Dragonlance: Shadows of the Dragon Queen

[P. G. Macer]

So for those who preordered on D&D Beyond or via the bundle (such as myself), the Dragonlance adventure book is out.

I haven’t read the entire thing front to back yet, though I’ve read the world lore and player character options.

So far, my impression of the book is that it’s good but not great. The Kender have no mention of kleptomania, which is good, and you can now choose from several skills, not just Sleight of Hand, so you kender PC needn’t be a pickpocket.

In one respect, the backgrounds are even worse than the Strixhaven and UA ones, in that they don’t give any personality traits, on top of no Ideals, Bonds, or Flaws. Additionally, the new Backgrounds and Feats have an interesting prerequisite: “Dragonlance Campaign”. This is likely a fig leaf to defend against power gamers taking these backgrounds and feats in a non-DL campaign, though in the case of Divinely Favored (which also is now a 4th-level Feat) the gating isn’t really necessary IMHO.

The Lunar Sorcerer is bonkers frontloaded, yet still powerful enough in Tier 4, as per the preview we got earlier, it gets an obscene 15 bonus spells known—and one of them is now shield! While you can’t swap out these bonus spells like the Tasha’s Sorcerers, I’m still considering banning this subclass outright, though I may settle for nerfing it.

The main thing I’ve read so far that makes me want to hurl my laptop all the way to Renton, WA, is the “solution” WotC has come up with for mass combat: just by the new Dragonlance board game and use that! Obvious sidestep/cash grab is obvious.

I’ve barely scratched the surface even of what I’ve read so far, but I figured I’d get the ball rolling and see what y’all think as well.

[animewatcha]

Now here will come loads of characters with backstories in which they originated from dragonlance (which means that they totally meet the dragonlance campaign requirement). This could have been simply solved by allowing players a feat (any in which meet the requirement instead of restricted list) and more feats at every ASI in addition to the ASI.

Also, would the lunar sorcerer be okay if it was just 'bonus spells known' limited to the lunar phase said sorcerer was in?

[Unoriginal]

So for those who preordered on D&D Beyond or via the bundle (such as myself), the Dragonlance adventure book is out.

I haven’t read the entire thing front to back yet, though I’ve read the world lore and player character options.

So far, my impression of the book is that it’s good but not great. The Kender have no mention of kleptomania, which is good, and you can now choose from several skills, not just Sleight of Hand, so you kender PC needn’t be a pickpocket.

In one respect, the backgrounds are even worse than the Strixhaven and UA ones, in that they don’t give any personality traits, on top of no Ideals, Bonds, or Flaws. Additionally, the new Backgrounds and Feats have an interesting prerequisite: “Dragonlance Campaign”. This is likely a fig leaf to defend against power gamers taking these backgrounds and feats in a non-DL campaign, though in the case of Divinely Favored (which also is now a 4th-level Feat) the gating isn’t really necessary IMHO.

The Lunar Sorcerer is bonkers frontloaded, yet still powerful enough in Tier 4, as per the preview we got earlier, it gets an obscene 15 bonus spells known—and one of them is now shield! While you can’t swap out these bonus spells like the Tasha’s Sorcerers, I’m still considering banning this subclass outright, though I may settle for nerfing it.

The main thing I’ve read so far that makes me want to hurl my laptop all the way to Renton, WA, is the “solution” WotC has come up with for mass combat: just by the new Dragonlance board game and use that! Obvious sidestep/cash grab is obvious.

I’ve barely scratched the surface even of what I’ve read so far, but I figured I’d get the ball rolling and see what y’all think as well.

If you don't mind me asking, how are the NPCs/Monsters of the book?

In particular I'm curious about what setting-specific monsters/NPC statblock are in the book, if they have statblocks for Dragonlance's iconic characters, and if they have a new version of Tiamat's stats.

[sambojin]

And, are there any beasts for Druids to use brokenly?

