Dragonlance Dragonlance Philosophy thread

[Scribe]

So the God of Paladins thinks Evil is necessary and too many good people is bad.

I dont believe thats the message to be taken here. In no way can the actions of the Istar Priesthood, be viewed as 'Good' by the time the Rock's start falling.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

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 that makes some little sense in more shades ofgrey view... but not in 5e alignment descriptions

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I dont believe thats the message to be taken here. In no way can the actions of the Istar Priesthood, be viewed as 'Good' by the time the Rock's start falling.

then how was good or "too much good in control" when he and his followers weredoing evil?

 

[Scribe]

then how was good or "too much good in control" when he and his followers weredoing evil?

Once the priesthood went from doing good, to witch hunting, would likely be the marker.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Once the priesthood went from doing good, to witch hunting, would likely be the marker.

but again then once he is evil the problem was EVIL not good if GOOD held sway there would not be the issue

 

[Scribe]

but again then once he is evil the problem was EVIL not good if GOOD held sway there would not be the issue

I dont agree, because the issue is once Good was in a position of being unchallenged, is the moment it becomes an issue within the setting.

They were still Good, but the logical line is 'Good is Good' 'Good stopping Evil actors is Good' 'Good stopping Evil thoughts is Good'. Once we hit the red, its too late.

 

[RuinousPowers]

I dont believe thats the message to be taken here. In no way can the actions of the Istar Priesthood, be viewed as 'Good' by the time the Rock's start falling.

"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 freely. " "all the suffering, just for that?" Laurana asked, coming to stand beside Tanis. "Why shouldn't good win, drive the darkness away forever? " Young lady? " Fizban scolded, shaking a bony finger at her. "There was a time when good held sway. Do you know when that was? Right before the cataclysm!" "Yes" he continued seeing their astonishment " the king priest of Istar was a good man. Does that surprise you? It shouldn't, because both of you have seen what goodness like that can do. You've seen it in the elves, the ancient embodiment of good! It breeds intolerance, rigidity, a belief that because I am right, those who don't believe as I do are wrong."

"We gods saw the danger this complacency was bringing upon the world. We saw that much good was being destroyed, simply because it wasn't understood. And we saw the queen of darkness, lying in wait, biding her time; for this could not last, of course. The overweighted scales must tip and fall, and then she would return. darkness would descend upon the world very fast. " And so the cataclysm, we grieved for the innocent. We grieved for the guilty. But the world had to be prepared, or the darkness that fell might never have been lifted."

So, the world was dominated by good, which is bad. Because the world has to be in balance- but neutrality isn't balance. It's an extreme alignent- maybe even more extreme than good or evil. It is certainly not The Balance that Moorcock created.

So. Good breeds intolerance. Not just the Kingpriest- it's the very nature of good.

 

[Flamestrike]

So following Paladine's teachings inevitably leads to intolerance and forced compliance, which results in more Cataclysms?

No, that's not what they're saying.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

"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 freely. " "all the suffering, just for that?" Laurana asked, coming to stand beside Tanis. "Why shouldn't good win, drive the darkness away forever? " Young lady? " Fizban scolded, shaking a bony finger at her. "There was a time when good held sway. Do you know when that was? Right before the cataclysm!" "Yes" he continued seeing their astonishment " the king priest of Istar was a good man. Does that surprise you? It shouldn't, because both of you have seen what goodness like that can do. You've seen it in the elves, the ancient embodiment of good! It breeds intolerance, rigidity, a belief that because I am right, those who don't believe as I do are wrong."

this one back and forth is what I think messes up the balance... It messes up the entire alignment system, and were it can be an interesting philosophical argument that may be fun it doesn't fit D&D now (I could argue even as far back as 2e, but right now I am focusing on 5e/1D&D)

"We gods saw the danger this complacency was bringing upon the world. We saw that much good was being destroyed, simply because it wasn't understood. And we saw the queen of darkness, lying in wait, biding her time; for this could not last, of course. The overweighted scales must tip and fall, and then she would return. darkness would descend upon the world very fast. " And so the cataclysm, we grieved for the innocent. We grieved for the guilty. But the world had to be prepared, or the darkness that fell might never have been lifted."

again IF the King Priest was good (the alignment and working for good the alignment as described in 5e) then he would be elevating people and only going after the problems. This is why the darkness MAY come back but would not an organized GOOD force be the thing to stop them?
of course this isn't what they talk about (and maybe back when the back and forth was written they had a different idea) they had the King priest that was 'a good man' doing down right evil things.

So, the world was dominated by good, which is bad. Because the world has to be in balance- but neutrality isn't balance. It's an extreme alignent- maybe even more extreme than good or evil. It is certainly not The Balance that Moorcock created.

yes and again I think there is a great nuggets of WHY must the good gods go for balance not victory that is where the setting droped the ball.

So. Good breeds intolerance. Not just the Kingpriest- it's the very nature of good.

 

[Faolyn]

Weird how Ive only ever played with exceptionally well played Kender. Must be that the player and DM aren't out to cause Chaos. Must be that a crappy player plays crappy characters. shrugs

If it's only "crappy players" at fault, why are there so many horror stories about kenders? You very rarely hear about crappy players being jerks because they're playing elves or dwarfs. You only ever hear about them with kender.

No, I propose that the kender are a crappy race that encouraged players to act like jerks. That they also attracted jerks is beside the point.