Dragonlance Lunar Sorcery: A Preview from Shadow of the Dragon Queen

WotC has posted a preview from the upcoming Shadow of the Dragon Queen on D&D Beyond, diving into the Lunary Sorcery subclass.

lunar-socerer-featured.jpg


Traditionally magic in Krynn has been represented by the Wizards of High Sorcery, who owe their allegiance to one of the black, red, or white moons (and gods) of magic. Sorcerers weren't around in D&D when Dragonlance was created.

Lunar Sorcerers also draw power from the moons, based on the moon's phase (Full, New, Crescent). You choose the phase each day (though at later levels you can do so more often). The subclass gets a lot of spells (15 additional spells!)


 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Russ Morrissey

Russ Morrissey


log in or register to remove this ad

Remathilis

Legend
Nothing I said was an addition. All of it either existed in the 1e/2e setting, but didn't have mechanics made for it(artificers) or both existed and didn't exist simultaneously which requires DM adjudication.

Your implication that my position on artificers which did exist in the Tinker gnomes is the same as adding in orcs which explicitly didn't exist, is disingenuous at best.
The artificer is a handwave since a. Only tinker gnomes had any interest in technology and b. Tinker gnome tech has more in common with ACME than with the reliable temporary magical items that artificers make. Fitting artificer into Krynn is still a lore change, unless you are advocating only gnomes can be artificers and that their spells (ahem temporary magical items) have a % chance to fail spectacularly every time they are used.

But a human artificer with a steel defender and a magic wand? That's a retcon.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
The artificer is a handwave since a. Only tinker gnomes had any interest in technology and b. Tinker gnome tech has more in common with ACME than with the reliable temporary magical items that artificers make. Fitting artificer into Krynn is still a lore change, unless you are advocating only gnomes can be artificers and that their spells (ahem temporary magical items) have a % chance to fail spectacularly every time they are used.
Mad gnomes didn't fail.
But a human artificer with a steel defender and a magic wand? That's a retcon.
I've said at least three times now that it would be gnome only. Why are you talking about humans to me?
 




Artificers did in fact exist when DL was first created. They just didn't have formal artificer mechanics for what the tinker gnomes and mad gnomes did.
I thought the first artificer (at least what was recognizable as what we recognize as an artificer) was published in the Spells and Magic book for players options back in the late 90's. Where was the earlier one from?
 

Remathilis

Legend
Sure. No good reason not to in this case. Unique things are good for a campaign.
Let's just go back to 2e era restrictions then. Maybe we can bring back racial ASIs and alignments while we're at it.

Dragonlance: where our dwarves are fighters and... That's about it, really...
 

Remathilis

Legend
I thought the first artificer (at least what was recognizable as what we recognize as an artificer) was published in the Spells and Magic book for players options back in the late 90's. Where was the earlier one from?
The 2e one was a specialist wizard like a transmuter or diviner. The current class is the direct descendant of Eberron's 3e artificer.
 


Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Let's just go back to 2e era restrictions then. Maybe we can bring back racial ASIs and alignments while we're at it.
Yes! And since I give my child chores, we should go back to indentured servitude while we are at it! And because you are against limiting artificers in Krynn to gnomes, we must get rid of all limitations so you can do anything you want in the game! Want to be a gnome/human/giant/dragon/mouse? We shouldn't stop you because that would be a limitation!!!!

See how silly arguments like that are?

Limiting a single class to one race isn't even a beginning of going back to 1e and 2e. It's just a feature of the setting.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I thought the first artificer (at least what was recognizable as what we recognize as an artificer) was published in the Spells and Magic book for players options back in the late 90's. Where was the earlier one from?
What do you think mad gnomes who created devices to fly(fly spell), time travel and other things were? It wasn't formalized into "This is an artificer class," but they were artificers. Had there been an artificer class back then, they would have had access to it.
 

What do you think mad gnomes who created devices to fly(fly spell), time travel and other things were? It wasn't formalized into "This is an artificer class," but they were artificers. Had there been an artificer class back then, they would have had access to it.
I see what you're referring to.

Based on the original Dragonlance Adventures book and my remembering of the setting the Tinkers inventions were firmly scientific in nature and the rules for building the devices supported a "separation of science and magic". The artificer blends science and magic. Almost like (to steal a term) a techno-wizard.

Yeah I know that there's some overlap. I understand that the term artificer can refer to someone who uses magic or technology or both to create things. And yes I agree that had the mechanics of the artificer class existed the tinker gnomes would have latched onto that like a miniature giant space hamster latches onto a ranger. I just feel that saying "Artificers did in fact exist when DL was first created." is a stretch given the context.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I see what you're referring to.

Based on the original Dragonlance Adventures book and my remembering of the setting the Tinkers inventions were firmly scientific in nature and the rules for building the devices supported a "separation of science and magic". The artificer blends science and magic. Almost like (to steal a term) a techno-wizard.

Yeah I know that there's some overlap. I understand that the term artificer can refer to someone who uses magic or technology or both to create things. And yes I agree that had the mechanics of the artificer class existed the tinker gnomes would have latched onto that like a miniature giant space hamster latches onto a ranger. I just feel that saying "Artificers did in fact exist when DL was first created." is a stretch given the context.
Par-salian gave Caramon and Tasslehoff the magical Device of Time Journeying to use to go back in time where they met a gnome who tinkered with the now broken magical device and fixed it. That's someone who used both magic and technology in tinkering. An Artificer.
 

Micah Sweet

Legend
Par-salian gave Caramon and Tasslehoff the magical Device of Time Journeying to use to go back in time where they met a gnome who tinkered with the now broken magical device and fixed it. That's someone who used both magic and technology in tinkering. An Artificer.
Yeah, hard to claim Gnimish at least wasn't an artificer. He might be the only one though.
 




Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
No it's not the same difference. A race cannot be both smart enough to build catapults and too stupid to build stairs. That's a disconnect that breaks the race. A race can, however, be mentally incapable of wanting to do the simple things and have a compulsion to overcomplicate whatever they do. That does not create a disconnect.
That changes literally nothing about what I said. If they choose not the build stairs because they like to overcomplicate things, they're too dumb to build stairs.
 


Visit Our Sponsor

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top