Dragonlance Dragonlance "Reimagined".

If you continue to practice advanced magic without being a member of the towers you are hunted down and given the option of taking the test or being slain.

I don't know how else to express to you that in DL magic is seen as very important and very powerful and it must be controlled. Something people will risk death to learn. Its practically a religion all of its own. Is there nothing in your life you value so much that you might risk death to have it or kill to safe guard it?

Look at the X-Men, people born with amazing powers, and normal people fear, hate, and respect them for having that power. Because a mutant who looks like a normal guy can just walk into a building and destroy it with a thought. It's happened in the comics.

As much fun as D&D is with it's "everyone has magic and its everywhere!" is great think how scary that would really be to a normal pleb. Someone normal looking guy who can just put you to sleep, or mind control you, or blow up your house. As great as high fantasy worlds like Faerun are, it would be scary that people can just learn that stuff without regulation and abuse it at will.

Heck atleast Wizards have to dedicate time an resources to learn even simple spells. Sorcerers and Warlocks don't. That's even more terrifying.
Phrased like this I'm now wondering if Weiss+Hickman leaned into metaphor and analogy regarding nuclear war when designing the Towers
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Never in my life did I run from someone as quickly as a couple at a local comic store that said that mutants being killed made sense...

I admit I am conflicted on where I fall on the Xavier-Magneto-Apocalypse spectrum but... yeah that was A take.

Hunting down mutants is def something real life people would do. Heck we can’t even get past skin color. Tack on being a walking WMD… be it a mutant or fantasy wizard.

Is that right? Of course not.
 


Vaalingrade

Legend
Never in my life did I run from someone as quickly as a couple at a local comic store that said that mutants being killed made sense...

I admit I am conflicted on where I fall on the Xavier-Magneto-Apocalypse spectrum but... yeah that was A take.
Magneto is sadly right in the Marvel universe, where in the 90's cartoon, we see a couple on a date, break off said date to go charging off to attack a small, green child.

Of course, according to Grant Morrison, humanity hates mutants because every single human is being mind controlled to hatred by sapient yeast that is also a man; Sublime.
 

Magneto is sadly right in the Marvel universe, where in the 90's cartoon, we see a couple on a date, break off said date to go charging off to attack a small, green child.

Of course, according to Grant Morrison, humanity hates mutants because every single human is being mind controlled to hatred by sapient yeast that is also a man; Sublime.
Of all the dumb crap in comic books that's definitely among it.
 

I am old enough to have read and even looked at playing it. YES the wizards stop all casters and force them into a test and not everyone lives through it. the 'renegades' that choose not to test are hunted like dogs.
Not a Dragonlance expert - is there any background material on how this is done? Who decides a hunt should happen, what evidence is examined before calling a hunt, who does the hunting? Are there roving squads of mage-cops who spend all their time performing hits on renegades who hit 6th level? Or is this a sort of ad-hoc thing that's the duty of everyone? "Hey Gerry, I know you're busy with research, but we've just heard that Horace the Disobedient is in your area and he's been seen casting Fireball twice in a day. Track him down and murder him for us, can you?" Is this something that PC wizards would be expected to do, once they're accepted into the Order of High Sorcery? What happens to the PC if they refuse this duty, or turn a wilfully blind eye?
 

Not a Dragonlance expert - is there any background material on how this is done? Who decides a hunt should happen, what evidence is examined before calling a hunt, who does the hunting? Are there roving squads of mage-cops who spend all their time performing hits on renegades who hit 6th level? Or is this a sort of ad-hoc thing that's the duty of everyone? "Hey Gerry, I know you're busy with research, but we've just heard that Horace the Disobedient is in your area and he's been seen casting Fireball twice in a day. Track him down and murder him for us, can you?" Is this something that PC wizards would be expected to do, once they're accepted into the Order of High Sorcery? What happens to the PC if they refuse this duty, or turn a wilfully blind eye?
Basically the Orders of High Sorcery are self policing and the general public hates mages. If you’re an official member of the conclave you can get bailed out by then if you’re in trouble, otherwise you’re likely lynched if you cause trouble. Powerful mages are generally dealt with by the order, not so are left to the general public.
 


