Dragonlance Shadow of the Dragon Queen AMA

[dave2008]

It is lore from the game. 1e and 3e Krynn drew from the novels for the campaign lore and established the timeline for the gods return as being Goldmoon or possibly others around the same time as Goldmoon. It didn't happen months before, though.

By the game I mean the game at the table, what we are playing. That may or may not include lore from the RPG products.

 

[overgeeked]

I think that's the thing when it comes to "continuity" - in any shared "universe", be it Dragonlance or Marvel Comics, or what have you: Fans generally want a new creation to NOT CONTRADICT IT. We don't need anyone to be slave to continuity; we don't need stories to constantly reference continuity; we just need them to not screw it up.

I think that it's seen as the very basics of respect (for the material and for the audience). If you, as a creator of material, contradict what's come before, you disrespect it, either because you can't be bothered to know the property on any meaningful level, or because you DO know, but you don't CARE.

Sometimes, continuity changes are made by property handlers with great care and consideration. How well that's received is usually based on quality of execution (though in this day and age, there's a click-desperate online factor that will hate it no matter how well done).

Personally, I tend to find that most continuity blunders could easily be avoided with a little imagination. It's not usually necessary to contradict a previous story to tell your current one. So far it looks like they're doing a good job of it here. Indicates that they know and care (and by extension respect) the previous material, but aren't slave to it. Which is the ideal combination.

Exactly. It’s trivial to set the start of the module after Goldmoon becomes a cleric, thus not contradicting established lore.

 

[Maxperson]

By the game I mean the game at the table, what we are playing. That may or may not include lore from the RPG products.

That's fair. I play the Realms, but I change up what I don't like and establish new lore through game play.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Exactly. It’s trivial to set the start of the module after Goldmoon becomes a cleric, thus not contradicting established lore.

Exactly. A little imagination (like they used here) is ADDITIVE to the overall story. You don't need to say, "No, Goldmoon didn't do anything to bring back the gods, it was done here by this character" when you can say "Once the gods were reawakened, there was a cascading effect where they began to attract followers all over Krynn, in unique and interesting ways".

Now you can do any number of cleric origins, without stepping on anyone's toes, and they're still rare and interesting. YOUR cleric doesn't need to BE Goldmoon, but can have an experience that is at once unique to you, and at the same time, similar to Goldmoon's.

I honestly think having your cleric's first experience with their god happening IN THE GAME is a really interesting idea. I've only had that happen with multiclass warlocks before, and I found it gave depth to that character's story (rather than the god just being a faceless fluff source for your cleric's magic).

 

[MonsterEnvy]

@MonsterEnvy Are there any examples of good or neutral Draconian NPCs in the adventure?

The Draconians are too new and indoctrinated for their to be any defections at this point.

 

[Scribe]

Is there anything to be gleaned* from the book on how Wizard's may approach God's in any say...upcoming planar products?

 

[Demetrios1453]

Is there anything to be cleaned from the book on how Wizard's may approach God's in any say...upcoming planar products?

Other than that Takhisis and Paladine are specifically called out as Tiamat and Bahamut respectively, no.

 

[pukunui]

Is there anything to be gleaned* from the book on how Wizard's may approach God's in any say...upcoming planar products?

What is it that you're hoping to see? The gods get their own brief section at the start of the book. There's the typical list, although I note that it does not specifically assign any cleric domain subclasses to any of the deities like usual, and each god gets a paragraph explaining who they are and what they do. And that's about it really.

Something worth noting because it's been discussed in multiple threads at this point: I don't feel like there's actually been a shift in how the different colored robes are organized. While it's true there isn't a mechanical requirement to be an evil alignment to take the "Adept of the Black Robes" feat, the book clearly says you follow Nuitari and he is listed under the Gods of Evil section as being the god of evil magic. That naturally should weed out good or neutral aligned characters from following an evil god. Solinari and Lunitari are described similarly, so personally I think the impression that the feats were some huge departure from the previous presentation is a bit inaccurate.

Edit: Also worth mentioning there isn't a mechanical requirement to be good aligned to take the Squire of Solamnia feat, so there's that too.

Yeah, I mean, the Black Robes are described as "ruthless", "wicked", "reviled and feared", etc. They are also expected to put their own ambitions first. This is reinforced in the adventure when any would-be mage PCs deliver the scroll they received during the prelude to the Black Robe in Kalaman.

Spoiler

The Black Robe can sense the PC mage's alignment, and she will only recommend they join the Black Robes if they a) have an evil alignment and b) opened the scroll (despite being told not to). If the PC is evil but didn't open the scroll, then she recommends the Red Robes instead.

 

[Scribe]

What is it that you're hoping to see? The gods get their own brief section at the start of the book. There's the typical list, although I note that it does not specifically assign any cleric domain subclasses to any of the deities like usual, and each god gets a paragraph explaining who they are and what they do. And that's about it really.

I guess something that would start to tip Wizard's hand on how they are going to treat God's, specifically in a book/setting/campaign, where the are on their home turf, and players could potentially be interacting with them. Prior editions went out and provided stats for Avatar's and things like that, which I guess we do see in Fizban's, but if we have a book (Planescape) where we are on the outer planes, I was just curious if they handle them in any detail or, because its Dragonlance, they are just kind of out there, as a loosely defined Pantheon.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yeah, I mean, the Black Robes are described as "ruthless", "wicked", "reviled and feared", etc.

I mean can no one imagine a ruthless chaotic good enemy, a reviled any alignment a feared any alingment... wicked is really the only one that is evilish

Spoiler

The Black Robe can sense the PC mage's alignment, and she will only recommend they join the Black Robes if they a) have an evil alignment and b) opened the scroll (despite being told not to). If the PC is evil but didn't open the scroll, then she recommends the Red Robes instead.

I mean that sounds like most PCs...