And their opinions are just as valid.

The word "ban" is not the right word. Orcs are not native to the world of Krynn. That's the lore, not the law. There is no thought police that come around and arrest a DM who decided to allow them anyway.

No. But, as mentioned before, this book will be the introduction to the setting for thousands of newer players. And the book banning parts of the PHB because of tradition isn't going to make the setting more enjoyable for a lot of newer players.