Dragonlance Dragonlance "Reimagined".

Status
Not open for further replies.
I guess having a topic is now gatekeeping. :erm:
No, of course not. The gatekeeping is when someone says something you disagree with, and your response is "why are you even talking about this if you don't intend to buy it?" That's the gatekeeping. The idea that only those who intend to buy the book have any reason to discuss it. That everyone else should butt out. That's the gatekeeping.

It is not gatekeeping to expect people who are weighing forth with an opinion to have at least a basic understanding of the topic.
Gatekeeping is, for example, when you assume that because someone disagrees with you, it must be because they're not as well-read on the topic. They just need to read more to be able to participate in the discussion. That's also gatekeeping. It's not the type of gatekeeping you employed here, but others certainly have in this thread.

If you have an opinion then you should be able to back that up with pesky things like facts. I guess expecting facts is now gatekeeping too. Why bother with facts? All we need is an opinion and an explanation that everyone should listen and respect that opinion.
This is entirely irrelevant to everything I've said, and it's a blatant misrepresentation of my post. And it's very condescending. All-round, a very disappointing response.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


DragonBelow

Adventurer
Or maybe the kingpriest's mistake temporarily banished or weakened them.

The Tales of the Lance offers an answer in its "Cause of the Cataclysm" write up. It presents a hypothesis, that is all about the Kingpriest gaining enough power to challenge the gods (who perhaps were severely weakened at the time), and that the Cataclysm was the result of the insane ritual that was supposed to elevate the Kingpriest to godhood
 



Hussar

Legend
/nope

I made my saving throw once in a while and I know when I'm not adding anything of value to a conversation.
 
Last edited:


Faolyn

(she/her)
You misunderstood me. I was talking from the point of view of the story, the gods can't come back if they don't first leave. I never said the gods planned it that way, but the writers did.
OK, sorry. I actually got what you meant, I just wrote it incorrectly. But that still sucks because the writers had to make their characters terribly OOC to make something happens, which is not good writing.
 

DragonBelow

Adventurer
OK, sorry. I actually got what you meant, I just wrote it incorrectly. But that still sucks because the writers had to make their characters terribly OOC to make something happens, which is not good writing.
No worries.

What do you mean by OOC? out of character?
 
Last edited:


Velderan

Adventurer
Actually, the solutions suggested do work.

The Kingpriest himself causes the Cataclysm - the ritual he tries to make himself a god fails and BOOOM. Istar is a crater. Moral of the story - don't try this at home kids.

You still get a Cataclysm, the whole Old Testament links are erased and the setting largely continues as is. There is nothing inherent in the gods smiting the Kingpriest that makes it necessary for the setting. Frankly, that's probably the least interesting (if the most contentious) element of the setup. You need the Cataclysm or the whole setting falls apart, but, the exact reason for it isn't all that important.

In fact, this way, very little needs to change. The Gods still warn the Kingpriest not to do it - but, are not allowed to directly intervene because the Balance must be maintained - if Paladine directly steps in, then Takhisis and everyone else can do the same and it's a much larger conflict with the gods taking a direct hand in things. Soth still fails and that whole story line is maintained. And the setting functions largely as it was.

Something to remember is that this is very much NOT Forgotten Realms. The gods in this setting do NOT directly appear. Even during the War of the Lance, Takhisis never actually arrives in Krynn (at least, not until possibly the very, very end). The gods never take the field and they do not have avatars, AFAIR. Fizban pops up, sure, but, again, takes no actual direct role. Only advises. ((Well, the line on that one might be a bit blurry, but, you get my meaning I hope))

I actually pretty much approve of this approach. It's a fairly minor change to the canon of the setting that smooths things over nicely and, honestly, probably makes more sense.
From what I recall, the gods DID use avatars. Fizban was Paladine, Reorx used the form of a dwarf named Dougan Redhammer, Gilean was Astinus, and the story explanation for Takhisis being unable to come into the world was the gemstone Berem possessed left the foundation she needed incomplete which is why the Dragonarmies were after him. It's been a bit since I've read the old material but iirc the lore reason the gods didn't directly interfere (e.g. Paladine taking the form of a platinum dragon and fighting the evil forces) was the balance going too far one way causing the risk of destroying the world or something like that

Edit: Ariakan was the son of Ariakas and the goddess of the sea, Zeboim also.
 

Hussar

Legend
Now that the dust has settled here, let me try a couple of thoughts.

