D&D 5E Fizban's Treasury of Dragons is Up on D&D Beyond!

[Ixal]

Huh, they have removed it. To be honest, I don't think I didn't realise they didn't have tails until reading some sort of debate. I often use art from the internet to get some idea of what people look like, and those images (being independent artwork) often show them with tails. I must never have looked too hard at the official artwork.

I find it only pretty strange that all dragonborn in MTG have tails and all dragonborn in D&D have not.
And there are too many MTG pictures so that it can be blamed on a freelancer getting the description wrong (and no one got it right). It really looks like WotC wanted the MTG art to have tails but for some reason doesn't want them in D&D art.
Why?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Just thinking about the monk's wings when used with step of the wind. Sometimes I wonder about the designers decisions, like why did they think it was worth limiting this feature to a number of times equal to their proficiency bonus/long rest? As a 6th level ability, flight is often available via magic, if not via race. I sort of wonder if they have, or need, someone on the team to ask "why limit it?". It's almost like they've become so enamoured with the whole PB/long rest abilities that they've tried to fit it in everywhere.

Twilight Clerics get flight at level 6, which is non-concentration, lasts for a minute, and can be used PB/long rest, and doesn't require spell slots to use, while the Ascendant Dragon Monk' ability lasts for 1 turn, requires a ki point to use, and can only be used PB/long rest.

"Balance?" What's that?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I find it only pretty strange that all dragonborn in MTG have tails and all dragonborn in D&D have not.
And there are too many MTG pictures so that it can be blamed on a freelancer getting the description wrong (and no one got it right). It really looks like WotC wanted the MTG art to have tails but for some reason doesn't want them in D&D art.
Why?

Because Half-Dragons are typically depicted with tails, and so Wotc wanted some minor physical trait to differentiate them. IMO, that's stupid and boring, but it's the reason. Draconblood Dragonborn from Exandria have tails, though (not sure if by RAW they're compatible with these new Dragonborn races, though).

 

[pukunui]

Anyone else notice that topaz dragons appear to have their wings on backwards?

Their description indicates that their wings are "shaped to propel them through both air and water" but it still looks to me like they'd be flying / swimming backwards.

 

[Zaukrie]

Lots to live, more than a bit too make you scratch your head, and a few things I didn't love. But, overall, a good book, on first glance.

I haven't looked at DMsGuild yet, but I have to imagine we'll see more hoard items and a few other things.

 

[Weiley31]

I'm increasingly disillusioned with 5e design parameters if we want to call them that.

Its getting harder all the time to even work up anything for Wizards products, when others are doing what I want, but better and still '5e compatible'.

EDIT: I was watching some video on the Witchlight book, and they said the same thing I did regarding the Fairy.

"Its a Fairy, give it at will to make it Small, but by default, why isnt it Tiny."

I swear if they gut the 'not Spacejammer' races I will be sad for a week.

It's their whole "Keep It Simple Stupid" philosophy that is an aspect of 5E. Also it leads to having it being a headache trying to work out the details(pros/cons/table issues) of playing Large/Tiny races. Even though Raiders of the Serpent Sea/Iron Kingdom: Requiem have already figured out ways of working out certain details for Large size pcs in their own ways.

Although I do view that WoTC insistence on balance, by reverse tuning stuff/strange decisions, sometimes doesn't make sense when they have before, in the past, had no probs with giving players stronger options like Yuan-Ti Purebloods, Satyrs, the Twilight Cleric, and perfectly being okay with giving Fey typed racial options as pc choices.

Editor's Note: I'm not saying that Balance shouldn't be important or they should chuck it out the window, I just mean it more that their walk backs at times is weird despite what's been done before. Only with the recent UAs have they actually decided to test the waters pass their "fears" a bit. and even came up with an interesting method of PB usage/Ki Points for the UA version of the Dragon Ascendant monk subclass

 

[Scribe]

It's their whole "Keep It Simple Stupid" philosophy that is an aspect of 5E. Also it leads to having it being headache trying to work out the details of Large/Tiny races.

I know, I think I'm just over it to a degree.

 

[cbwjm]

Rereading through the book again, I've just realised that they completely did away with Io.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Rereading through the book again, I've just realised that they completely did away with Io.

Nope, he's mentioned in relation to Greyhawk when they are talking about the echoes of the First World, right in the first section. They even leave it ambiguous whether he's dead or alive (he "shed his blood", which could be interpreted either way)...

 

[cbwjm]

Nope, he's mentioned in relation to Greyhawk when they are talking about the echoes of the First World, right in the first section...

Nice spotting, I was reading through the first world section and missed that mention. Still, he's been relegated to almost nothing since they've completely focused on the initial dragon gods being Bahamut and Tiamat and (now that I've reread that bit again) it's almost like they've completely removed him.