Search results

Barbarian: Path of the Totem Warrior 34 (+) Bard: College of Lore 16 Druid: Circle of the Shepherd 21 Fighter: Battle Master 35 Paladin: Oath of the Ancients 28 Ranger: Gloom Stalker 32 (-) Rogue: Thief 33 Wizard: School of Abjuration 8

Barbarian: Path of the Totem Warrior 36 Bard: College of Lore 22 Druid: Circle of the Shepherd 23 Fighter: Battle Master 35 Monk: Way of the Kensei 13 Paladin: Oath of the Ancients 34 Ranger: Gloom Stalker 37 Rogue: Thief 37 Warlock: Pact of the Fiend 4 Wizard: School of Abjuration 11

Path of the Totem Warrior 39 (+) College of Lore 29 Circle of the Shepherd 23 Battle Master 36 Way of the Kensei 22 Oath of the Ancients 38 Gloom Stalker 36 (-) Thief 39 Pact of the Fiend 19 School of Abjuration 21

Path of the Totem Warrior 44 College of Lore 39 Tempest Domain 14 Circle of the Shepherd 27 Battle Master 38 Way of the Kensei 32 Oath of the Ancients 38 Gloom Stalker 40 Thief 46 Pact of the Fiend 29 School of Abjuration 30

Barbarian: Path of the Totem Warrior 48 Bard: College of Lore 41 Cleric: Tempest Domain 15 Druid: Circle of the Shepherd 27 Fighter: Battle Master 46 Monk: Way of the Kensei 36 Paladin: Oath of the Ancients 45 Ranger: Gloom Stalker 42 Rogue: Thief 47 Warlock: Pact of the Fiend 31 Wizard: School...

I stand corrected then. I can't say that I followed anything past the original novels and modules. Guess that must make wizards pretty common if there was enough renegades to ve an effective thought police.

There is no supporting information that he was a wizard or that there was a wizard working with him.

It's obvious Scribe is retconning changes to the story to explain the ridiculousness of Krynn morality. 😉

The idea that the Kingpriest turned evil is not supported by what Paladine said. He said it was the height of Goodness and the Kingpriest was Good.

But he is still LG, and you were wrong. And Paladine called down a preemptive strike against his own followers because he was afraid of a future evil happening. Nice guy.

It's funny how you originally insisted the Kingpriest must be evil, and when shown indisputable proof that he was in fact good, your position hasn't changed. Which just goes back to "Color Coded Morality is just team jerseys". By his actions, you couldn't tell the difference.

Don't you know how pendulums and scales work?

But it's still "good". It doesn't become "not good". Just somehow the definition changes into a bad thing?

Who wouldn't want to adventure in a world where every good deed MUST be balanced out by evil ends or the gods will drop a mountain to reset the world? A "heroic" setting where doing good just sets evil up for victory? Where even the gods of good say neutral is better. And nowhere does it say...

Perfectly stupid. The Gods of Good destroyed the world because there was too much goodness.

"So this is the end," Tanis said. "Good has triumphed. "good? Triumph? "Fizban Repeated, turning to stare at the half-elf shrewdly. " Not so, half elvin. The balance is restored. The evil dragons will not be banished. They remain here, as do the good dragons. Once again the pendulum swings...

Paladine wasn't talking about viewpoints, he was talking about the nature of Good, and that Evil and Neurality were necessary. So the God of Paladins thinks Evil is necessary and too many good people is bad.

And how was the Kingpriest threatening the whole world when he was limited to 2nd level spells? Paladine had to murder an entire city, caused untold devastation to BOTH sides of a planet, just to stop his own good aligned priest. It's just silliness.