Dragonlance New Dragonlance Novels from Weis and Hickman in 2026

Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman announced a new trilogy of Dragonlance books titled Dragonlance Legacies with the first novel titled War Wizard.

Tracy Hickman made the announcement on his Facebook page this past weekend:

Just announced at Gencon: Margaret Weis and I will be writing a new trilogy: Dragonlance Legacies. First book: War Wizard

Margaret Weis’s Facebook announcement had a bit more detail:

Tracy and I are pleased to announce Dragonlance Legacies. The story of the legendary wizard, Magius, and his friendship and adventures with the Solamnic knight, Huma. Published by Random House Worlds. 2026.

Weis also answered a few questions giving us a bit more information.

• Weis and Hickman are writing the books together
• When asked if this will conflict with pre-existing lore established in Richard A. Knaak’s The Legend of Huma, Weis said “This is our story.”
• When asked if Hasbro was involved, Weis said “Random House Worlds is the publisher”
• The omnibus edition of Chronicles will be accompanied by an omnibus edition of Legends as well in 2025.

So far, the only new book officially announced through any publishers is Dragonlance Chronicles: Dragons of Autumn Twilight, Dragons of Witner Night, Dragons of Spring Dawning omnibus edition coming in February 2025 (pre-order on Amazon through this affiliate link), but it may be several months until we get details on the Legends omnibus or the new trilogy.

 

[Dire Bare]

I think what is trying to be said here is:
WotC's view on canon is that if it is not in 5e, it is not canon to 5e. Thus, @mamba's point is that the only thing in 5e so far is SotDQ, so only that portion of DL is canon - to 5e. Basically, WotC is neither confirming nor denying that anything before or after the events of SotDQ is canon to 5e.

Oh I understand . . . I just don't agree.

 

[dave2008]

Oh I understand . . . I just don't agree.

What don't you agree with? WotC said specifically that only things published in 5e are canon in 5e. So which part are you disagreeing with?

 

[mamba]

Not how I interpret what WotC is doing at all.

so in your version everything still happens exactly as before, we just jump into the timeline somewhere and tell a story there, but everything we know still takes place just like we know, and nothing in the adventure can change anything about that.

Tiamat is still being defeated by the Heroes of the Lance, we just played a minor, unimportant side quest (in that it makes no difference to the overall war). And even their victory is ultimately short lived as Chaos is unleashed, changing the world a few years down the line from that victory.

As to WotC’s take on canon

Dungeons & Dragons Novels, Video Games, and Other Spin-Offs Are Not Canonical to D&D Roleplaying Game

Wizards of the Coast has provided some clarity on the canon of Dungeons & Dragons in regards to [...]

comicbook.com

“For many years, we in the Dungeons & Dragons RPG studio have considered things like D&D novels, D&D video games, D&D comic books, as wonderful expressions of D&D storytelling and D&D lore, but they are not canonical for the D&D roleplaying game," Crawford said.

As for what is considered canon in the D&D RPG, Crawford provided a very simple answer. "If you're looking for what's official in the D&D roleplaying game, it's what appears in the products for the roleplaying game," Crawford said. "Basically, our stance is that if it has not appeared in a book since 2014 [the year that Dungeons & Dragons' Fifth Edition core rulebooks came out], we don't consider it canonical for the games."

 

[Dire Bare]

What don't you agree with? WotC said specifically that only things published in 5e are canon in 5e. So which part are you disagreeing with?

Y'all's interpretation of exactly what that means. And really, your quotations of exactly what WotC stated.

IMO, WotC's statements on canon do not mean that the only canon source for Dragonlance now is Shadow of the Dragon Queen. That there is a void before and after the events of this adventure.

Simply that WotC isn't going to rigidly adhere to canon from older sources.

We're picking nits, arguing about canon when canon isn't really all that important. So, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.

It's similar . . . again, IMO . . . to how Lucasfilm treats material from the Star Wars expanded universe before the Disney purchase. All that stuff is still there . . . quasi-canon if you will. Maybe it happened, maybe not, it depends on the needs of the next movie, novel, video game, or comic series.

WotC is unlikely to de-canonize Chronicles and Legends at all. And they haven't de-canonized anything else. It's just if and when they do create a new Dragonlance product, they might change up some of that classic canon. Or they might not. It's still there, but they may choose to not use it.

