log in or register to remove this ad

 

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

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

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!



2E56D87C-A6D8-4079-A3B5-132567350A63.png




EEA82AF0-58EA-457E-B1CA-9CD5DCDF4035.jpeg

Fizban the Fabulous by Vera Gentinetta
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Russ Morrissey

Russ Morrissey


log in or register to remove this ad

Congratulations. You've just turned demons and devil's into 20+ different mechanical stat blocks for tiefling.
The tiefling is still distinguished from the fiend by the former being fully mortal and humanoid, while fiends are still beings of planar energy (or whatever the equivalent is in your setting). I just don't find it mechanically useful or thematically appealing to box them in a strict moral category despite their otherworldly nature.
 

Remathilis

Legend
I guess that it's how other people see your alignment. It's subjective. That's one of my main problems with alignment. One would look at Ingsoc from 1984 and the description of Lawful Evil in the PHB, and see that they match to a t, but their methods of forcing their citizens to love Big Brother are very brutal/vicious, which is typically a Chaotic Evil trait. Many other examples of Lawful Evil nations share similar themes (the Empire from Star Wars, Nazi Germany, etc), where their overall structure is Lawful Evil, but their leaders are typically Neutral Evil (selfishly caring about themselves more than law or the welfare of others), and many of their methods are Chaotic Evil (torture, genocide, disproportionate responses, etc).

There is nuance that the Alignment system just doesn't have. It's subjective, and thus a flawed tool for a "morality system".
It's a flawed morality system since it was supposed to be a faction system.

Most RPGs have a faction system to tell you who the bad guys are. The First Order is evil, evil enough that while a Finn-type character is possible, the vast majority of them are evil enough (or accepting of evil) that when the rebels (Luke, Poe) blow up the Death Star/Starkiller Base, they are heroes and not terrorists.

D&D doesn't have a similar "evil faction" like the First Order, Hydra or Cobra. Well, it did, and it was called alignment. You wore the team colors for good, evil, law, chaos or neutrality. You spoke an alignment language. Certain alignments had champion classes (paladin, druid). You went to the plane that you were aligned to. You had reaction penalties when you were speaking to a member of a known different alignment. Whether you wanted to or not, you were fighting for some team in the big cosmic battle of ideas. Which if why the penalties for changing alignment was so great, you were basically changing teams mid game.

Somewhere along your way, this idea failed and alignment became the morality system it notoriously sucked at. It was certainly by 2e. And there it has lingered as one part morality system and one part role playing advice, never totally successful at either but never so useless as to be discarded entirely.

What will D&D look like when it's totally lost the remnants of it's morality and faction system? When a beholder is just as likely to be friendly as a halfling? I don't know.
 

AcererakTriple6

Autistic DM (he/him)
What will D&D look like when it's totally lost the remnants of it's morality and faction system? When a beholder is just as likely to be friendly as a halfling? I don't know.
But that's never going to happen, though, and that's not what's being advocated for. This is a complete mischaracterization of the argument against alignment.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Mod Note:
Goodness gracious. The orc alignment debate? Again?

Dragons, people. This thread is on a book about dragons. Not orcs. Leave the orc alignment debate out of it. We already know where that goes. It won't resolve, except perhaps by some folks getting removed from the discussion. So, please drop it already.
 

I think I mentioned here I got the sapphire dragon mini today. I intend to use it as the secret force behind an unusually aggressive group of deep gnomes that typically presents itself via an animated statue posing as an aspect of Sunnis, Princess of Elemental Earth, before revealing its true form.
 
Last edited:

RoughCoronet0

Dragon Lover
I'm pretty excited for these new hoard items. I know the easiest way to power these items up is to slay dragons but it can also potentially open up reasons for PCs to try and negotiate with more powerful dragons to be able to empower their hoard item in order to better prepare to take down some bigger evil. Imagine Going through the Tyranny of Dragons adventure with one of these.
 


RoughCoronet0

Dragon Lover
I think I mentioned here I got the sapphire dragon mini today. I intend to use it as the secret force behind an unusually aggressive group of deep gnomes that typically presents itself via an animated statue posing as an aspect of Sunnis, Princess of Elemental Earth, before revealing its true form.
That sounds like an awesome adventure idea!

Speaking of the Underdark I'm glad to be seeing Deep/Purple Dragons returning in Fizban's. They are one of my favorite Chromatic Dragons next to White Dragons.
 



Edit: Sorry; didn't see the mod note.

No clue what you wrote, as I did not see it pre-edit, but yeah, I was trying to steer the conversation away from that topic, but I guess too many others pushed the envelope enough for a reminder to be needed.

So, dragons and free will and normal reproduction and alignment. Will this new book say more, or differently, how Dragonborn and Draconians come into being? Are they only created by a dragon or can a male and female of the species make children without help?
 

