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!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If you want primary sources, try the basic rules: "the ability to cast cleric spells relies on devotion and an intuitive sense of a deity’s wishes."

It says nothing about the nature or power of the deity. A sufficiently devoted cleric could get spells from a rock.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I dont see how this stuff matters to anybody. There are so many versions of the lore across the editions and third party products that even if you dont want to make up your own version you can find one you like somewhere. WotC has abrogated responsibility for story so no one can get mad at them anymore. They are no longer the keeper of lore, so everything is subjective now. If you dont like what they did, do something else.

 

[Rabulias]

These categories do not exist in 5e.

Sure they do. "Quasigod" isn't a thing, but "Quasideity" is. It's in the DMG. There's a difference between Quasideities, Demigods, Vestiges, Titans, and other types of creatures with Divine (or near-Divine) levels of power.

Take another look at your DMG.

 

[bedir than]

WotC has abrogated responsibility for story so no one can get mad at them anymore

No outside entity is ever responsible for the story at my table.
Never have been. Never will be.

Story is what happens to the characters, not the background information.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Then perhaps I should have said lore or background info. The point is, what WotC had to say about these things used to have some special perceived weight, and now it doesnt. At this point, I dont see them as any better or worse than any other 5e publisher, and treat them accordingly.

No outside entity is ever responsible for the story at my table.
Never have been. Never will be.

Story is what happens to the characters, not the background information

 

[darjr]

View attachment 145386

Swipe!

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I dont see how this stuff matters to anybody. There are so many versions of the lore across the editions and third party products that even if you dont want to make up your own version you can find one you like somewhere. WotC has abrogated responsibility for story so no one can get mad at them anymore. They are no longer the keeper of lore, so everything is subjective now. If you dont like what they did, do something else.

I actually I cam get mad that them for it, I think I've proven that amply!

 

[cbwjm]

I tend not to get too worked up about lore changes. There's been a few times where I've read some lore in one of the 5e books that lead me to go, that's cool but I won't be using it. Mostly it's because it just doesn't fit with how I want the background of my game to go. I still haven't read Fizban's guide since I'm waiting for it to be released on dndbeyond, but things like the first world and great wyrms being divine, not something that I'm going to include. It sounds cool, but not what I want for my setting.

 

[Reynard]

::casts raise thread::
I was reading through my copy of Fizban's this morning and wanted to talk about some elements in depth.
The first that that struck me on more careful reading that I had sort of skimmed too lightly before is hoard items: these are basically magical items that level with the PCs -- assuming they are involved in a dragon focused campaign (either Skyrim style sucking the souls out of the hoards of dragons they kill, or because they are being rewarded by dragons). I am a little surprise, in a good way. I did not think WotC would create a template for this sort of thing in 5E. Is this new, or have I missed it in some other book?

Second, I have to wonder what the designers are thinking sometimes, especially when it comes to monsters. Aspect of Bahamut and Aspect of Tiamat breath weapon damages are pitiful.

Finally (for now) I like the Greatwyrm mythic builds. I don't own Theros so this is the first I have seen of them. The only thing I don't like is how it engages. I would double their hit points and have it happen at "bloodied" rather than pull a "gotcha" on the players by describing how it is almsost dead but NO, it comes back stronger! I think some players would feel cheated, especially if they ust burnt a mjor ability to down the thing because I described it as "close to falling" or whatever.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The first that that struck me on more careful reading that I had sort of skimmed too lightly before is hoard items: these are basically magical items that level with the PCs -- assuming they are involved in a dragon focused campaign (either Skyrim style sucking the souls out of the hoards of dragons they kill, or because they are being rewarded by dragons). I am a little surprise, in a good way. I did not think WotC would create a template for this sort of thing in 5E. Is this new, or have I missed it in some other book?

It's kind of based off of the Vestiges of Divergence from Exandria (official in Explorer's Guide to Wildemount), but expanded and changed to match dragons. But those were kind of based off of a mechanic from 4e, so it does go back to WotC.

Second, I have to wonder what the designers are thinking sometimes, especially when it comes to monsters. Aspect of Bahamut and Aspect of Tiamat breath weapon damages are pitiful.

I think the main purpose of Bahamut's breath weapon is the healing/resurrection mechanic. I agree that Tiamat's is pretty lackluster for the avatar of a goddess, though.

Finally (for now) I like the Greatwyrm mythic builds. I don't own Theros so this is the first I have seen of them. The only thing I don't like is how it engages. I would double their hit points and have it happen at "bloodied" rather than pull a "gotcha" on the players by describing how it is almsost dead but NO, it comes back stronger! I think some players would feel cheated, especially if they ust burnt a mjor ability to down the thing because I described it as "close to falling" or whatever.

It kind of is based on Bloodied, and you don't have to describe the monster as being "almost dead" before they use Mythic. Just keep the ability in mind and call them "bloodied" after they use it.