Dragonlance Dragonlance cataclysm and a bit about Paladine

I think this discussion about the Krynn gods of Good taking out Istar and starting the Cataclysm reminded me of Tom Baker's Doctor - he had said in interviews he played the Doctor as an alien, with inappropriate responses to situations. We're talking about alien intelligences, these deities
and since no outside view calls the doctor objectively good, that isn't a problem. At one point the REALLY doubled down that he is NOT a good person but he is TRYING to be good but sometimes gets dragged down to being bad.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Reynard

Legend
and since no outside view calls the doctor objectively good, that isn't a problem. At one point the REALLY doubled down that he is NOT a good person but he is TRYING to be good but sometimes gets dragged down to being bad.
Why do.you think the gods of any world would be any different? We know by their descriptions that they have individual personalities, which is strongly suggestive of some sort of free will of their own. And knowing what we do about real world mythological pantheon that include such gods, why is it hard to believe that a bunch of good gods couldn't talk themselves into making the wrong decision? Especially if maybe they had some whispering in the ear from a particular 5 headed dragon lady who thought her best shot at world domination would come during a post apocalyptic period.

My point is that just because the gods of Krynn have "xG" in their descriptions doesn't make them infallible. Rather than argue about whether they dropped a mountain of fire on Istar, we can discuss why they did and maybe learn something interesting, entertaining and even useful (in play) about the gods.
 


Why do.you think the gods of any world would be any different? We know by their descriptions that they have individual personalities, which is strongly suggestive of some sort of free will of their own.
yes free will that is good or neutral or evil...
And knowing what we do about real world mythological pantheon that include such gods, why is it hard to believe that a bunch of good gods couldn't talk themselves into making the wrong decision?
sure they could and over the last few threads where I have gone over and over and over this I said even if they admitted they overreacted instead of arguing that 'good was too strong' Fizbin should be regreating it... I have the feeling based on the video that is more the way they are going
My point is that just because the gods of Krynn have "xG" in their descriptions doesn't make them infallible.
and I don't require them to be infallible... just good.
Rather than argue about whether they dropped a mountain of fire on Istar, we can discuss why they did and maybe learn something interesting, entertaining and even useful (in play) about the gods.
is there such a thing I have missed?
 


Dude, he litterally told you he was talking about the Kingpriest - not you. And you are still claiming he called you evil? You might want to take a little break and then come back to it.
wait after he insults me and uses teh wink emoji to try to make it a joke he falls back on "Oh even though I was talking about you I wasn't talking about you" instead of appologizing... so yeah, I am still upset about it.
 


Scribe

Legend
wait after he insults me and uses teh wink emoji to try to make it a joke he falls back on "Oh even though I was talking about you I wasn't talking about you" instead of appologizing... so yeah, I am still upset about it.

Sorry you are upset. It was a wink/nod to the thread you couldnt comment in anymore, after you had taken a few swings at me, where we discussed.

1. Interpretation of Good.
2. The Kingpriest and his 1984 style solutions.
3. The Cataclysm.

Its ok though, I dont need an apology.
 

dave2008

Legend
wait after he insults me and uses teh wink emoji to try to make it a joke he falls back on "Oh even though I was talking about you I wasn't talking about you" instead of appologizing... so yeah, I am still upset about it.
I read the posts as an unbiased 3rd party and did not think he was insulting you. I think you misunderstood that. So when he explained that he wasn't insulting you, you misunderstood that too and thought he was doubling down and being snarky. Reread the post with the assumption he is not insulting you and I think you may see them differently.

I was frankly shocked you accused him of "calling you evil." When you kept going back to that line of thinking, even after I felt he clarified himself, I thought it might help if someone else gave their opinion as they (me in this case) have no skin in the argument.

I was just trying to be helpful without having to do so much typing. I will stop now.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top