I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
But, doesn't that make your enjoyment of the game dependent on me? I mean, you obviously think that you have created a Dragonlance character. Fair enough. Why put your enjoyment of the game on me though? That's the difference between my problems with my fighter and your character. I don't really care if you think my character was fine or not. Whether or not you have a problem with my character was never the issue (except that it made it somewhat more difficult to make changes, I suppose). But, my enjoyment of the character is completely independent of you.
Why are you placing the enjoyment of your character on me? Your insist that you are following lore to create this character and that this character is a "unique Dragonlance" character. Ok, fair enough. I disagree. I think that you have created what is essentially an anti-Dragonlance character that opposes the core conceits of the setting. But why should your enjoyment of the character hinge on what I think?
Why would I play D&D if I didn't want to collaborate with my fellow-players for an enjoyable gaming experience? Why would you? I have some small role in your pleasure in gameplay, I imagine, why would you imagine that you don't have that role in mine?
I can have fun in a room by myself just fine, thanks. I don't need D&D for that.
And, if it DOES hinge on what I think, why didn't you ask the group before making the character? Although, to be fair, likely no one would have said anything, because quite obviously in this group, no one particularly cares about canon. Being "authentic" to the setting is certainly not a big concern for this group and never has been. AFAIK, no one seems to share your priorities. The character sounds cool, and that trumps any canon concerns.
But, again, if your goal was to make a genuinely Dragonlance character, why did you go this direction? You're a gnome, but, certainly not a Dragonlance Gnome which is a pretty specific background (although to be fair, the whole "Mad gnome - gnomes that other people would consider "gnormal" is a thing). You're a wizard, but, not a Dragonlance wizard because Dragonlance wizards are all Wizards of High Sorcery. And, to top it off, your character wants the gods to go away, a view espoused by no one in the setting.
So, I'm still kinda stuck on between your stated goals and what you actually brought to the table.
I picked this character because I did the dang research. I knew from osmosis that DL had a Cataclysm and that is one of the things that it had that no setting did. I also knew that it had crazy comic relief gnomes who invented dangerous technologies (other settings kind of have those, but DL dials up the wacky hijinx to 11). So I read about them - about how the Cataclysm caused mortals to lose their faith in the gods. About how gnomes think big, push the limits, are always in development, and embrace failure, and don't think much about the risks. About a mythical creation of the gnomes as a curse from a god concerned about their hubris. About the Greygem, and how it created wild sorcery and how it's tied very closely to the gnomes once again (either creating them in one version of the myth, or being unleashed by them in the other version of the myth). About how gnomes tend toward Lawful considerations in their inventions these days, but are not very concerned with good or evil. About how some gnomes study at the Guild of Magical Sciences as technically-renegades. About how a Life Quest to constantly improve an invention defines their lives.
So bam. Chronologically, you have a gnome born in Mount Nevermind who was delighting in failure and learning about the birth of the race and who, at adulthood, adopted a Life Quest to further the knowledge of wild sorcery (so closely linked to the Gnome's origin story), who went into the wilderness to contemplate it, and, in that wilderness and chaos, opened up a Discovery about the history of the world and all that inhabited it that lead to him embracing Chaos as his cause, and seeing the Cataclysm not just as divine violence, but as divine violence whose express purpose was to control mortals, to punish them for being "too Good." He returns to his traditional society, but can't hack it. Having embraced Chaos, he causes disasters - sometimes just to stop the expected thing from happening. The way other gnomes work on rocket-powered ironing-boards, he works on wild surges, the fabric of reality, his own mind, and the gods themselves. Because gnomes don't think small, and they're never happy with the end result, and there's always more cogs to add. He leaves Mount Nevermind (or, more likely, is thrown out with a none-too-subtle warning to never return) and, wandering in the wilderness and living on the streets, his mischief eventually attract Tower mages, who cage him.
That's the character that emerged from my research of the Cataclysm and Gnomes in the sources I am looking at.
It doesn't match the version of DL that you have in your head, because that version of DL isn't the version that I read about, I guess.
Which, to bring it back around to the Topic At Hand again, is part of how a change in lore negatively affects a gameplay experience. If the material I've read said that gnomes could not cast spells and that no mortal ever questioned the justice of the gods in killing millions of people, I wouldn't be playing a gnome who casts spells and questions the justice of the gods in killing millions of people. But these are things that happened in the setting I read about. And the DM didn't contradict me or tell me no.
Canon matters because it becomes part of your character or your campaign (or in your case, your memory), and then if it's later changed or invalidated, your setting doesn't have quite the unique identity it once did, and the play experience of those campaigns and characters is fraught with all this thorny uncertainty.