D&D 5E (2014) The October D&D Book is Fizban’s Treasury of Dragons

As revealed by Nerd Immersion by deciphering computer code from D&D Beyond!

Spoiler

Fizban the Fabulous is, of course, the accident-prone, befuddled alter-ego of Dragonlance’s god of good dragons, Paladine, the platinum dragon (Dragonlance’s version of Bahamut).

Which makes my guess earlier this year spot on!

UPDATE -- the book now has a description!

D&D 5E - Fizban's Treasury: The Dragon Book Now Has A Description... And A Feat

Courtesy of Amazon, we now have a description for Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, the October D&D hardcover. The book introduces gem dragons, dragon-themed player options, and plenty of draconic lore! This joins September's The Wild Beyond the Witchlight, and November's Strixhaven: Curriculum of...

www.enworld.org

D&D 5E - My guess for the other D&D book this year... Draconomicon!

We know the fifth major product this year will be James Wyatt‘s as-yet unannounced project, and we know it will be coming out this year between Witchlight and Strixhaven. Wyatt co-wrote the Draconomicon for 3E. There have been two recent dragon-themed Unearthed Arcanas — dragon-themed...

www.enworld.org

Fizban the Fabulous by Vera Gentinetta

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Sure it can. A copyright is context based. So Draconian as dragonmen is copyrightable, where you or I could still use the term to mean harsh or severe(He took draconian measures to keep his enemies down). They probably created Dragonborn to put distance between a generic race and Dragonlance.

I'm fairly certain it isn't copyrighted, even in this context. A Google images search of "Draconian Race" gets a bunch of different results from various properties, all of which seem to at minimum have scales... the most obvious example being draconians from Dr. Who.

I'm not saying it can't be copyrighted, but it doesn't seem to be as other properties seem to be using the concept just fine.

 

[JEB]

As for dragons and draconic creatures in this book... At least some planar dragons seem all but confirmed. Catastrophic dragons would be fun but I wouldn't hold my breath (weapon).

I think an update for the lung dragons is unlikely; they're more likely to save them for a future Asian-themed setting (which I have a gut feeling will be one of those upcoming brand-new campaign worlds). I don't think linnorms are likely, either, too niche.

I certainly hope for more metallics and chromatics, but I think they're likely to focus more on new entire categories, rather than adding to the categories we already have. Likewise, it would be fun to see some of the oddball dragons, like mist or song dragons, but they're also probably too niche.

I bet on more drakes (4E had plenty not yet updated). I think the dragonne is also likely, as an old-school nod. I could see dragonspawn making a comeback, especially since they can easily be tied in with the original draconian lore.

Updated stats for Bahamut would certainly be neat (and they already have Tiamat stats, why not reprint those again too?).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Why does the dragon on the left have two tails?

 

[pukunui]

Why does the dragon on the left have two tails?

Because it’s a crystal dragon.

 

[JEB]

Given the lawsuit over the new DL books being written by them, don't we know that they are/will be involved already? Maybe not more than with fiction, but that will go a long way for the super-fans.

The lawsuit may have happened because Weis and Hickman aren't going along with what Wizards has planned for Dragonlance. Or at least weren't - they did drop it in the end. Hard to say if we'll ever know.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm fairly certain it isn't copyrighted, even in this context. A Google images search of "Draconian Race" gets a bunch of different results from various properties, all of which seem to at minimum have scales... the most obvious example being draconians from Dr. Who.

I'm not saying it can't be copyrighted, but it doesn't seem to be as other properties seem to be using the concept just fine.

Yup, Doctor Who used draconians back in 1973, so if anyone is suing anyone it would be the BBC suing WotC!

 

[Ixal]

You got me for why they did that. I largely skipped that edition. I'm just saying that Draconian is almost surely copyrighted and WotC owns it. What they'll do here is anyone's guess. As a company they flip flop around on things a lot, so....

Considering how Games Workshop was not able to copyright the name 'Eldar' I doubt that 'Draconian' can be copyrighted.

 

[vecna00]

TOO BAD!
/em Hurls 10 kender at you
DRAGONLAAAAAAAANCE

10 Kender?!? One is bad enough, 10 could destroy the world by accident!

 

[Azzy]

The lawsuit may have happened because Weis and Hickman aren't going along with what Wizards has planned for Dragonlance. Or at least weren't - they did drop it in the end. Hard to say if we'll ever know.

Well, they seemed to have no problem until WotC replaced their previous intermediaries with Nic Kelman (a pedo apologist)—something they call out expressly in their lawsuit.

 

[vecna00]

If we're (probably) getting deep dives on true dragons, and maybe a few others, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a sidebar referencing Athasian dragons. Probably won't be any stats beyond maybe "use ancient red dragon but add spells and psionics."

Just the mention would be nice.