Dragonlance DRAGONLANCE LIVES! Unearthed Arcana Explores Heroes of Krynn!

The latest Unearthed Arcana has arrived and the 6-page document contains rules for kender, lunar magic, Knights of Solamnia, and Mages of High Sorcery.

In today’s Unearthed Arcana, we explore character options from the Dragonlance setting. This playtest document presents the kender race, the Lunar Magic sorcerer subclass, the Knight of Solamnia and Mage of High Sorcery backgrounds, and a collection of new feats, all for use in Dungeons & Dragons.

Kender have a (surprisingly magical) ability to pull things out of a bag, and a supernatural taunt feature. This magical ability appears to replace the older 'kleptomania' description -- "Unknown to most mortals, a magical phenomenon surrounds a kender. Spurred by their curiosity and love for trinkets, curios, and keepsakes, a kender’s pouches or pockets will be magically filled with these objects. No one knows where these objects come from, not even the kender. This has led many kender to be mislabeled as thieves when they fish these items out of their pockets."

Lunar Magic is a sorcerer subclass which draws power from the moon(s); there are notes for using it in Eberron.

Also included are feats such as Adepts of the Black, White, and Red Robes, and Knights of the Sword, Rose, and Crown.

News Archive | Dungeons and Dragons

Read the full archives of Dungeons & Dragons news, Sage Advice, Unearthed Arcana, and D&D Studio Blogs.

dnd.wizards.com

 

[This Effin’ GM]

So? What difference does that make? They are all new D&D settings. Why do new fans supposedly need a new setting that WotC has never made before?

Before someone says “ah but you said WOTC before not specifically d&d!” I just want it clear that one of those settings is less than a year old, another less than 4, another less than 10, and all four only recently have become a playable setting book. To imply that any of these are old or to start narrowly defining new (a designation that can get as small as “didn’t come out in the past ten seconds!”) seems pretty disingenuous.

 

[Minigiant]

So? What difference does that make? They are all new D&D settings. Why do new fans supposedly need a new setting that WotC has never made before?

Because WOTC doesn't explore new ideas and instead tries to sell old ideas while twisting and changing those old ideas. Whereas new ideas that the world has moved to gets little to no support.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So you're just going to cop out, then? Ignore everything in my post and just say "It's just my opinion, I don't have to justify it." Okay. Proves my point, then.

I find fey stuff off-putting in general. The current trend to accentuate it annoys me. It really is a personal opinion. I feel a curse that affects behavior (like the kenku thing) is different than a magical effect that spontaneously generates items, which feels, frankly, inane to me. I understand why they want to change the trait, but I liked the original novels and the kender as depicted there, and would prefer a change that preserves that narrative. Maybe if kender players respected their allies, or at least tried not to be explicitly annoying, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Best justification I can give.

 

[NaturalZero]

Christ, I hope they don't bring back feat chains/ladders.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Because WOTC doesn't explore new ideas and instead tries to sell old ideas while twisting and changing those old ideas. Whereas new ideas that the world has moved to gets little to no support.

In their defence, they learned it from watching Hollywood.

“I learned it from watching you, Dad! I learned it from watching you!”

In their further defence, they wouldn’t do it if people didn’t flock to buy existing IPs for nostalgia’s sake.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Because WOTC doesn't explore new ideas and instead tries to sell old ideas while twisting and changing those old ideas. Whereas new ideas that the world has moved to gets little to no support.

I suppose you're saying that Theros is just a Greek-analog so it isn't "new"... Strixhaven is just a Harry Potter-analog so it isn't "new"... Ravnica is just a Sigil-analog so it isn't "new"... Kamigawa is just a Japan-analog so it isn't "new"... Amonket is just an Egypt-analog so it isn't "new"... Innistrad is just a Translyvania-analog so it isn't "new".

So what are the "new" setting ideas that WotC hasn't moved to? And what makes you believe that just because it would be completely and totally invented somehow using no influences from anything whatsoever... makes it somehow better than any of those other settings WotC created for all their Magic: The Gathering games?

 

[This Effin’ GM]

In their further defence, they wouldn’t do it if people didn’t flock to buy existing IPs for nostalgia’s sake.

I’ve been saying this ever since the first print run of The Odessey! It’s not new to print it we all know the story stop giving us what we already had, HOMER.

Not even his story anyway. People have no idea what they were doing buying that and what they would end up doing to gamers in the 2020’s

 

[Alzrius]

We knew that when the court case happened. Hence the "Classic" label.

But she has long been unhappy with what the IP owner did with the setting. She hated Krynn's presence in Spelljammer way back in 1989.

I guess when you write a religious allegory you don't want people mucking with it.

Quick sidebar here: has it ever been confirmed that Margaret Weis is a Mormon? We know Tracy Hickman is, but I'm less certain about the other half of the original Dragonlance authorial duo.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Stop giving us what we already had, HOMER.

There's never been a more apt name. He's a Homer for his stories.

 

[FrozenNorth]

I’ve been saying this ever since the first print run of The Odessey! It’s not new to print it we all know the story stop giving us what we already had, HOMER.

In Homer’s defence, I don’t think he was involved in the printing. I blame Plato. What, Socrates wasn’t good enough that you had to go and write his %}#^ down?