Dragonlance Dragonlance "Reimagined".

[Micah Sweet]

I don't Exandria but I would kill to get out of Faerun and DL is a great start (I want BR and DS too)

I will never play in the realms again... so we are in agreement I DON'T want Faerun

I don't want it like other worlds I want Dragon Lance reimagined and modern take. I don't want cookie cutter. If anything I want MORE variance.

ironically 4e Faerun was the only one I liked since original grey box.

what are we baseing this on? I have seen many remakes and reimagining's that improved on the wroke, and and even if it doesn't, it doesn't take away the original. I like the Amazing SPiderman more then ether of the first two movie attempts (although I dislike the MCU reimagining) I like strange new worlds better then I like The Original Series, but I dislike the Abrahams movies. I prefer Batman Begins and Dark Knight to Adam west (not that I dislike that one) and the batman/returns/forever/and robin series... I like the newest batman better still.

I like the xmen animated universe better then the xmen comics (but I still like the comics) but I like the comics more then most live action movies...

I like the new Dune better then the orginal movie, but I prefer the books to both.

West Side Story is better in the remake
IT is worse in the remake


okay but that's not an option when we are already told this is what is coming

What exactly would you want changed that wouldn't make it like every other modern setting release?

And making something new is always an option.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Again, the scale of the punishment is part of the genre of romantic fantasy, as been referenced upthread multiple times.

the scale of punishments doesn't need a 'good' god to agree to it though

 

[Micah Sweet]

Those are adaptions (of books, comic books, etc) not remakes of an original film or tv show. IE Like The Thing from the 80s is not a remake of the old black and white Thing From Another World film. They are both adaptions of a book.

A remake is like remaking Friday the 13th (which blew) (same with any 80s horror remake from Halloween to Childs Play). Remaking Resident Evil 2 (which was good but not as good as the original.) Etc. Heck. The Force Awakens was practically a remake of A New Hope.

In general, I agree, although I do like reimagined Battlestar Galactica and Strange New Worlds (not sure if the latter counts as a reimagining).

 

[Micah Sweet]

the scale of punishments doesn't need a 'good' god to agree to it though

Sounds like they did everything they could short of killing the Kingpriest with a bolt from the blue.

 

[Faolyn]

In JRRT's work, the Valar - who are angels enacting the will of God - destroy Numenor with a great flood. The inspirations for this idea are obvious. JRRT does not intend that this shows the Valar to be evil. It is intended to be a story about the consequences of the sin of pride. Humility, particularly before the divine, is a recurrent them in work like JRRT's, and DL picks up the same tradition.

If the Valar and whatever are supposed to be beings of Pure Good, then he also messed up by having them commit genocide. And honestly, these Tolkien references are lost on me. Not a fan of the books.

Personally, I'd love to know why "the sin of pride" deserves to be punished by mass murder, but that's a question for a different forum, not this one.

I don't know what you mean by Cosmically Good - that's not a notion I've come across in a D&D rulebook. The Dragonlance Adventures book that I quoted from upthread doesn't use it, as far as I know, and I don't remember it figuring in the DL novels that I read in the second half of the 1980s, though that is a long time ago so perhaps I've forgotten?

Seriously? Dragonlance poses Good Gods, Evil Gods, and Neutral Gods, as opposed to, say, Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms, that merely have gods with good, evil, and neutral alignments. These are meant to be major things in the setting. Good Versus Evil.

Unless you're going with the idea that Good and Evil are merely names for sides and there's no actual difference in how they operate, where its basically Blue and Orange morality for all the actual meaning they have. (Warning: TV Tropes link.) Is that the case here?

If by "cosmically good" we mean good in the way that God is understood to be good in a number of religious traditions, then obviously there are many people (the authors of Middle Earth and Dragonlance among them) who do think that the real world contains at least one such person; and who think that that person meted out collective punishment from time to time in human history, for reasons that are ultimately mysterious but are certainly related to the nature of human sin, including pride.

And that doesn't mesh with an alignment system. And, because Dragonlance is a game in a system with an alignment system, it means things will have to change. Such as by removing the "Gods of Good" and "Gods of Evil" titles and just making them gods.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

What exactly would you want changed that wouldn't make it like every other modern setting release?

the racism/sexism right out for a game (it's okay for a story but not a game we are expecting to play with different people)
from a story point of view some minor tweaks would be enough... change 'good' and 'evil' to light and dark, and make some evil in the light side and some good in the dark side... then do the same with the wizards align the towers with the moons but not a concept of good and evil.

add an option for the DM to insert other races, it doesn't take much more then a page to show how you can include any/all races.

And making something new is always an option.

not in a thread where we are talking about reimagining a campaign setting that is comeing out no matter what

 

[Faolyn]

I guess I don't really see the distinction. Polytheistic gods are sentient beings who make choices. What does cosmically good even mean? Is that just what they call themselves? The only difference between mortals and gods is that gods have a lot more power to enforce their will. They are making choices just like mortals do.

Dragonlance is supposed to be a setting of the balance of Good and Evil. Those are cosmic sides.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

And that doesn't mesh with an alignment system. And, because Dragonlance is a game in a system with an alignment system, it means things will have to change. Such as by removing the "Gods of Good" and "Gods of Evil" titles and just making them gods.

this, either remove alignments from the game, or follow the alignments.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I guess I don't really see the distinction. Polytheistic gods are sentient beings who make choices. What does cosmically good even mean? Is that just what they call themselves? The only difference between mortals and gods is that gods have a lot more power to enforce their will. They are making choices just like mortals do.

Player Characters are supposed to be sentient, but if a Lawful Good Wizard decided to start fireballing a whole town (or worse meter swarm) because the mayor was an egotistic jerk to them... we would all agree that isn't 'good' or 'lawful' behavior.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If the Valar and whatever are supposed to be beings of Pure Good, then he also messed up by having them commit genocide. And honestly, these Tolkien references are lost on me. Not a fan of the books.

Personally, I'd love to know why "the sin of pride" deserves to be punished by mass murder, but that's a question for a different forum, not this one.


Seriously? Dragonlance poses Good Gods, Evil Gods, and Neutral Gods, as opposed to, say, Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms, that merely have gods with good, evil, and neutral alignments. These are meant to be major things in the setting. Good Versus Evil.

Unless you're going with the idea that Good and Evil are merely names for sides and there's no actual difference in how they operate, where its basically Blue and Orange morality for all the actual meaning they have. (Warning: TV Tropes link.) Is that the case here?


And that doesn't mesh with an alignment system. And, because Dragonlance is a game in a system with an alignment system, it means things will have to change. Such as by removing the "Gods of Good" and "Gods of Evil" titles and just making them gods.

So they grouped the gods with individual alignments into categories with names. If two of the FR gods with good alignments suddenly started calling themselves "the gods of good", would  that setting suddenly become unacceptable and need to be "reimagined"?

I don't see the issue. Alignment has gotten pretty vestigial by this point and means very little. Are the labels really that important?