D&D 5E (2024) Wargamer Takes Shot At WotC for Not Respecting Forgotten Realms Canon.

[Parmandur]

You never know; there could be someone going into it with fresh eyes!

"X" to doubt.

 

[pemerton]

though that might be a bit of a spoiler?

You never know; there could be someone going into it with fresh eyes!

I can handle spoilers for a novel I've never heard of until today, and will never read. My eyes shall remain fresh!

 

[nightwind1]

Negative engagement drives clicks. If there are "fan complaints" about something, a lot of sites will incorporate that into their headlines because that drives views more than simple reporting of the facts.

And it was probably a handful of fans on one obscure site.

 

[Maxperson]

Oh my god how can they not respect the canon that I totally understand when I don't even know the difference between a Fighter and a Paladin!

Ad Hominem attacks don't make you all look any better than the writer. He made a mistake, probably a typo.

 

[Maxperson]

As I pointed out before, this isn’t a retcon. It doesn’t change what PDKs were in the past, it only changes what they are in the present.

Where is the 5e lore saying that this is a new thing and that they didn't have these dragons in the past? I don't see lore in the UA in either direction, so you can't say that it isn't a retcon, either.

 

[Hussar]

It’s a quantum retcon.

 

[pemerton]

It’s a quantum retcon.

I've heard that they're the worst kind.

 

[ECMO3]

I know of no example of an Amethyst Dragon in any D&D fiction.

That's part of the point. Why rely on old lore about counter-intuitive red dragons, when you can use the relatively blank slate of amethyst dragons? (As @Paul Farquhar said, the key thing here is not the dragons per se, but the dragon riders.)

This is not true.

If this were true why use Dragons at all? If Lore and tradition did not matter it would be just as good to have a knight riding a newly made up monster called a Humptfatz with no lore at all behind it.

It is the lore that makes Dragons players know of attractive, and the Lore is not counter intuitive for Reds considering the place alignment has come to in the modern game with Mexican Orcs and good Drow.

As a matter of fact there are more examples of heroes on Red Dragons I can think of then there are examples of heroes on any other Dragon types.

 

[Incenjucar]

While it doesn't matter because 5.5E doesn't care about lore, amethysts are an odd choice compared to other gem dragons. Sapphires were the notably militaristic ones more fitting for an order of knights. Amethysts were the more royal/lofty sort, so it's like a queen being a soldier's sidekick when there's a general available.

 

[Hussar]

As a matter of fact there are more examples of heroes on Red Dragons I can think of then there are examples of heroes on any other Dragon types.

Dragonlance has entered the chat

This seems to be a lot of tempest in a teacup. After all, we haven't actually SEEN the new writeup yet. One would think that maybe, just maybe, waiting until we see what WotC is bringing to the table before taking a big steaming dump on the idea might be an idea?