log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E The New D&D Book: Tasha's Cauldron of Everything!

tashacover.jpg


The new D&D book has been revealed, and it is Tasha's Cauldron of Everything, "a magical mixture of rules options for the world's greatest roleplaying game." The 192-page book is due out November 17th, with standard and alternate covers, and contains more subclasses, spells, character options, group patrons, and rules. Oh, and psionics!


tasha.png

Cover art is by Magali Villeneuve

WHAT WONDERFUL WITCHERY IS THIS?

A magical mixture of rules options for the world's greatest roleplaying game.

The wizard Tasha, whose great works include the spell Tasha’s hideous laughter, has gathered bits and bobs of precious lore during her illustrious career as an adventurer. Her enemies wouldn’t want these treasured secrets scattered across the multiverse, so in defiance, she has collected and codified these tidbits for the enrichment of all.
  • EXPANDED SUBCLASSES. Try out subclass options for every Dungeons & Dragons class, including the artificer, which appears in the book.
  • MORE CHARACTER OPTIONS. Delve into a collection of new class features and new feats, and customize your character’s origin using straightforward rules for modifying a character’s racial traits.
  • INTRODUCING GROUP PATRONS. Whether you're part of the same criminal syndicate or working for an ancient dragon, each group patron option comes with its own perks and types of assignments.
  • SPELLS, ARTIFACTS & MAGIC TATTOOS. Discover more spells, as well as magic tattoos, artifacts, and other magic items for your campaign.
  • EXPANDED RULES OPTIONS. Try out rules for sidekicks, supernatural environments, natural hazards, and parleying with monsters, and gain guidance on running a session zero.
  • A PLETHORA OF PUZZLES. Ready to be dropped into any D&D adventure, puzzles of varied difficulty await your adventurers, complete with traps and guidance on using the puzzles in a campaign.
Full of expanded content for players and Dungeon Masters alike, this book is a great addition to the Player's Handbook and the Dungeon Master’s Guide. Baked in you'll find more rule options for all the character classes in the Player's Handbook, including more subclass options. Thrown in for good measure is the artificer class, a master of magical invention. And this witch's brew wouldn't be complete without a dash of added artifacts, spellbook options, spells for both player characters and monsters, magical tattoos, group patrons, and other tasty goodies.

Here's the alternate cover:

Screen Shot 2020-08-24 at 4.07.15 PM.png


UPDATE! An online event called D&D Celebration from September 18th-20th will be hosted by Elle Osili-Wood, which is "an epic live event with panels, gameplay, & previews of the book!" See the video in the Tweet below!

Gather your party and join the adventure at  D&D Celebration 2020, an online gaming event open to fans all over the world!

Celebrate the release of  Icewind Dale: Rime of the Frostmaiden  with a weekend of Icewind Dale–themed virtual play sessions and help us create the biggest virtual tabletop roleplaying game event ever! Fans will also get the chance to preview some content from  Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, the forthcoming book featuring massive rules options, subclasses, and more for the fifth edition of Dungeons & Dragons. Watch featured play sessions with D&D luminaries and learn something new with a slate of panels led by the D&D design team and community.


UPDATE! Check out the Nerdarchy site for some previews.


tcoe-eldritch-storms.jpg


Chapter-1-Opener-Tasha-and-Baba-Yaga-scaled.jpg


UPDATE! Other news items around the web about this book:




 
Last edited:
Russ Morrissey

Comments


log in or register to remove this ad

Ooooh ooh what is the Blade of Disaster wizard spell?
Black Blade of Disaster. Most known from Baldurs's Gate 2, but originally came from a 2nd edition splat book (Wizard's Spell Compendium Volume One).

It was pretty much 9th level version of Shadow Blade, that could insta-kill or energy drain the target.
This spell enables the caster to create a black, blade-shaped planar rift about three feet long. It jumps into the caster's hand and is used as a normal sword, remaining there for the duration of the spell.

Also worthy of note:
The Black Blade of Disaster is written down in the Mage Book of Elminster, though he won't cast it.
 

see

Explorer
Hell, I remember a time before kobolds were dragony, when they were sort of dog-critters...
They were always reptiles. Dog-like reptiles, yes, but always reptiles:

1). Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monster Manual, 1977, p.57.

"If 200 or more kobolds are encountered in their lair there will be the following additional creatures there: 5-20 guards (as bodyguards above), females equal to 50% of the total number, young equal to 10% of the total number, and 30-300 eggs."

"The hide of kobolds runs from very dark rusty brown to a rusty black. They have no hair."

(Also see the kobold artwork on pp. 57 & 58, which clearly shows scales.)

2). Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set, 1981 (Moldvay), p.B37

"They have scaly rust-brown skin and no hair."

3). Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set, 1983 (Mentzer), Dungeon Masters Rulebook, p.32

"They have scaly, rust-brown skin and no hair."

4). Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monstrous Compendium Volume 1, Kobold page

"Barely clearing three feet in height, kobolds have scaly hides that range from very dark rusty brown to a rusty black."

"In a lair there will be 5-20 (5d4) bodyguards, females equal to 50% of the males, young equal to 10% of the males and 30-300 (3d10x10) eggs."

5). Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia, p.187

"They have scaly, rust-brown skin no hair."

6). Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monstrous Manual, p.214

"Barely clearing three feet in height, kobolds have scaly hides that range from very dark rusty brown to a rusty black."

"In a lair there will be 5-20 (5d4) bodyguards, females equal to 50% of the males, young equal to 10% of the males and 30-300 (3d10x10) eggs."
 

Azzy

Newtype
Works for me. Archons, exarchs, heralds, emissaries, shards, exemplars, choristers, servitors - just not 'angels'. I know Planescape/2e's LG celestials were called archons, but it wouldn't be the first time D&D has reinvented a creature. Hell, I remember a time before kobolds were dragony, when they were sort of dog-critters...
To be utterly and unnecessarily pedantic, the archon of AD&D originated in the 1e Manual of the Planes in 1987. However, it was preceded by the archon of BECMI D&D in the Master Rules boxed set in 1985. The only real similarity between the two is that they are outer planar creatures that are also lawful and good. So, creating a new monster called "archon" that is different from what came before wouldn't be beyond the pale. (I mean, there is already two different monsters with that name, so what would a third hurt?)
 

Azzy

Newtype
Works for me. Archons, exarchs, heralds, emissaries, shards, exemplars, choristers, servitors - just not 'angels'. I know Planescape/2e's LG celestials were called archons, but it wouldn't be the first time D&D has reinvented a creature.
Ooh, I like "exarch". Though "asura" (from the Vedic tradition, like the extant devas) might also be an option to look at for an alightment-unspecific servitor of a god.. While mostly portrayed as evil in later texts, they are more nuanced and there and not all are evil.
 

Marandahir

Crown-Forester
They were always reptiles. Dog-like reptiles, yes, but always reptiles:
VERY Early D&D, and throughout variations of Basic, they were described as dog-like, and a dearth of explanatory text and few images to go off of (especially as people "circulated the tapes" regarding the early rules of the game) may have led to the idea that Kobolds are some sort of furry dog goblin in D&D.

This "furry"-type Kobolds that were altogether more akin to Gnolls eally took off in non-D&D circles and in especially in Japanese TTRPG tables through the 80s and 90s.

We also happend to see the furry-type Kobold in the Warcraft series of video games, which had their rise in the 90s.

By the time Record of Lodoss War was being played (and published as replays in Comptiq) as a setting for AD&D 2e, Tunnels & Trolls, and Runequest (1986), Japan had very clearly set in their minds that Kobolds were essentially equivalent to what we now refer to as Gnolls in D&D 5e. This has never been the case for the officially published versions of D&D to my knowledge, but for many people who watched the 1990 anime OVA adaptation, the series very clearly has got the idea that THESE are Kobolds:

record_of_lodoss_by_keiiion-d8iybtd.jpg
 

Kobold Avenger

Adventurer
Ooh, I like "exarch". Though "asura" (from the Vedic tradition, like the extant devas) might also be an option to look at for an alightment-unspecific servitor of a god.. While mostly portrayed as evil in later texts, they are more nuanced and there and not all are evil.
Asura is a Chaotic Good celestial, introduced first in Al-Quadim and later brought into Planescape. They'd be based more off the Zoroastrian "Ahura" rather than the Vedic "Asura".
 

Marandahir

Crown-Forester
Asura is a Chaotic Good celestial, introduced first in Al-Quadim and later brought into Planescape. They'd be based more off the Zoroastrian "Ahura" rather than the Vedic "Asura".
Or the RigVedic Asura - In the RigVedic era of Proto-Indo-Iranian religion, the Asura/Deva divide hadn't yet arisen (The Avestas demonizes Daevas while praising Ahuras; the later Hindu traditions demonize the Asuras while praising the Devas; in the RigVedas, both terms are used for entities considered one class or the other in each religion).

