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.

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!)

Lunar Sorcery Sorcerer Preview From Dragonlance: Shadow of the Dragon Queen

Harness the power of the moon with the Lunar Sorcery sorcerer! Here's a look at the versatile features granted by this celestial subclass.

www.dndbeyond.com

 

[Maxperson]

I also find it odd to be focusing on the Artificer/Warlock exclusion since neither of those classes existed when DL was created.

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.

 

[Remathilis]

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]

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?

 

[Remathilis]

Mad gnomes didn't fail.

I've said at least three times now that it would be gnome only. Why are you talking about humans to me?

So we are okay with going back to race/class restrictions. Good to know.

 

[Maxperson]

So we are okay with going back to race/class restrictions. Good to know.

Sure. No good reason not to in this case. Unique things are good for a campaign.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Do we really need to score points here?

 

[WarDriveWorley]

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]

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]

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.

 

[WarDriveWorley]

The 2e one was a specialist wizard like a transmuter or diviner. The current class is the direct descendant of Eberron's 3e artificer.

Yes. I am aware, but one can argue that the 2E one paved the way for the one we got in Eberron. I'm more interested in a version that predates 2E