Hussar

Legend
In my opinion, I think evil can be completely eliminated and good can actually be just naturally there. At least in my current way of thinking. So, my own feelings are not aligned with how Dragonlance presents the idea of balance. That's as much as I will elaborate upon my thoughts on this though.
I think that this really is the way to view the setting. It's not telling you what morality has to be. It's telling you what morality is IN THIS SETTING. And the point of playing this setting (or at least one of them anyway) is an exploration of that morality.

I totally get why that turns some people off. Totally understand why. Like you, @GreyLord, I find it pretty horrific if you start drilling down. But, this is how the setting is presented. It's not meant to be debated, really. They are telling you, "In this setting, THIS is how morality works."

IOW, if you take the morality as set from the outset, the whole setting makes a lot of sense. Change that morality, and sure, it makes about as much sense as a cardboard hammer.
 

Hussar

Legend
Without going into things not allowed on this forum, I wouldn't consider either of those things to be Good. And I wouldn't consider that sort of utilitarianism to be Good either. At best, they're necessary evils. It may be that the only way for Good to flourish is to kill Evil, but the act itself isn't Good, and the ends don't justify the means--particularly when the means involve sentient beings.

Which is fine in a setting where Good and Evil are not supposed to be both cosmic forces and moralities. It's fine in a setting that's Light Gray and Dark Gray. But that's not what Dragonlance is supposed to be, AFAICT.
But, again, that's the point. It's not asking you to consider these things as good. It's telling you that in the context of this setting, this is what good is. It's very much old Testament, old school religion where smite the unbeliever was considered a good thing.

I'd actually argue that if you aren't willing to wrap your head around that mindset going into the setting, then this setting likely isn't for you. It's not trying to tell you to change your mind. It's presenting a very specific version of morality from a very specific viewpoint. Which, frankly, at the time it was being written, wasn't really all that out of line with a lot of mainstream thinking about things.

This is a setting where the ends 100% justify the means. That's the point. Remember, it's all about balance. So extreme good is just as horrific as extreme evil. It's unfortunate that they tied it to good/evil instead of law/chaos, because then it would have worked SOOOO much better. Everyone can get behind the notion of extreme Law or extreme chaos being horrific and bad. And, when Dragonlance was being written, Law/Chaos was largely the dichotomy in the game. Remember, Takhisis is the Queen of CHAOS, not the Queen of Evil. I think if you stop applying Good/Evil and see the conflict through Law/Chaos, it makes a lot more sense. The Kingpriest caused the Cataclysm, not because he was evil (that can be argued) but because he was too Lawful. The gods needed to shift things away from rigid cultures that stultify and die, so, whack, here comes a honking big mountain.

Takhisis is resisted because she brings too much chaos - if she wins, then there is no more order in the world - only the strong rule. It's anarchy. Everything has to be balanced. Not between good and evil, because that's too nebulous. But between Law and Chaos.

I really do think that a lot of the whole Good vs Evil thing is more what people are reading into the material, not what's actually there.
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
The mutant analogy is not really accurate as gaining wizard levels is a choice. Don’t want to face the test? Don’t seek arcane power.
How else can I defeat all the evil wizards who keep this nightmare status quo going? Not everyone can find and old stack of CDs and gain Real Ultimate Power.

Edit: Oh my god, I only just now got what the Discs are supposed to be. How did I never make that connection before.
 

But, again, that's the point. It's not asking you to consider these things as good. It's telling you that in the context of this setting, this is what good is. It's very much old Testament, old school religion where smite the unbeliever was considered a good thing.

I'd actually argue that if you aren't willing to wrap your head around that mindset going into the setting, then this setting likely isn't for you. It's not trying to tell you to change your mind. It's presenting a very specific version of morality from a very specific viewpoint. Which, frankly, at the time it was being written, wasn't really all that out of line with a lot of mainstream thinking about things.

This is a setting where the ends 100% justify the means. That's the point. Remember, it's all about balance. So extreme good is just as horrific as extreme evil. It's unfortunate that they tied it to good/evil instead of law/chaos, because then it would have worked SOOOO much better. Everyone can get behind the notion of extreme Law or extreme chaos being horrific and bad. And, when Dragonlance was being written, Law/Chaos was largely the dichotomy in the game. Remember, Takhisis is the Queen of CHAOS, not the Queen of Evil. I think if you stop applying Good/Evil and see the conflict through Law/Chaos, it makes a lot more sense. The Kingpriest caused the Cataclysm, not because he was evil (that can be argued) but because he was too Lawful. The gods needed to shift things away from rigid cultures that stultify and die, so, whack, here comes a honking big mountain.