Asura/Ahura/AEsir are believed to derive via sprachbund from Proto-Uralic *Asera, which would mean "Lord." Deva & Devi, of course, comes from Proto-Indo-European *dyew- meaning "Sky" or "God," as seen in other languages in the family in roles such as Tyr, Jupiter, Zeus, Dispater, Dyeus Pater, etc; it's the same root as Divine. They're two different words to refer with respect to a God, but over time in separating cultures, the words took on different meanings. D&D takes a positive take with BOTH terms, likely out of a desire to not offend practitioners of either modern religion descended from the Ancient Vedic traditions.
 

see

Explorer
VERY Early D&D . . . they were described as dog-like
Er, no, they were not described as dog-like in "VERY Early D&D". In the original three booklets (1974), they were not described at all. In Holmes Basic (1977), they were described as being like dwarves, with no mention of dogs. In the first Monster Manual (1977), again, no mention of dogs, though there is mention of eggs.

And every single version of kobolds published in D&D that mentioned dogs at all (the Moldvay Basic [1981], Mentzer Basic [1983], Monstrous Compendium Volume 1 [1989], Rules Cyclopedia [1991], Monstrous Manual [1994], 3e Monster Manual [2000], and 3.5 Monster Manual [2003] write-ups all mention dogs as a point of comparison) also specified that kobolds had scales.

Yes, some people came away with the impression that D&D kobolds were dog-people. This was some mix of the illustration in the 1977 Monster Manual (where their heads definitely resemble those of dogs and their scales can be mistaken for scale armor), not fully reading later descriptions, and the way other media depicted kobolds.

But D&D kobolds have demonstrably been scaly egg-layers since 1977, before, during, and after any mention of dogs in their write-ups.
 




Parmandur

Legend
1e MM Kobold - I think I always thought that was scale armor, is it?
Nope, the text calls out that they have eggs, and I have seen elsewhere that the artist was supposed to make them more clearly scaley, but somewhat failed. Kobolds as reptilian has been pretty consistent, but vague, until 3E really cleared it up.
 


Cadence

Hero
Supporter
Nope, the text calls out that they have eggs, and I have seen elsewhere that the artist was supposed to make them more clearly scaley, but somewhat failed. Kobolds as reptilian has been pretty consistent, but vague, until 3E really cleared it up.
My first exposure was in Moldvay. They got the scaley right there. But also emphasized dog-like.
 

Attachments


@Cadance

Some dinosaurs are bird-like, some dinosaurs are dolphin-like, and so on. Perhaps, the kobold is more like a dog-like dinosaur. Their shape is a convergent evolution (or a mimicking magical creation). Strictly speaking, dragons are something like magical monstrosities, but they are dinosaur-esque, nevertheless.

I am unclear about the dragon being warm-blooded or cold-blooded. Probably it is cold-blooded because of trope associations of being heartless. The kobold might be similar.
 


Cadence

Hero
Supporter
@Cadance

Some dinosaurs are bird-like, some dinosaurs are dolphin-like, and so on. Perhaps, the kobold is more like a dog-like dinosaur. Their shape is a convergent evolution (or a mimicking magical creation). Strictly speaking, dragons are something like magical monstrosities, but they are dinosaur-esque, nevertheless.

I am unclear about the dragon being warm-blooded or cold-blooded. Probably it is cold-blooded because of trope associations of being heartless. The kobold might be similar.
I think I described them as "lizard-dog people" in the game I'm running for my 11yo and his friends.

Isn't there a good argument for birds to actually be the last surviving dinosaurs?

I think I always assumed Dragons were warm blooded. If not, should they be much easier pickings at night and in the winter?
 


I think I described them as "lizard-dog people" in the game I'm running for my 11yo and his friends.

Isn't there a good argument for birds to actually be the last surviving dinosaurs?

I think I always assumed Dragons were warm blooded. If not, should they be much easier pickings at night and in the winter?
Yeah, I follow the taxonomy that birds are dinosaurs. At least the warm-blooded kind of dinosaurs.

Dragons are magical. But if you feel they are warm-blooded, that seems plausible, especially because they are partly mammalian too.



Kobolds are "lizard-dog people".

Dragons tend to be either "snake-lion-eagle" beasts or "snake-wolf-bat" beasts. The East Asian dragon is something like a "snake-camel-tiger-deer-fish" beast.

So maybe "reptile-dog" kobolds and dragons are related after all? If the kobolds are "snake-wolf" people, that would be even more draconic.



That reminds me. Really a "kobold" is the nature spirit of a land, equivalent to a sprite or gnome. But I feel it is ok, for a creature like the D&D kobold to get its name from being the gnome-like reptile that lives underground.
 

COMING SOON: 5 Plug-In Settlements for your 5E Game

Advertisement1

Latest threads

COMING SOON: 5 Plug-In Settlements for your 5E Game

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top