[P. G. Macer]

RE: Monsters and NPCs

I’m no Dragonlance expert, but the only "iconic" character from the setting with a statblock is Lord Soth, and the Introduction to the book mentions the PCs aren’t expected to fight him (he is CR 19, the adventure maxes out shortly above 10th Level IIRC) but rather evade and avoid him.

There are no new Beast stat blocks in the book, nor does Takhisis/Tiamat get stats here. The draconians get new stats, with their proper Dragonlance names, and there is a Kender Skirmisher statblock.

The spelcasters use the MPMM style of casting, though some beings (such as Lord Soth) automatically upcast their spells, e.g. Soth can cast banishment at 6th level 1/day (notable particularly as Soth uses the Paladin tag, and a 6th-level upcast wouldn’t be possible for an NPC paladin under the old system(.

[Unoriginal]

RE: Monsters and NPCs

Thanks!

I’m no Dragonlance expert, but the only "iconic" character from the setting with a statblock is Lord Soth

Lord Soth, as in the only person to ever escape the role of Dark Lord imposed on him by the Dark Powers, thanks to becoming so incredibly boring they couldn't be bothered with holding any more?

the Introduction to the book mentions the PCs aren’t expected to fight him (he is CR 19, the adventure maxes out shortly above 10th Level IIRC) but rather evade and avoid him.

Well that can be very fun or very frustrating, depending on how the adventure presents it.

[JadedDM]

Not surprising, the Heroes of the Lance don't exist anymore (or rather, the players are the Heroes now). So no Tanis, Tasslehoff, Flint, Raistlin, etc. So I'd be surprised if any iconics were even mentioned in passing, never mind given full stat blocks.

[KorvinStarmast]

The Lunar Sorcerer is bonkers frontloaded, yet still powerful enough in Tier 4, as per the preview we got earlier, it gets an obscene 15 bonus spells known—and one of them is now shield! While you can’t swap out these bonus spells like the Tasha’s Sorcerers, I’m still considering banning this subclass outright, though I may settle for nerfing it.

So we gave the feedback from the UA, I am sure some of us pointed out the Lunar sorcerer, a neat concept, being way out of whack, and they blew it off.

What confidence do we have that they listen to any rational critique of D&Done?

[P. G. Macer]

So we gave the feedback from the UA, I am sure some of us pointed out the Lunar sorcerer, a neat concept, being way out of whack, and they blew it off.

What confidence do we have that they listen to any rational critique of D&Done?

I’m with you on that one. This isn’t the first time WotC has seemingly ignored feedback; see them doubling down on Hexblade and Twilight Domain, while backing off on the popular Stone Sorcerer.

[Thunderous Mojo]

Would it not be more accurate to state that WotC in the past has perhaps ignored your specific responses, but perhaps listened to other’s feedback.

Perhaps most of the feedback for the lunar sorcerer was positive.

“How could X win the election, no one I know voted for X”…

Are the stats for Draconians different then what was presented in Fizban’s? You mentioned new statblocks……

[P. G. Macer]

Would it not be more accurate to state that WotC in the past has perhaps ignored your specific responses, but perhaps listened to other’s feedback.

Perhaps most of the feedback for the lunar sorcerer was positive.

“How could X win the election, no one I know voted for X”…


Are the stats for Draconians different then what was presented in Fizban’s? You mentioned new statblocks……

Just because something has a positive fan response doesn’t make it good for the game (I suspect this may be what gave Stone Sorcerer the axe, though it’s been a hot minute since I looked at that particular UA).

As for the Draconians, they’re mostly identical to the Fizban’s versions. The exception is that most of the new versions have an impactful new feature: Baaz get advantage on attack rolls when it can see a Dragon that isn’t hostile to it, Bozak gets a new lightning attack, Aurak gets a 20ft version of the Devotion Paladin's Auras of Devotion and Courage (can't be charmed or frightened), Sivak has a new version of Death Throes that causes fear, and Kapak is identical to Fizban's Infiltrator except in name as far as I can tell.