Takhisis is resisted because she brings too much chaos - if she wins, then there is no more order in the world - only the strong rule. It's anarchy. Everything has to be balanced. Not between good and evil, because that's too nebulous. But between Law and Chaos.

I really do think that a lot of the whole Good vs Evil thing is more what people are reading into the material, not what's actually there.
That is a very inaccurate reading of Dragonlance. Istar wasn’t destroyed because it was too “lawful”, but because he tried to upend the cosmic order. Takhisis isn’t defeated because of “chaos” either. And Dragonlance isn’t certainly not a setting built on the end justifying the means.
 

cbwjm

Legend
How the orders deal with renegades is explained in the 2e (and probably 1e) books.

White Robe wizards will capture the renegade using as little violence as possible. The renegade is informed that he must go before the Conclave and join an Order of High Sorcery. If the renegade refuses, he is magically cast out of Krynn. If the White Robes fail to capture the renegade, they will keep tabs on his location, destroying him only if the renegade proves to be a menace to the ways of magic or to innocents.

Red Robe wizards will attempt to capture the renegade with as much force as deemed necessary, usually increasing in proportion with the renegade's resistance. The renegade is brought before the Conclave and asked to join an Order of High Sorcery. Should the renegade refuse, or if the Red Robes fail in their attempt to capture him, the Red Robes will hunt down and destroy the renegade, citing him to be a threat to the balance.

Black Robe wizards will attempt to capture the renegade and try to win him over directly to the Black Robe Order. Should he refuse, the renegade is persuaded to remain renegade or killed.
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
But, again, that's the point. It's not asking you to consider these things as good. It's telling you that in the context of this setting, this is what good is. It's very much old Testament, old school religion where smite the unbeliever was considered a good thing.

I'd actually argue that if you aren't willing to wrap your head around that mindset going into the setting, then this setting likely isn't for you. It's not trying to tell you to change your mind. It's presenting a very specific version of morality from a very specific viewpoint. Which, frankly, at the time it was being written, wasn't really all that out of line with a lot of mainstream thinking about things.

This is a setting where the ends 100% justify the means. That's the point. Remember, it's all about balance. So extreme good is just as horrific as extreme evil. It's unfortunate that they tied it to good/evil instead of law/chaos, because then it would have worked SOOOO much better. Everyone can get behind the notion of extreme Law or extreme chaos being horrific and bad. And, when Dragonlance was being written, Law/Chaos was largely the dichotomy in the game. Remember, Takhisis is the Queen of CHAOS, not the Queen of Evil. I think if you stop applying Good/Evil and see the conflict through Law/Chaos, it makes a lot more sense. The Kingpriest caused the Cataclysm, not because he was evil (that can be argued) but because he was too Lawful. The gods needed to shift things away from rigid cultures that stultify and die, so, whack, here comes a honking big mountain.

Takhisis is resisted because she brings too much chaos - if she wins, then there is no more order in the world - only the strong rule. It's anarchy. Everything has to be balanced. Not between good and evil, because that's too nebulous. But between Law and Chaos.

I really do think that a lot of the whole Good vs Evil thing is more what people are reading into the material, not what's actually there.
Then its a setting that terribly misuses the concepts of Good and Evil.

Good and Evil having to be in Balance, quite frankly, is a boring and overused concept, and one that is nonsensical and highly unrealistic. OK, it might not have been overused when the setting came out, but it is now. Renaming these alignments to be Law and Chaos may make more sense, but is also boring and overdone and, quite frankly, means you have to ignore what the setting actually says in order for it to make sense for you. If the setting wanted the conflict to be between Chaos and Law, then maybe they shouldn't use the terms Good and Evil.

Also, no matter what basic D&D tried to claim, Good and Law are not synonymous, and neither are Chaos and Evil.

