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!

 

[Mecheon]

EDIT: I just checked the 2e Draconomicon didn't have pink dragons either. In fact, it only had Mercury, Steel, Yellow, and Dracohydra stats. But there is one page of info on crossbreeding dragons and the results.

Pink dragons were from Dragon, don't remember the issue, one of the April Fools ones. They have soap bubbles as their breath weapon

I've been a bit of a fan for a while of just going full ham and just bringing them back as not-Mizutsune from Monster Hunter

 

[dave2008]

As I mentioned up thread, the sidebar "Dragons of Song and Steel" being in the shapeshifters section of the book very much seems to indicate we'll get info on song and steel dragons in the book. I mentioned there how the steel dragon in Dungeon of the Mad Mage used the silver dragon as its base with necessary changes noted. I've pulled out my copy of that adventure, and, really, it's just a short paragraph of changes (and much of which concerns the NPC's duergar alternate form). The only real change is the breath weapon (line of acid instead of cone of cold) - they even forgot to change the damage immunity from cold to acid (which I hope they catch if they go this route in this book). They could do the same with the song dragon using a copper dragon base (with a cone of lightning and lightning immunity instead of a line of acid and acid immunity). It would take a minimal amount of space to list the changes to breath weapons and immunities, even within a sidebar, so hopefully that is what we will see!

Sure, but I was thinking more about the specific named dragons

 

[Demetrios1453]

I guess poor mercury Dragons got left out.

Song dragon

Steel dragon

I think your right about Steel = Silver and Copper = Song, but I think Song Dragons will trade the variety of shapes in its Ancient and Great Wyrm age in exact for being able to shape shift into a single beautiful human woman form at any age.

I kind of like the idea of a Great Wyrm Song Dragon.


I hope Deep Dragons get their shapeshifting back, they lost it in 4e.

I also note that of all the hypothesises about why we didn't see Ancient Deep Dragons in the preview of high CR is that it's the weakest of the big Dragons, only CR 18. I wonder if they are still considered Chromatics or if the Ancient Purple Dragon, like the Dragon Turtle, the Ancient will be their equivalent to a Great Wyrm.

I'm also looking forward to the Dragon Gods part, could we be getting the Draconic Pantheon?

Well, with probably over 100 types of dragon in the history of the game, unfortunately some are just going to get left out of a book this size. Honestly, I'm pretty satisfied with the selection we're getting, and actually my only real, but very minor, regret was that steel dragons seemed to have not made the cut. This seems to have even cleared up that minor concern. Would I have liked to have seen brown or yellow or mercury dragons? Sure - but I'm not going to shed any metaphorical tears at their absence...

 

[Yaarel]

I didnt see the mithral dragon.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Sure, but I was thinking more about the specific named dragons

So, looking over the list of individual dragons, there are examples of all the featured dragon types other than deep, moonstone, and shadow (or conversely, examples for all the metallic, chromatic, and gem types, plus faerie dragon and dragon turtle). Most interesting among them is Astilabor, who as the dragon deity of wealth, was never really associated with a particular draconic type (unlike the other deities listed here, Aasterinian and Nathair Sgiathach, who were always associated with brass and faerie dragons respectively), but whose scales would shimmer in all draconic colors. Here, she's apparently going to appear in the topaz dragon section.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I am sad about a lot of the cuts/dropped dragons from previous editions, like the Catastrophic Dragons from 4e, fully statted-out Steel Dragons, and the revised Kobold race (holding out hope for Monsters of the Multiverse to contain it and the Hobgoblin of the Feywild), but the one I'm most upset about is the fact that we don't have stats for Sardior. Gem Dragons will never be equal until we have monster stats for their God! Without them, how are players supposed to kill him!?!?

(/s for the last bit, but the rest of the post is completely serious.)

 

[Parmandur]

How in practice are Hollow Dragons different from Dracoliches?

Mechagodzilla.

 

[Demetrios1453]

I am sad about a lot of the cuts/dropped dragons from previous editions, like the Catastrophic Dragons from 4e, fully statted-out Steel Dragons, and the revised Kobold race (holding out hope for Monsters of the Multiverse to contain it and the Hobgoblin of the Feywild), but the one I'm most upset about is the fact that we don't have stats for Sardior. Gem Dragons will never be equal until we have monster stats for their God! Without them, how are players supposed to kill him!?!?

(/s for the last bit, but the rest of the post is completely serious.)

Dear lord, just think of the market crash in ruby prices when the players flood the market with a deity's worth of rubies...

As for steel dragons, I'm not worried about them getting full stats as long as they give us the directions on how to do so. Heck, it can be done from what they gave us in Dungeon of the Mad Mage, and I expect something similar here.

I wonder if they contemplated making a somewhat larger book than 224 pages for this. What they could put into this (or any) book is constrained by its page size, so if it had been longer, they could put more in. This book is the same size as Volo's, but shorter than Mordenkainen's (at 256 pages). An extra 32 pages would have given us room for stats of at least a dozen or so more types. So that's a very good point - why didn't they go for that page count and fit in a few more dragon types, if just for stats?

 

[Parmandur]

I am sad about a lot of the cuts/dropped dragons from previous editions, like the Catastrophic Dragons from 4e, fully statted-out Steel Dragons, and the revised Kobold race (holding out hope for Monsters of the Multiverse to contain it and the Hobgoblin of the Feywild), but the one I'm most upset about is the fact that we don't have stats for Sardior. Gem Dragons will never be equal until we have monster stats for their God! Without them, how are players supposed to kill him!?!?

(/s for the last bit, but the rest of the post is completely serious.)

Saridor does seem to get significant attention in the book, so the lack of a system block is interesting. Perhaps Saridor is represented as a Gem Great Wyrm...?

As to every Dragon type that has ever been in D&D...they did get some deep cuts in here, and I will wager we will see suggestions for some others as with Steel Dragons. An awful lot of Dragons throughout the games history are a bit...redundant.

 

[Parmandur]

Dear lord, just think of the market crash in ruby prices when the players flood the market with a deity's worth of rubies...

As for steel dragons, I'm not worried about them getting full stats as long as they give us the directions on how to do so. Heck, it can be done from what they gave us in Dungeon of the Mad Mage, and I expect something similar here.

I wonder if they contemplated making a somewhat larger book than 224 pages for this. What they could put into this (or any) book is constrained by its page size, so if it had been longer, they could put more in. This book is the same size as Volo's, but shorter than Mordenkainen's (at 256 pages). An extra 32 pages would have given us room stats for at least a dozen or so more types. So that's a very good point - why didn't they go for that page count and fit in a few more dragon types, if just for stats?

Maybe they tried that at some point, but found Bedtiary entries for Yellow, Mitral, etc. Dragons became a bit repetitive, when some conversion notes might do.