Dragonlance Dragonlance Adventure & Prelude Details Revealed

Over on DND Beyond Amy Dallen and Eugenio Vargas discuss the beginning of Shadow of ther Dragon Queen and provide some advice on running it.

Screenshot 2022-11-11 at 11.27.17 AM.png


This epic war story begins with an invitation to a friend's funeral and three optional prelude encounters that guide you into the world of Krynn. Amy Dallen is joined by Eugenio Vargas to share some details about how these opening preludes work and some advice on using them in your own D&D games.


There is also information on the three short 'prelude' adventures which introduce players to the world of Krynn:
  • Eye in the Sky -- ideal for sorcerers, warlocks, wizards, or others seeking to become members of the Mages of High Sorcery.
  • Broken Silence -- ideal for clerics, druids, paladins, and other characters with god-given powers.
  • Scales of War -- ideal for any character and reveals the mysterious draconians.
The article discusses Session Zero for the campaign and outlines what to expect in a Dragonlance game -- war, death, refugees, and so on.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
people bending themselves out of shape with how fantasy gods act when all you have to do if look at them like old real world stuff like the Greek and Norse pantheons.
I have no problem with fantasy gods acting like the gods of the Greek, Norse, Egyptian, Mesoamerican, and other mythological pantheons. I love mythology and have spent tons of hours learning about it since I was 12. However, I do have a problem with them being labeled good when they commit atrocities. I would never worship Zeus because a) I don't believe that he's real and b) he's a serial-raping authoritarian egomaniac.

It's different for mythology because those pantheons are mostly not worshipped today and our moral values have shifted a lot over the last couple thousand years. Gods created in the modern day that are intended to be worshipped (even by fantasy peoples) and be labeled "Good" need to actually, you know, be good in the view of modern society.
The Gods (which some were considered good/evil etc) acted just like normal people with a lot of super powers. See also: Superman

It’s a lot easier to understand when you think “Well isn’t Paladine the ultimate good?” No, he’s the “god of good” but he’s also just Superman, a dude with a lot of power trying to do what’s right.
He is supposed to be the ultimate good in the setting. He's the head deity of the Good Pantheon in Dragonlance. If anyone in the world is supposed to be "the Big Good", it's Paladine.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Scribe

Legend
He is supposed to be the ultimate good in the setting. He's the head deity of the Good Pantheon in Dragonlance. If anyone in the world is supposed to be "the Big Good", it's Paladine.

I'm currently operating under an assumption that there are 4 actual "Cosmic" powers (Good/Evil/Law/Chaos) but the Gods, are those things in either combination or seen through a filter. There is no power that is "Lawful Good" in its essence, but there is a God (or many actually) which is seen through a lens of Law, and Good, but with their own free will to interpret these things.

The Big Four, if you will, are primal, raw, and basic concepts, that do not translate fully when viewed or engaged via personification.

return to the navel gaze
 

I have no problem with fantasy gods acting like the gods of the Greek, Norse, Egyptian, Mesoamerican, and other mythological pantheons. I love mythology and have spent tons of hours learning about it since I was 12. However, I do have a problem with them being labeled good when they commit atrocities. I would never worship Zeus because a) I don't believe that he's real and b) he's a serial-raping authoritarian egomaniac.

It's different for mythology because those pantheons are mostly not worshipped today and our moral values have shifted a lot over the last couple thousand years. Gods created in the modern day that are intended to be worshipped (even by fantasy peoples) and be labeled "Good" need to actually, you know, be good in the view of modern society.

He is supposed to be the ultimate good in the setting. He's the head deity of the Good Pantheon in Dragonlance. If anyone in the world is supposed to be "the Big Good", it's Paladine.
This argument has not gone anywhere in the previous 3 or 4 locked threads. Is it really worth having it again?
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
people bending themselves out of shape with how fantasy gods act when all you have to do if look at them like old real world stuff like the Greek and Norse pantheons.

The Gods (which some were considered good/evil etc) acted just like normal people with a lot of super powers. See also: Superman

It’s a lot easier to understand when you think “Well isn’t Paladine the ultimate good?” No, he’s the “god of good” but he’s also just Superman, a dude with a lot of power trying to do what’s right.
If he's "the god of good" but commits evil, then he's not filling his job requirements.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Extreme good is also unhealthy, since it results in people who are willing to murder 10,000 innocents in order to save 10 million. The ends justify the means to achieve the greater good. All of the extremes are bad.
Murder is evil. If you murder 10,000 people, no matter the justification, you are evil. You cannot be good and commit genocide.

"The path to hell is paved with good intentions" doesn't mean that striving to do good always turns you evil. It means that evil people often justify their evil actions through "the ends justify the means".

"Extreme good" is good. Good is good. It cannot be evil or bad. Extreme chaos is bad. Extreme evil is bad. Extreme law is bad. But extreme good needs to be good, or good isn't good.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
In the case of Dragonlance, good vs. evil as it relates to balance works perfectly. The pendulum swinging too far towards good, as it did prior to the Cataclysm, ends up with an authoritative figure of good attempting to take away one of the 3 gifts mortals were given at creation in free will in order to prevent evil thoughts and deeds. Pretty safe to say if the balance swung too far towards evil a similar threat to free will would exist so a balance is needed. This obviously allows some evil deeds to happen and encourages good to be there to fight it.
If you murder innocent people, take away the mental privacy of your subjects using Detect Thoughts to make sure they aren't evil, and are so egotistical that you want to become a god, you're not good. The Kingpriest was not good. He did not do good things, so he was not good. He was very, very evil.

A person that intends to do good but does evil things is evil.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Well, with the Lady of Pain, it's sort of a "greater good" thing. But on the other hand, I don't think many people think the LoP is good-aligned.
No. They say that she's "Lawful Neutral". Which I disagree with, because she murders people regularly in order to maintain total control of her domain. Thus, I say she's "Lawful Evil".
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Murder is evil. If you murder 10,000 people, no matter the justification, you are evil. You cannot be good and commit genocide.

"The path to hell is paved with good intentions" doesn't mean that striving to do good always turns you evil. It means that evil people often justify their evil actions through "the ends justify the means".

"Extreme good" is good. Good is good. It cannot be evil or bad. Extreme chaos is bad. Extreme evil is bad. Extreme law is bad. But extreme good needs to be good, or good isn't good.
Extreme good is intolerant of even the smallest sins or flaws in people. It expects people to be paragons of virtue, just like it is. Extreme good is bad, just like pretty much all extremes.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Extreme good is intolerant of even the smallest sins or flaws in people. It expects people to be paragons of virtue, just like it is. Extreme good is bad, just like pretty much all extremes.
You can be intolerant of evil without taking away their agency and forcing them to be good. Thinking evil is bad is not bad. Good is good. It has to be, or else it isn't good and shouldn't be called by that name.
 


Related Articles

Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top