[JadedDM]

I like the concept of the lunar sorcerer, I just think it's a terrible fit for the setting, specifically. In Dragonlance, Wizards draw their powers from the moons. Sorcerers draw their powers from the ambient chaos magic left behind after the Chaos War.

[Leon]

Sounds like another vapid setting book to go on the pile.

[JadedDM]

It's not a setting book, it's an adventure path.

[Thunderous Mojo]

Just because something has a positive fan response doesn’t make it good for the game (I suspect this may be what gave Stone Sorcerer the axe, though it’s been a hot minute since I looked at that particular UA).

I agree. Which is why, this is the first D&D release that I have not pre-ordered, and might skip entirely. I love a good module though and hoped to get to some juicy details like:

As for the Draconians, they’re mostly identical to the Fizban’s versions. The exception is that most of the new versions have an impactful new feature: Baaz get advantage on attack rolls when it can see a Dragon that isn’t hostile to it, Bozak gets a new lightning attack, Aurak gets a 20ft version of the Devotion Paladin's Auras of Devotion and Courage (can't be charmed or frightened), Sivak has a new version of Death Throes that causes fear, and Kapak is identical to Fizban's Infiltrator except in name as far as I can tell.

That is cool. A good start at least.
Is the Adventure helmed by Chris Perkins?

[diplomancer]

Are 15 extra known spells, of which most are not very good and that you can't change at all, better than the 10 known spells Tasha's sorcerers get (which they can change to better ones if the ones given were not that good)? I'm not so sure. Of those 15 extra spells, probably less than half, maybe as few as one third of them, will see actual use.

The problem with the subclass is not that it's too powerful, at least not compared with the Tasha's subclasses; it's that it is too complicated.

And they DID listen to the criticism of the UA, at least concerning the extra castings. Before it was way too powerful, now it is one free casting of a 1st level spell, and two castings of two different 1st level spells at the cost of 1 SP.

What the subclass is really not is front-loaded. 3 extra-known spells (of which one is really good, one is average or below average, and one is trash), one extra-known decent cantrip that can be doubled up if the enemies are bunched up. I'd say that's about on-par with the other Sorcerer classes

[Gignere]

Are 15 extra known spells, of which most are not very good and that you can't change at all, better than the 10 known spells Tasha's sorcerers get (which they can change to better ones if the ones given were not that good)? I'm not so sure. Of those 15 extra spells, probably less than half, maybe as few as one third of them, will see actual use.

The problem with the subclass is not that it's too powerful, at least not compared with the Tasha's subclasses; it's that it is too complicated.

And they DID listen to the criticism of the UA, at least concerning the extra castings. Before it was way too powerful, now it is one free casting of a 1st level spell, and two castings of two different 1st level spells at the cost of 1 SP.

What the subclass is really not is front-loaded. 3 extra-known spells (of which one is really good, one is average or below average, and one is trash), one extra-known decent cantrip that can be doubled up if the enemies are bunched up. I'd say that's about on-par with the other Sorcerer classes

Having shield as an automatic known spell I wouldn’t call even that good. I can count on 1 finger the number of sorcerers I played with that didn’t have the shield spell. This might mean shield is too good and it became a spell tax for sorcerers but compared to Tasha’s sorcerers ability to swap spells on level up, the Luna sorcerer isn’t really more powerful.

[Psyren]

Not surprising, the Heroes of the Lance don't exist anymore (or rather, the players are the Heroes now). So no Tanis, Tasslehoff, Flint, Raistlin, etc. So I'd be surprised if any iconics were even mentioned in passing, never mind given full stat blocks.

This isn't set during the War of the Lance IIRC, it's a prequel. I'll know for sure when my copy unlocks.

Would it not be more accurate to state that WotC in the past has perhaps ignored your specific responses, but perhaps listened to other’s feedback.

Perhaps most of the feedback for the lunar sorcerer was positive.

