log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Fizban Is In The Wild -- With the Table of Contents!

Some people have received their copies of Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, and have posted photos (including the table of contents!) online!

8BFC444C-5615-4B7D-8BB7-F5D32D4F4C49.jpeg

E9ABFDE2-7C70-4917-8A3B-8C08CC5818DF.jpeg

E8DE898D-6851-408A-BC24-7010CEF5FF14.jpeg


 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

For Tiamat think of it this way: Tyranny of Dragons 2019(or RoT) Tiamat is her in her Deity/Avatar form or close to it, WITH the House Rule of adding in her Mythic Action onto the stat block.


Aspect of Tiamat, as mentioned before, is basically not her closeish fully powered up form, but the weaker Aspect form of her.

They aren't even the same creature type, Tiamat is a fiend, Aspect of Tiamat is a Dragon.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Urriak Uruk

Debate fuels my Fire
Which contradicts the DotMM. This book feels more like a grab bag of possible ideas then solid lore.

I mean, yes there is a named steel dragon in DotMM, but she herself contradicts steel dragon lore by being evil... she's also just a silver dragon with some duergar abilities and acid breath. So it very much could be that she's just a silver dragon who "went bad" or something.
 

This Cleric sidebar is more 5e 'just do what you want' type design, I won't even call it World building.

That people feel it needs to be explicitly stated that they can do whatever robs us of deep World building systems/lore, and that's unfortunate.

Exactly, Divine magic coming from the actual Gods is FR version of no Gnomes in DS, Leonin & Satyrs in Theros, no Halflings or Tieflings, etc..., what do with the setting in one's home game is their business, but the official lore is what it is, Divine magic in FR IS Divine, as in Divinity, as in deities.
 

Urriak Uruk

Debate fuels my Fire
Some have consistent interlocking narrative, which you can pillage for you home game and change as you like, but is not the same as just being a grab bag of ideas like Fizban's is. You really can't treat Fizban's as canon to anything as it just don't fit anything and it gets contradicted by 5e products themselves even. That a major difference compared to E: RftLW which has internal and setting coherence, which Fizban lacks.

You can't treat any books beyond the core books as canon. The D&D team has already said they aren't going to make any attempt to make everything consistent 100% of the time, so books will absolutely contradict each other.

What is actually true in your game entirely depends on the DM. So for example, in some games, steel dragons are just folklore of folks mis-categorizing silver dragons that went evil. In another, steel dragons are actually real and the wizard community believes they're just folklore.
 

You can't treat any books beyond the core books as canon. The D&D team has already said they aren't going to make any attempt to make everything consistent 100% of the time, so books will absolutely contradict each other.

What is actually true in your game entirely depends on the DM. So for example, in some games, steel dragons are just folklore of folks mis-categorizing silver dragons that went evil. In another, steel dragons are actually real and the wizard community believes they're just folklore.

Some of us actually care about setting canon, it effects the Immersion level of the story for us, so this makes the lore in this 90% useless to me, which is fine, after MToF and VGtM, I'm used to that, but I think setting books should be viewed as being canon, the lack of that being mentioned in my view was simply an omission.

Most of the mechanics are still useful.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Well, there is no separation between divine and arcane magic in 5e... (at least that I can recall of)
"All magic depends on the Weave, though different kinds of magic access it in a variety of ways. The spells of wizards, warlocks, sorcerers, and bards are commonly called arcane magic. These spells rely on an understanding-learned or intuitive-of the workings of the Weave. The caster plucks directly at the strands of the Weave to create the desired effect. Eldritch knights and arcane tricksters also use arcane magic. The spells of clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers are called divine magic. These spellcasters' access to the Weave is mediated by divine power-gods, the divine forces of nature, or the sacred weight of a paladin's oath."
 


"All magic depends on the Weave, though different kinds of magic access it in a variety of ways. The spells of wizards, warlocks, sorcerers, and bards are commonly called arcane magic. These spells rely on an understanding-learned or intuitive-of the workings of the Weave. The caster plucks directly at the strands of the Weave to create the desired effect. Eldritch knights and arcane tricksters also use arcane magic. The spells of clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers are called divine magic. These spellcasters' access to the Weave is mediated by divine power-gods, the divine forces of nature, or the sacred weight of a paladin's oath."

The funny part of this is that none Arcane Sorcerers have since come out that explicitly use other power sources, Divine Soul (Divine magic), Shadow Magic (Shadow magic), and Psionic Soul (Psionic magic).

I don't think this comes up in other none material (Rogue, Barbarian, and Fighter) classes otherwise the rest are consistent in their power sources (possible exception being the Bard's magic secrets and the College of Whispers).

I think that in the 5.5e PHB, the Sorcerer won't be explicitly just an Arcane class, like the change in Pathfinder 2e.
 

Urriak Uruk

Debate fuels my Fire
Some of us actually care about setting canon, it effects the Immersion level of the story for us, so this makes the lore in this 90% useless to me, which is fine, after MToF and VGtM, I'm used to that, but I think setting books should be viewed as being canon, the lack of that being mentioned in my view was simply an omission.

Most of the mechanics are still useful.

Well, I'll reiterate that Fizban's isn't more or less canon than Mad Mage. But of course you're meant to use the parts of lore you like and don't like, so if you prefer setting books content than it is your prerogative to use that and disregard Fizban's. That's part if the designs intention, I think.

