Dragonlance Dragonlance "Reimagined".

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

If divine magic is present at the start of the war then no need for the companions to go “seek it out” and no need for Goldmoon and her Blue Crystal Staff.

Do we know that is the case? You said “if.”

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Also, you can advance the setting instead of re-making it. Even so, i still think letting it go and making demeaning new is a better move.

Sure, but remaking it is fine to IMO. It is fiction, it is not like the old books (novels) didn’t change things too.

Also, we should separate the rpg from the novels, like how we separate the MCU from the comics. They inform each other, but they are not beholden to each other.

All IMO of course

 

[Paul Farquhar]

What changes are people talking about.

I don't know what other folk are talking about, but I noticed this change:

Despite being referred to as the Wizards of High Sorcery, all people that can channel the arcane arts are able to join the order. Wizards are the most common class associated with the organization, but warlocks and sorcerers also seek out the Tower to further their knowledge. That said, the strict rules devised by the Conclave—the Wizards governing body—make it unlikely for those with a more free-thinking way of life, like druids and bards, to want to join their ranks.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I never met a repulsive genocidal monster that didn't think it was doing the right thing.

I feel that a lot of Dragonlance's nuance gets lost in knee-jerk reactions. The characters within the setting are more than capable of recognizing the difference between Good ideals and Good actions - it's one of the focal points of conflict, especially as embodied in Tanis. The characters are shocked when they learn that the Kingpriest of Istar was a Good person, which makes it as much a lesson in the pitfalls of bureaucracy and fanatacism as anything else.

Hell, the Good deities are constantly shown to be at a disadvantage because their role is reactionary instead of preemptive, but recognize that trying to spread Good by the sword isn't Good at all. Their followers who do choose to take a preemptive or aggressive approach are shown to be hollow in both their faith and their morals.

All of these things are why I really love alignment in D&D, why I loved Eberron's approach two decades later, and why I still feel that the 3.X descriptions of the nine alignments are the best ever written. If we approach alignment as both aspirational and descriptive, where Good and Evil are discrete cosmic forces and a creature can try to lean toward or embody one or the other but not always succeed, much more of the game and its cosmos as written makes sense.

I think the problem is that there's no valid pre-retcon perspective that doesn't make the "Good" gods into basically "Pol Pot was an amateur!" types. That's not failing at an ideal, that's ignoring it entirely, especially with the sulking afterwards. You've got to buy into the idea that it's okay for a being with sufficient arbitrary "authority" to engage in mass slaughter because they think it's a good idea, and I dunno, if the 20th century had even one lesson it's that that is never, ever true. I'm never going to be able to buy a being that signed up to slaughter millions, including countless total innocents, with an indiscriminate WMD, essentially to try and nail one guy, is worthy of basic respect, let alone worship.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I don't know what other folk are talking about, but I noticed this change:

Where they excluded in the OT (original trilogy)? I don’t remember much being revealed about it in the books.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Do we know that is the case? You said “if.”

This apparently begins at “the start of the war” which is almost a year before Goldmoon.

Not to mention that the War was about half way over by the time Soth got into it.

And again it could just be poor wording on their part.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

I think the problem is that there's no valid pre-retcon perspective that doesn't make the "Good" gods into basically "Pol Pot was an amateur!" types. That's not failing at an ideal, that's ignoring it entirely, especially with the sulking afterwards. You've got to buy into the idea that it's okay for a being with sufficient arbitrary "authority" to engage in mass slaughter because they think it's a good idea, and I dunno, if the 20th century had even one lesson it's that that is never, ever true. I'm never going to be able to buy a being that signed up to slaughter millions, including countless total innocents, with an indiscriminate WMD, essentially to try and nail one guy, is worthy of basic respect, let alone worship.

Gods work in mysterious ways

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

This apparently begins at “the start of the war” which is almost a year before Goldmoon.

But could you just exclude clerics then? How did the original adventures handle clerics?

Not to mention that the War was about half way over by the time Soth got into it.

Was this fdiscussed in the OT. I remember Soth, but I don’t remember it saying what he was doing previously to the events in the novel. As far as I am concerned, only the OT is “canon,” everything else is a change to the “setting” IMO.

And again it could just be poor wording on their part.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But could you just exclude clerics then? How did the original adventures handle clerics?

Was this fdiscussed in the OT. I remember Soth, but I don’t remember it saying what he was doing previously to the events in the novel. As far as I am concerned, only the OT is “canon,” everything else is a change to the “setting” IMO.

Does the Legends trilogy count in your version of Canon? It was written as a sequel trilogy by the same authors.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Does the Legends trilogy count in your version of Canon? It was written as a sequel trilogy by the same authors.

No, I didn’t like it and didn’t finish it, so it can’t be in “my” canon.

However, if there is something relevant to this discussion in those books, please share!