“How could X win the election, no one I know voted for X”…

This - we in fact know the Lunar Sorcerer feedback was overwhelmingly positive because Crawford openly said so. (Twice in fact.) It's the reason LS was in the first round of the UA and then removed from the second, they got all the responses they needed, and so round 2 focused on iterating the Kender.

(As usual though some people on this forum will continue thinking their opinions unfailingly represent the majority of the playerbase despite all evidence to the contrary.)

I like the concept of the lunar sorcerer, I just think it's a terrible fit for the setting, specifically. In Dragonlance, Wizards draw their powers from the moons. Sorcerers draw their powers from the ambient chaos magic left behind after the Chaos War.

What about Bards and Warlocks? Honest question.

[RSP]

Do Sorcerers even exist in DragonLance? I remember Wizards being associated exclusively with the Towers: you add to go there to learn, and the testing was required.

I don’t recall anything that fit a “sorcerer” in the DL books (though those were a long time ago for me); though sorcerer is difficult to put into “game world” terms (High Elves and Drow seem to all be something akin to “Fey Bloodline” Sorcerers).

[8wGremlin]

Do Sorcerers even exist in DragonLance? I remember Wizards being associated exclusively with the Towers: you add to go there to learn, and the testing was required.

I don’t recall anything that fit a “sorcerer” in the DL books (though those were a long time ago for me); though sorcerer is difficult to put into “game world” terms (High Elves and Drow seem to all be something akin to “Fey Bloodline” Sorcerers).

i believe when the first ones were written D&D didn't have Sorcerers in the game, they came later.

The original books by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman date from:
Dragons of Autumn Twilight - November 1984
Test of the Twins - August 1986

Sorcerers were added in 3rd edition Publication date August, 2000

So thats's why they were not part of the story.

[JadedDM]

This isn't set during the War of the Lance IIRC, it's a prequel. I'll know for sure when my copy unlocks.

I am certain it takes place during the War of the Lance. If not...then when exactly is it supposed to take place? The last big war involving Takhisis was the Third Dragon War, with Huma, and that was long before the Cataclysm or Lord Soth existed.

What about Bards and Warlocks? Honest question.

Warlocks didn't exist in 1E, which is when the setting was first created. However, a warlock is just someone who makes a pact with a supernatural being, and draws power from them, so there's technically nothing in the lore that says they couldn't exist. I imagine they'd be very, very rare, though.

Bards are tricky. Back in 1E, Bards looked very different than they do nowadays. Their spellcasting was more drudic in nature than arcane or divine. But in 2E they were exclusively arcane casters, and in 3E they got some divine spells, as well, so it was something of a big mess. Because if they are arcane casters, it raises questions about what role they have among the Orders of High Sorcery. Some DMs removed Bards entirely just to simplify things. Others found ways to make them work. But for the most part, in the lore, bards were considered more divine than anything. Good Bards got their powers from Branchala, Neutral from Gilean and Evil from Hiddukel.

Do Sorcerers even exist in DragonLance? I remember Wizards being associated exclusively with the Towers: you add to go there to learn, and the testing was required.

Sorcerers were introduced in the Age of Mortals. After the Chaos War, the gods all vanished (again). The three moons, as well. So Krynn had no magic at all. The people began to develop new kinds of magic. They were mysticism, or 'the power of the heart' which replaced clerical/druidic magic, and then primal sorcery, which replaced high sorcery (wizardry), which drew power from the ambient Chaos magic left behind from Chaos, the All-Father.

[Jophiel]

On the other hand, there were several standard 1e classes that DID exist but Weis & Hickman decided that they didn't fit and just said "Not in Krynn, though" -- monk, assassin and druid (and the only quasi-paladins are the Knights of the Sword/Rose). Probably can't get away with that in today's D&D though.

[JadedDM]

Yep, same thing with races. No orcs (and consequently, half-orcs), no drow, no halflings (replaced by kender). None of that will fly these days.

