Dragonlance Dragonlance Philosophy thread

The race itself did the encouragement. They "handle" anything they can, lie about it, their primary mode of defense is insulting others, they will do whatever they want when they get bored, and that they refuse to take orders. They are literally built to be disruptive. They are Obnoxious Chaotic Neutral: the race.
again the one and only example I have of the race NOT being disruptive would be told they are not playing it as a kender.
And again, nobody has this problem with any other race. Only the kender. Nobody says "every time I play with an elf, the player is so snooty." Nobody says "I can't stand dwarf players because all they ever want to do is craft all the time and it totally wrecks the party."

So it's good that kender were rewritten to make them into a race that plays well with others.
complet agreement
 

log in or register to remove this ad




then the rules need a carve out exception "This is not what the word normally means"
That's what I hear when a setting is described as a place with black and white morality. The normal shades of gray and nuance we use when we talk about morality don't function as we're used to.
 


Do we agree that "Good" unopposed, within DL leads to as per the quote.



I mean, its just too on the nose.
Except that ISN'T good being the problem. That is a good person falling to evil then EVIL being the issue.

This wasn't an example of the balance being too much good, it was not enough good. Because more good would have stopped the evil the priest king was useing.
 

That's what I hear when a setting is described as a place with black and white morality. The normal shades of gray and nuance we use when we talk about morality don't function as we're used to.
nothing about this shows how it interacts with alignment or the statements of what the 3 good alignments means.
 

Except that ISN'T good being the problem. That is a good person falling to evil then EVIL being the issue.

This wasn't an example of the balance being too much good, it was not enough good. Because more good would have stopped the evil the priest king was useing.

It isnt just a singular "Good" person. It isnt even a singular "Good" organization. It was many people, multiple organizations, and the view of an entire race (Elves).

This is the point. When "Good" runs the show, and becomes too powerful, too unchallenged, it becomes twisted into well, exactly what the quote says.

I mean its right there... :(
 

I mean its interesting. You provide a quote that perfectly illustrates the point, and you call it stupid. 🤷‍♂️

Is what it is I guess.
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 that the slave owning intolerant elves were anything but good.
 

Remove ads

Top