But either way, the events of Dragons of Eternity do not conflict with Shadow of the Dragon Queen at all, regardless of how you consider canon. Which is what started this side discussion.

In other words, it just doesn't matter at all . . . until perhaps when WotC publishes another Dragonlance product that does conflict with earlier canon. Which they haven't, yet.

 

[dave2008]

Y'all's interpretation of exactly what that means.

Sorry, I stopped here because I never said what I think it means. Only what WotC and others think it means.

 

[dave2008]

We're picking nits, arguing about canon when canon isn't really all that important. So, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I was just trying to clarify what I thought others meant (probably mistake on my part). I don't give a lick about canon and think try to hold to it is silly. I use what I want and discard what I don't like. I don't care what is canon for D&D or 5e or any other edition.

 

[Velderan]

WotC is unlikely to de-canonize Chronicles and Legends at all. And they haven't de-canonized anything else. It's just if and when they do create a new Dragonlance product, they might change up some of that classic canon. Or they might not. It's still there, but they may choose to not use it.

Which is exactly what they did with SotDQ. In the previously published material, Lord Soth didn't leave Dargaard Keep to have anything to do with the events unfolding in the world until Kitiara earned his loyalty by surviving a night in his keep. In SotDQ, Takhisis appealed to him to give them a marketable name for older fans serve her, no mention of Kitiara. SotDQ also doesn't say anything about Goldmoon or the Heroes of the Lance, allowing the PCs in that adventure to discover the true gods and so on without worrying about what is or isn't happening on the other side of the continent. While some of what they published conflicts with previously published stuff... IMO it really doesn't matter for the purposes of what they're trying to do for the adventure the PCs are actually participating in and honestly, I think that's the right approach. I know it's how I used the setting during the 2e days when I almost exclusively played in Dragonlance.

 

[dead]

It was supposed to be a trilogy and it was made because their boss wanted an ending to that generation.

I guess it can be tough when you're a writer-for-hire and your boss gives you a brief on a new direction for the setting and you don't like it. I guess you have to try to make the best of the situation. I didn't mind Dragons of Summer Flame. I felt Dragonlance needed to be injected with some new life. I didn't like the Fifth Age Saga execution, though.

But I'm glad Weis & Hickman came back and did the War of Souls. That was a mature attempt that accepted what had come before but, at the same time, an attempt to "reset" some damage done. FR have done a similar thing. They have accepted what's come before but reset it back to an "early days" feel (too bad about the 100 year time jump, though, which is a gaping void of wasted opportunity).

I guess that's the tricky thing with a shared world. Sometimes the creators aren't going to like what their boss decides or what other authors on the team have written.

 

[JEB]

As for what is considered canon in the D&D RPG, Crawford provided a very simple answer. "If you're looking for what's official in the D&D roleplaying game, it's what appears in the products for the roleplaying game," Crawford said. "Basically, our stance is that if it has not appeared in a book since 2014 [the year that Dungeons & Dragons' Fifth Edition core rulebooks came out], we don't consider it canonical for the games."

For the record, the final canon policy (Internet Archive link; it disappeared in the switch to DDB as the central D&D hub) narrowed that further: only what was in the current printings of the core rulebooks was confirmed to be canon for 5e, the status of everything else canonically was no longer "public-facing". They also reinforced this with the "Legacy Content" label on DDB, which indicated that the lore in such products (like Volo's) was superseded by newer works (such as Monsters of the Multiverse).

That said, Dragonlance 5e marked a shift from how they'd handled Ravenloft and (to a lesser extent) Spelljammer in terms of pre-5e canon - they avoided contradicting established lore, and the changes they did make don't necessarily prevent the classic storylines from happening. As long as you can accept some retcons (Soth retreated to Dargaard after SotDQ and only rejoined the fray after Kitiara's test; the true gods were discovered in multiple places independently; etc.). Which was a wise move, considering the Dragonlance fandom is (even today) more robust than the Ravenloft or Spelljammer fandoms, and probably would have been vocally unhappy about a Ravenloft-level reboot. They continued this approach with Planescape, and I expect something similar with 2024 5e Greyhawk.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

And if there is a future cinematographic adaptation, action-live, animation or CGI, then we have got a new "timeline" with its own continuity.

A reboot of Dragonlance is too risky after so many books to be published.

Several times in the past I suggested the idea of alternate timelines to fix or avoid this type of troubles.