From what I have read--I'm going by the Dragonlance wiki here--the Kingpriest didn't cause the Catalyst. The gods did, because they didn't want him to destroy evil. They very likely were able to have stopped him in any number of ways, and they chose genocide. I really don't care about the minutia here because I don't care about the books at all. The gods created evil (or chaos) to destroy someone who wanted to destroy evil (or chaos). However you choose to phrase it, it's stupid and screwed up and is the type of "morality" that really messes with people in a bad, bad way and makes the game's concept very unpleasant for probably a whole lot of people. On a personal note, if I want to play a bad guy who thinks he's a good guy, I'll do so. If I want to play a good guy who sometimes has to do bad things, I will. I like moral issues in my games. But to play a bad guy that the game itself considers to be good? Ugh, no.
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
They very likely were able to have stopped him in any number of ways, and they chose genocide.
In fairness, they sent one guy.

One guy they knew had major issues going on that would distract him from doing the job.

And who by them doing so became a blight on two worlds.

And somehow they're still not dumber than Ms. 'I will enforce a completely dysfunctional society on my followers, thus guaranteeing my constant, humiliating failure as well as theirs, commanding fractious, self-destructive behavior when their primary enemy is a me-damn hivemind' Lloth.
 


Hussar

Legend
That is a very inaccurate reading of Dragonlance. Istar wasn’t destroyed because it was too “lawful”, but because he tried to upend the cosmic order. Takhisis isn’t defeated because of “chaos” either. And Dragonlance isn’t certainly not a setting built on the end justifying the means.
Bold mine. You said it yourself- it was destroyed because the Kingpriest tried to upend cosmic ORDER. That's a pretty Law vs Chaos interpretation.

Again, Takhisis isn't the "queen of evil". She's the Queen of Chaos.

Considering that the ends justifying the means is all over Dragonlance, I'd strongly disagree here.
 

Hussar

Legend
In fairness, they sent one guy.

One guy they knew had major issues going on that would distract him from doing the job.

And who by them doing so became a blight on two worlds.

And somehow they're still not dumber than Ms. 'I will enforce a completely dysfunctional society on my followers, thus guaranteeing my constant, humiliating failure as well as theirs, commanding fractious, self-destructive behavior when their primary enemy is a me-damn hivemind' Lloth.
Yeah, again, I'm thinking that you haven't actually read any of the books or the modules, or at least, not in a really long time. Because this is flat out not true.

And, I REALLY hope you are kidding by comparing the Disks of Mishakal to CD's, given the date of writing.
 

If you continue to practice advanced magic without being a member of the towers you are hunted down and given the option of taking the test or being slain.

I don't know how else to express to you that in DL magic is seen as very important and very powerful and it must be controlled. Something people will risk death to learn. Its practically a religion all of its own. Is there nothing in your life you value so much that you might risk death to have it or kill to safe guard it?

Look at the X-Men, people born with amazing powers, and normal people fear, hate, and respect them for having that power. Because a mutant who looks like a normal guy can just walk into a building and destroy it with a thought. It's happened in the comics.

As much fun as D&D is with it's "everyone has magic and its everywhere!" is great think how scary that would really be to a normal pleb. Someone normal looking guy who can just put you to sleep, or mind control you, or blow up your house. As great as high fantasy worlds like Faerun are, it would be scary that people can just learn that stuff without regulation and abuse it at will.

Heck atleast Wizards have to dedicate time an resources to learn even simple spells. Sorcerers and Warlocks don't. That's even more terrifying.
you can't practice spell not available from the third level without their books to teach them to you, magic needs knowledge for wizards and that was how your setting was built.

sorcerers honestly make no sense of how they get spells.

warlock would have a whole different problem but that is more the entities they work for not whatever dumb fool joined up.
How else can I defeat all the evil wizards who keep this nightmare status quo going? Not everyone can find and old stack of CDs and gain Real Ultimate Power.

Edit: Oh my god, I only just now got what the Discs are supposed to be. How did I never make that connection before.
discs?
 

Not a Dragonlance expert - is there any background material on how this is done? Who decides a hunt should happen, what evidence is examined before calling a hunt, who does the hunting? Are there roving squads of mage-cops who spend all their time performing hits on renegades who hit 6th level? Or is this a sort of ad-hoc thing that's the duty of everyone? "Hey Gerry, I know you're busy with research, but we've just heard that Horace the Disobedient is in your area and he's been seen casting Fireball twice in a day. Track him down and murder him for us, can you?" Is this something that PC wizards would be expected to do, once they're accepted into the Order of High Sorcery? What happens to the PC if they refuse this duty, or turn a wilfully blind eye?
in my experience this was not detailed... however I too am far from an expert.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top