.........
Oh, you want to know where? Yeah, I can't remember. heh heh It seems like maybe More Leaves from the Inn of the Last Home had the rules, I think.
Oh yes, yes. Definately!
.........
Oh, you want to know where? Yeah, I can't remember. heh heh It seems like maybe More Leaves from the Inn of the Last Home had the rules, I think.
Oh Hey, Brim, go and pick up the first Leaves sourcebook for yourself and bring it to the next powwow at Sov Press. It'll help ya' with your misunderstandings of Krynns cosmology.
*snicker* got me a zing, I did, I did. :D
Oh Hey, Brim, go and pick up the first Leaves sourcebook for yourself and bring it to the next powwow at Sov Press. It'll help ya' with your misunderstandings of Krynns cosmology.
I guess I don't get it? Want to explain?
Oh, kind of an in-joke I guess. Remember my rant on what you guys were doing to the comology a few months back (let's have it then Ares). Basically I was saying most of the fans that like this "new dragonlance" could stand to read the notes on the gods in the original sourcebook. a slight zing from a discussion that lamely took place months ago. That's all. No biggie.
And I still, since you didn't explain yourself last time, don't understand what's so different about it. The Appendix from DoaVM is quite a leap from the original gods but, I just don't see that much difference between what's in the DLCS (which doesn't really acknowledge said Appendix) and what's in DLA/TotL.
I still think the DLCS is the perfect compromise between those two continuities. (even if it is a little rough around the edges in other aspects)
And I still, since you didn't explain yourself last time, don't understand what's so different about it. The Appendix from DoaVM is quite a leap from the original gods but, I just don't see that much difference between what's in the DLCS (which doesn't really acknowledge said Appendix) and what's in DLA/TotL.
I still think the DLCS is the perfect compromise between those two continuities. (even if it is a little rough around the edges in other aspects)
I guess that's the point of disagreement. Seriously, read the first Leaves book and then immediatly read the appendix. All joking and silliness aside, its bad man. One of these days when I have more then five minutes of feversihly fast typing I'll write a manifesto or something and list my problems. The biggest thing that got me flabbergasted about you was that you basically looked at me and said, "Problems, what problems?" Anyway, it was just a quick little jab (hence the "zing"). Think no more of it for now, I'll get ing on some essay or something someday when my computer stuff is more stable.
Cheers,
Ares
Holy hijacking Batman...
Seriously, read the first Leaves book and then immediatly read the appendix.
But...that's what I don't understand...the "Appendix" stuff is not included in the DLCS. The DLCS follows Dragonlance Adventures and the early Dragonlance stuff. I agree that the Appendix is nothing like what came before as far as what the gods go. That doesn't make it any less interesting...but it does make it, essentially, "non canon."
However, there are some things from the "Appendix" that, I think, can be fit into canon with a little finnangling(sp). I like the idea of Ithonas, the deity who would be Chaos. I didn't like that it portrayed Chaos is evil and the High God is good. Chaos is chaos and the High God is law, I think.
I guess that's where the confusion has always lay. The main meat of the "Appendix" really never went any further than the "Appendix." There might be a few minor things that found their way into the DLCS...but the DLCS is really more early Dragonlance than anything that has come since (although it certainly compromises some of the changes in TotL and 5A Boxed Set).
You know, I'm going to be really ticked if we have to go through all this again in 6 months because you decide to make fun of me about this again.