I actually view that as good lore design, as there are folks on this thread who seem to prefer Fizban's lore generally, or at least will find that lore more useful when integrating it into their own homebrew world. So this "canon doesn't matter much" methodology does seem to work wonders for a very wide playerbase.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
The funny part of this is that none Arcane Sorcerers have since come out that explicitly use other power sources, Divine Soul (Divine magic), Shadow Magic (Shadow magic), and Psionic Soul (Psionic magic).

I don't think this comes up in other none material (Rogue, Barbarian, and Fighter) classes otherwise the rest are consistent in their power sources (possible exception being the Bard's magic secrets and the College of Whispers).

I think that in the 5.5e PHB, the Sorcerer won't be explicitly just an Arcane class, like the change in Pathfinder 2e.
I'm not so sure. 3e also did that, with Divine Soul using divine, shadow magic using the shadow weave, etc.
 

Bolares

Hero
"All magic depends on the Weave, though different kinds of magic access it in a variety of ways. The spells of wizards, warlocks, sorcerers, and bards are commonly called arcane magic. These spells rely on an understanding-learned or intuitive-of the workings of the Weave. The caster plucks directly at the strands of the Weave to create the desired effect. Eldritch knights and arcane tricksters also use arcane magic. The spells of clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers are called divine magic. These spellcasters' access to the Weave is mediated by divine power-gods, the divine forces of nature, or the sacred weight of a paladin's oath."
I was talking more in a mechanical way, but sure, I didn't remember this quote, thank you.
 


dave2008

Legend
Also, yes, you can treat Fizban's as canon, because 5e has this wonderful way of treating lore that can be summarized by saying "New lore overrides old lore". It was true for Volo's Guide to Monsters and its changes to Orcs and Yuan-Ti, it was true for Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes and its changes to Elven Lore and Duergar Lore, and it is still true for Fizban's Treasury of Dragons and how it treats Dragons of all types and the First World. New lore overrides old lore. That's how 5e works. I treat all of those pieces of information as "D&D canon", even if I don't use it at my table, and even if they contradict earlier lore from previous editions or early 5e.
That is not quite right IMO. 5e lore is true for 5e. It doesn't replace the old lore. The lore is edition dependent.
 

dave2008

Legend
Druids actually get their magic in FR from the First Circle, a group of nature Gods, but worshipping them is not a requirement for this magic, they are just the source and it doesn't mean you can't primarily worship a God outside of the First Circle.

And it's mentioned else where that clerics magic in FR comes from Gods, but I'll need to look up which book later.

Really even a Paladin gets their Divine magic from the Gods indirectly, the Oath gets its powers from the Gods.
That is great if you believe that (ie have faith in it) ;)
 


dave2008

Legend
This Cleric sidebar is more 5e 'just do what you want' type design, I won't even call it World building.

That people feel it needs to be explicitly stated that they can do whatever robs us of deep World building systems/lore, and that's unfortunate.
Truth be told, I prefer that for the core books. But I do wish they (WotC) took the opportunity to push the lore more with setting books. Real robust setting books with mechanical and distinct lore differences would be cool. So it you play in FR, your cleric get its divine magic from deities, but if you play Eberron, it comes from faith, Darksun has no clerics, etc. I think in general the approach to settings as been a bit to timid.
 
Last edited:


dave2008

Legend
For Tiamat think of it this way: Tyranny of Dragons 2019(or RoT) Tiamat is her in her Deity/Avatar form or close to it, WITH the House Rule of adding in her Mythic Action onto the stat block.


Aspect of Tiamat, as mentioned before, is basically not her closeish fully powered up form, but the weaker Aspect form of her.
You can of course reconcile it however you want. WotC has apparently given no explanation and that is OK. I will point out that Tiamat's stat block in Descent (when she is in Avernus) is exactly the same as it was in RoT and ToD.

For me personally, the true avatar of Tiamat is more like the one I made and posted on these forums. Her true godly self is even more powerful.
 

The funny part of this is that none Arcane Sorcerers have since come out that explicitly use other power sources, Divine Soul (Divine magic), Shadow Magic (Shadow magic), and Psionic Soul (Psionic magic).

That's not the only interpretation of those subclasses.

It can also be looked at as their arcane magic producing effects normally only available through divine magic, much like how bards can cast healing spells with arcane magic.

You could even say that they are accessing divine or psionic sources through arcane magic, or that they have a blend of types of sources. The aberrant soul, for instance, is basically an arcane sorcerer with psionics as a bonus.

The point is, 5e class design never has a subclass remove or replace a base class feature--they only add. I think it's more consistent to assume that all sorcerers retain the stated arcane power of their base class, regardless of what is added by a subclass, than to assume that a couple subclasses are exceptions to the design paradigm. (There is no hint of Shadow as a power source in 5e.)
 

Remathilis

Legend
That depends upon setting, in FR Clerics still get power from a God, in fact all divine magic comes from Gods, it's just only clerics have to have a particular patron.

Personally I don't like the idea of Divine magic not coming from Gods, it makes the separation between Arcane and Divine magic meaningless.
So what about Athasian elemental clerics?
 

Visit Our Sponsor

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top