@Velderan - I think it's fair to say that the gods are not allowed to directly intervene. Yes, you have avatars like Fizban or Astinus (sorry, dunno about Dougan, after my time) that appear in the story, sometimes parceling out a bit of exposition or comedic relief, but, at no point are they directly doing anything. They advise, they talk, but, they'd don't act. Which seems to be a fairly consistent thing in the series and yes, the Green Gemstone Man is what's preventing Takhisis from actually physically coming into Krynn. IIRC, though, it wasn't as an avatar - Takhisis wanted to actually directly manifest on Krynn. But, I'm very willing to be proven wrong there, it's been a while. :D

But, back to the point about the Cataclysm. I was reading the DMG (ShOCK!!) and the part about pantheons did give me an idea. What if the Cataclysm is a result of the Pantheon deciding to stop the Kingpriest? Paladine tries to stop it, but, again, cannot directly influence anything, only advise, so, no stripping spells (that's directly influencing) and no just directly saying, "STOP". Sends various warnings and whatnot, but, they all fail. So, the pantheon, as a group, decide to drop the Cataclysm and then step away from the setting to prevent the same thing from happening again.

This way, Paladine remains a good god - he did try to stop the Cataclysm, but failed. And, even if you argue that gods can strip away spells, there's nothing stopping another god from answering the Kingpriest's prayers. It's not like the Kingpriest or anyone in Krynn would know. Or, maybe, since we know in the setting that you can learn to be a spell casting cleric from reading, you don't actually need gods to grant you spells - you just get your spells from the Divine, but, depending on what spell you cast, it might be a different god answering that prayer. You might be a priest of Paladin, but, if you drop a Toll the Dead, maybe Chemosh is the one who answer it and powers that spell.

In any case, I do think you can set the scene in such a way that it doesn't radically change the setting - you still have a Cataclysm caused by the Kingpriest which results in the gods taking a vacation for a while - but, by making a couple of fairly small changes, you can make it a lot more palatable.
 


Stormonu

Legend
I don't think we need a canon explanation. Just, Kingpriest demanded godhood, flaming mountain fell on Istar, everyone blamed the gods and stopped worshiping them.
Yeah, I don't think much ink/thought needs to be spilled on it in the book, other than "it happened."

Of course, my understanding of the situation, paraphrasing Fizban was, "Child, the gods never left. People just stopped looking at them." (I seem to recall this discussion between Fizban and Goldmoon, somewhere after Pax Tharkas).
 

What if the Cataclysm is a result of the Pantheon deciding to stop the Kingpriest? Paladine tries to stop it, but, again, cannot directly influence anything, only advise, so, no stripping spells (that's directly influencing) and no just directly saying, "STOP". Sends various warnings and whatnot, but, they all fail. So, the pantheon, as a group, decide to drop the Cataclysm and then step away from the setting to prevent the same thing from happening again.
I don't see how that justifies anything, because the Cataclysm is absolutely a direct intervention, so any concern about no direct influence is clearly misplaced. Once a decision like that was being discussed, the only good act would be to directly intervene in a way that did not cost so many lives.
 


DragonBelow

Adventurer
Yeah, I don't think much ink/thought needs to be spilled on it in the book, other than "it happened."

Of course, my understanding of the situation, paraphrasing Fizban was, "Child, the gods never left. People just stopped looking at them." (I seem to recall this discussion between Fizban and Goldmoon, somewhere after Pax Tharkas).

Elistan and Goldmoon at Pax Tharkas, but it was Goldmoon telling Elistan. I only remember because I read it about a week ago.
 


the Jester

Legend
But, back to the point about the Cataclysm. I was reading the DMG (ShOCK!!) and the part about pantheons did give me an idea. What if the Cataclysm is a result of the Pantheon deciding to stop the Kingpriest? Paladine tries to stop it, but, again, cannot directly influence anything, only advise, so, no stripping spells (that's directly influencing)
Wait a second. If stripping spells from one's clerics counts as directly interfering, surely granting them spells in the first place would also count as directly interfering, no?

Especially given that in 1e, a god stripping its clerics of (higher level) spells is absolutely canon- it's even a plot hook for a pregenerated pc in one of the early modules, I think C1- and that higher level spells are granted directly by the god, I can't see this argument as holding water.

And, even if you argue that gods can strip away spells, there's nothing stopping another god from answering the Kingpriest's prayers. It's not like the Kingpriest or anyone in Krynn would know. Or, maybe, since we know in the setting that you can learn to be a spell casting cleric from reading, you don't actually need gods to grant you spells - you just get your spells from the Divine, but, depending on what spell you cast, it might be a different god answering that prayer.
This changes the very nature of clerical spellcasting in 1e in a way that is not supported by, well, anything, really. I know that's four editions back, but that was the environment that Dragonlance was created in and for, and it's also applying a major screw to clerics in a way that I find verrrrry suspect.

Which isn't to say that you can't say that is how it worked in your own DL campaign, but there's no support for any of this kind of stuff in the rules anywhere, outside of Pazuzu style shenanigans.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top