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

 

[Micah Sweet]

I dislike the term because (like many with RPGs) it is loaded and people use it too many different ways.

If tomorrow I made a setting, I would most likely start with an area smaller then the state I live in. In that range I would put multi races (maybe not all of them... most likely not all of them) and then expand to maybe 2-3 times that size with MUCH less detail... and still be smaller then some states here in the US.

If someone came to be and really wanted to play something and I didn't have it already in the above area, I would most likely see if I could work it in. "Okay, so I guess we have half orcs here now" (again unless it was a hard no with a reason) but if I couldn't make it work I would just say it was from somewhere not detailed yet.

I can't imagine just out right saying "you can't play that" and then not have a reason.

I dislike the term because (like many with RPGs) it is loaded and people use it too many different ways.

If tomorrow I made a setting, I would most likely start with an area smaller then the state I live in. In that range I would put multi races (maybe not all of them... most likely not all of them) and then expand to maybe 2-3 times that size with MUCH less detail... and still be smaller then some states here in the US.

If someone came to be and really wanted to play something and I didn't have it already in the above area, I would most likely see if I could work it in. "Okay, so I guess we have half orcs here now" (again unless it was a hard no with a reason) but if I couldn't make it work I would just say it was from somewhere not detailed yet.

I can't imagine just out right saying "you can't play that" and then not have a reason.

If you don't like orcs (perhaps you think they're tired and overused, or you prefer them as antagonists) and you don't want to see them every session, you shouldn't have to run such a game.

 

[Micah Sweet]

One of the things I've heard (and I don't know if it was right) was since Dragonlance was going to be a major player in the fantasy novel scene, they did a lot to "de-Tolkienize" it to avoid any side eyes from the Tolkien estate. I don't know if that's true, but a lot of the changes made were either to filter off things like Hobbits and Orcs or to make it less confusing for non-players (like simplify all priests rather than have clerics and druids). None of that stuff seems overly relevant anymore.

But the world was built around those ideas, old as they are. If you want a world full of modern ideas, make one. Worldbuilding is a joy.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

From what I gathered from the most recent video, Shadow of the Dragon Queen is taking place just a few months after the events of Autumn Twilight. If someone plays a cleric, it sounds like either they'll be considered one of the few that has taken up the calling since the Disks were discovered or that there will be what they're calling a "micro-adventure" to introduce clerical magic. The latter is entirely a guess based on them saying that there will be a micro-adventure to introduce Draconians opponents to the world in the book.

Personally I'm far more interested in if and how they explain clerics pre-Disks of Mishakal but we don't have the book yet and the info released so far hasn't touched on it so I guess I'll save the speculation for the day the book goes live on D&D Beyond and I can skim through it to decide if it looks interesting enough to buy the physical book in December.

Ah, back then, when everyone had a Tarrasque or a couple Balors at the bottom of the dungeon, maybe even an Asmodeus if you were particularly unlucky.

DL16 "World of Krynn" that came out just one year after Dragonlance Adventures revealed that Lord Soth kept a Tarrasque in his basement so him riding a Death Dragon in the new material isn't too much to get fussed about.

 

[Velderan]

From what I gathered from the most recent video, Shadow of the Dragon Queen is taking place just a few months after the events of Autumn Twilight. If someone plays a cleric, it sounds like either they'll be considered one of the few that has taken up the calling since the Disks were discovered or that there will be what they're calling a "micro-adventure" to introduce clerical magic. The latter is entirely a guess based on them saying that there will be a micro-adventure to introduce Draconians opponents to the world in the book.

I took them saying the start of the war in Kalaman as meaning prior to Autumn Twilight since the eastern part of Solamnia was hit first and there were already rumors of war in the north by the time the Companions returned to Solace, but maybe that's a bad assumption on my part and Kalaman held up longer or something. Now you make me wonder if Kalaman was described as recently liberated in Spring Dawning or if it did manage to hold off the Dragonarmies the entire war. Either way, I hope your version is right because it would probably make more sense overall.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

If you don't like orcs (perhaps you think they're tired and overused, or you prefer them as antagonists) and you don't want to see them every session, you shouldn't have to run such a game.

that is already MORE of a reason then DL gives...

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

So I gave another listen to the YouTube video and they specifically say that if you are playing a cleric, there's a micro-adventure to introduce the place of deities in Krynn at that point. Same goes for the wizards and the three orders. Another micro-adventure will introduce draconians and that people might not believe at first that they saw what they saw, only for the draconians to reveal themselves in force later.

Looking at the Dragonlance timeline, Kalaman's fall and the events of Dragons of Autumn Twilight all happen in 351, though Kalaman falls in spring and, naturally, clerics return in autumn. To me it seems that there are two possibilities for including clerics:

1 - They play loose with the exact timeline, perhaps retconning the history of the war so that the battle of Kalaman happens later
2 - Clerics' return is not solely dependent on the Disks of Mishakal

I think it'll be 2. Though the Disks of Mishakal lead to the resurgence of clerics in the east, it doesn't mean that other gods weren't doing their own thing at the same time elsewhere. And this goes with putting the focus on the PCs, so that they're not adventuring in the shadow of the Heroes of the Lance.

I took them saying the start of the war in Kalaman as meaning prior to Autumn Twilight since the eastern part of Solamnia was hit first and there were already rumors of war in the north by the time the Companions returned to Solace, but maybe that's a bad assumption on my part and Kalaman held up longer or something. Now you make me wonder if Kalaman was described as recently liberated in Spring Dawning or if it did manage to hold off the Dragonarmies the entire war. Either way, I hope your version is right because it would probably make more sense overall.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

1 - They play loose with the exact timeline, perhaps retconning the history of the war so that the battle of Kalaman happens later
2 - Clerics' return is not solely dependent on the Disks of Mishakal

3. Though the Disks of Mishakal lead to the resurgence of clerics in the east, it doesn't mean that other gods weren't doing their own thing at the same time elsewhere. And this goes with putting the focus on the PCs, so that they're not adventuring in the shadow of the Heroes of the Lance.

yeah I could live with any of them

 

[Fifth Element]

World building by subtraction. My least favorite way for someone to build a setting.

This world is totally different because there are no orcs or drow.

Reminds me of those ads in Dragon back in the day: "No elves..." If that's the biggest selling point you think you have, no thanks.

I consider the feel of a setting to be a major part of it, so for us old timers it does impact the setting in a major way. For new players it wouldn't make a difference, because they don't really know the old setting.

Probably shouldn't speak for all us old timers like that.

 

[Hussar]

Who is telling you what to do at your table?

Well there have been several people telling me that WotC is ruining the setting, Dragonlance is only a money grab nostalgia hack, WotC is creatively bankrupt and I’m sure other bits as well.

Does seem to me there are lots of people who want to tell me what I should run at my table.

 

[Maxperson]

Probably shouldn't speak for all us old timers like that.

I'm not. You can care, not care or whatever. The degree of impact on the setting doesn't change, no matter what your opinion is, and it's pretty much ONLY old timers who can care at all, since the vast majority of new players never saw the original setting.