[Envyus]

Not surprising, the Heroes of the Lance don't exist anymore (or rather, the players are the Heroes now). So no Tanis, Tasslehoff, Flint, Raistlin, etc. So I'd be surprised if any iconics were even mentioned in passing, never mind given full stat blocks.

This isn't set during the War of the Lance IIRC, it's a prequel. I'll know for sure when my copy unlocks.

What about Bards and Warlocks? Honest question.

So as a Book owner I will provide some corrections.

The Heroes of the Lance still exist and the Adventure takes place during the War of the Lance. The Adventure is in Kalaman hundreds of miles north of where the Heroes of the Lance are doing their thing so they have no role in the Adventure. The Adventure is about the Red Dragon Army attacking Kalaman.

On Bards and Warlocks, the Wizards of High Sorcery have been renamed the Mages of High Sorcery and accept Arcane Spellcasters as members (though they are still predominantly wizards).

[Envyus]

Yep, same thing with races. No orcs (and consequently, half-orcs), no drow, no halflings (replaced by kender). None of that will fly these days.

The book just goes over the races native to Krynn, and says if you want to use others they are likely non native that somehow got transported to Krynn.

[Lord Torath]

On the other hand, there were several standard 1e classes that DID exist but Weis & Hickman decided that they didn't fit and just said "Not in Krynn, though" -- monk, assassin and druid (and the only quasi-paladins are the Knights of the Sword/Rose). Probably can't get away with that in today's D&D though.

Huh. The SSI gold box games Champions/Death Knights/Dark Queen of Krynn allowed paladins and knights. I'll admit I never dug deeply enough into either the 1E Dragonlance Adventures or the 2E Tales of the Lance rules to see if Paladins were excluded.

[Rafaelfras]

I like the concept of the lunar sorcerer, I just think it's a terrible fit for the setting, specifically. In Dragonlance, Wizards draw their powers from the moons. Sorcerers draw their powers from the ambient chaos magic left behind after the Chaos War.

Right? From what I remember from 3rd Ed sorcerers should be the one specifically NOT drawing power from the moon's.
In my opinion to do dragonlance right the should do 3 new wizard traditions (white red and black) and ban the ones in the PHB, até least for the humans and one of the more generic ones (warmage, scriber ) for renegade wizards

[Jophiel]

Huh. The SSI gold box games Champions/Death Knights/Dark Queen of Krynn allowed paladins and knights. I'll admit I never dug deeply enough into either the 1E Dragonlance Adventures or the 2E Tales of the Lance rules to see if Paladins were excluded.

My mistake, the 1e rules do allow for a paladin of the true gods. I think I forgot because the rest of the book doesn't have a paladin in it (and implies that off-world paladins would want to join the KoS) but it is a legal class pick.

[LordShade]

The 2e rules absolutely allowed paladins, druids and bards. The 2e Tales of the Lance Boxed Set also had some strange "classes" that I'm not sure were actually standalone classes, but were closer to kits. The book wasn't clear. These included the Mariner, Barbarian, Con Artist, Handler, and Renegade Mage. Then there were two classes that definitely were standalone classes, the Tinker and the Commoner.

2e Knights of the Sword and Rose actually functioned like 3e prestige classes, in that gaining levels in Crown (and Sword) were prerequisites to switch into a higher order. They're the earliest version of the prestige class concept I'm aware of other than the 1e Bard.

Technically White/Red/Black Robe mages could also have been considered 2e prestige classes, as the way these classes worked was that you were a regular wizard until level 4, at which point you took the Test of High Sorcery and got assigned a robe color based on your alignment. If you didn't take the test you were a Renegade, and again it's not clear if the Renegade was a kit or an entirely separate class. It had no mechanical differences though.

[Libertad]

I've been doing a Let's Read of Shadow of the Dragon Queen on some other sites. While normally I'd post it here on Giant in the Playground, new rules preventing double-posts has crippled my ability to make such reviews without guaranteed responses, so instead the next best thing I can do is link it for interested parties.

I'm still in the process of reviewing, but so far I have mixed feelings on a variety of things.