I think I mentioned here I got the sapphire dragon mini today. I intend to use it as the secret force behind an unusually aggressive group of deep gnomes that typically presents itself via an animated statue posing as an aspect of Sunnis, Princess of Elemental Earth, before revealing its true form.

Its a gorgeous mini and I look forward to seeing the other dragons in this book getting minis if they do, especially Purple Dragons and if its in the book, Steel Dragons, along with Song Dragons they are my favourite Dragon types.
 

No clue what you wrote, as I did not see it pre-edit, but yeah, I was trying to steer the conversation away from that topic, but I guess too many others pushed the envelope enough for a reminder to be needed.

So, dragons and free will and normal reproduction and alignment. Will this new book say more, or differently, how Dragonborn and Draconians come into being? Are they only created by a dragon or can a male and female of the species make children without help?

I too focused on Dragon, the actual subject matter of the book.

I hope their is a Dragon Ghost Template.
 



RoughCoronet0

Dragon Lover
Hollowed Dragons were a template in 4e for undead constructs of Metallic Dragons created by elemental magic that act as guardians to holy sites, ancient artifact, and massive hoards of treasure.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
No clue what you wrote, as I did not see it pre-edit, but yeah, I was trying to steer the conversation away from that topic, but I guess too many others pushed the envelope enough for a reminder to be needed.

So, dragons and free will and normal reproduction and alignment. Will this new book say more, or differently, how Dragonborn and Draconians come into being? Are they only created by a dragon or can a male and female of the species make children without help?
That has already kind of been answered in the PHB. It says that Dragonborn originally came from dragon eggs, which heavily implies that they are reproducing on their own now.
 

Faolyn

Hero
No clue what you wrote, as I did not see it pre-edit, but yeah, I was trying to steer the conversation away from that topic, but I guess too many others pushed the envelope enough for a reminder to be needed.

So, dragons and free will and normal reproduction and alignment. Will this new book say more, or differently, how Dragonborn and Draconians come into being? Are they only created by a dragon or can a male and female of the species make children without help?
Well, IMO, dragons are mortal creatures with as much free will as humans have, and so shouldn't be constrained by alignments. Ditto for giants, monstrosities, plants, and beasts, at least those that are intelligent enough to be able to consider morality. Other creature types are too alien to be truly understood with conventional morality, are effectively programmed, or are made out of or have been altered by pure good/evil/law/chaos. So "alignment" changes may happen, but are rare.

In another, more interesting topic: I think it would be really cool if dragonborn were literally born from dragons, like some dragon eggs produced wyrmlings, but in other eggs the embryos split and turned into a dragonborn twins or quadruplets (with the idea that wyrmlings are Medium but baby dragonborn are probably Tiny, so more can fit in an egg). But I doubt they'll use that.

Maybe they'll continue to make draconians out of corrupted eggs, but it wouldn't surprise me if they got rid of that or changed it. Guard drakes, for instance, are made out of dragon scales--which I personally think is silly, because there's no reason why they can't just be like wyverns or hydras and reproduce normally. They might go with the idea that dragons lay unfertilized eggs which are used to create draconians, and that you can make them out of any type of egg (so you can use chromatic or gemstone eggs as well as metallic eggs).

Or they might just make draconians a reskin of dragonborn (with or without the death effect) and just say they're self-reproducing.
 

Well, IMO, dragons are mortal creatures with as much free will as humans have, and so shouldn't be constrained by alignments. Ditto for giants, monstrosities, plants, and beasts, at least those that are intelligent enough to be able to consider morality. Other creature types are too alien to be truly understood with conventional morality, are effectively programmed, or are made out of or have been altered by pure good/evil/law/chaos. So "alignment" changes may happen, but are rare.

In another, more interesting topic: I think it would be really cool if dragonborn were literally born from dragons, like some dragon eggs produced wyrmlings, but in other eggs the embryos split and turned into a dragonborn twins or quadruplets (with the idea that wyrmlings are Medium but baby dragonborn are probably Tiny, so more can fit in an egg). But I doubt they'll use that.

Maybe they'll continue to make draconians out of corrupted eggs, but it wouldn't surprise me if they got rid of that or changed it. Guard drakes, for instance, are made out of dragon scales--which I personally think is silly, because there's no reason why they can't just be like wyverns or hydras and reproduce normally. They might go with the idea that dragons lay unfertilized eggs which are used to create draconians, and that you can make them out of any type of egg (so you can use chromatic or gemstone eggs as well as metallic eggs).

Or they might just make draconians a reskin of dragonborn (with or without the death effect) and just say they're self-reproducing.
The death effect is the most mechanically interesting part of the species. Without, they're not draconians.
 

Visit Our Sponsor

Latest threads

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top