Nuitari probably didn't consider either mage to be a renegade, although the Conclave may have been very much in disagreement.
Cheers,
Cam
Why do you think the Conclave sent Dalamar to spy on Raistlin in the first place?
Any wizard who thinks he can play god (literally) is not playing by the rules. Not to mention that WoHS were forbidden to use the portals again and F./R. did (or, at least, planned to).
You might want to give people longer than 20 minutes to answer.
LoL! I swear there are some comedians on these boards. His first post was @ 08:17, his second post was @ 09:58.
~~~
Cheers,
Cam
Something that I dont understand and maybe some of you out there might be able to help me out in understanding. Some people and in some places I have read, Towers of High Sorcery state that Raistlin and Fistindantilus while both wearing the Black Robes of Nuitari were actually renegades. I dont understand that in that as a pre-requiste of opening the portal to the Abyss, the mage had to be a mage of the Black Robes.
Actually the requirements to open the portal required a mage totally evil, and a cleric of inestimable goodness...or something to that effect. So it didn't have to be a black robed wizards, or a cleric of Paladine for that matter. That's just how it work/Raist planned it out.
The description, if I remember correctly, in Towers of High Sorcery as well as in the Legends book say that it has to be a mage of the black robes.
Thanks for the support LordofIllusions!
The description, if I remember correctly, in Towers of High Sorcery as well as in the Legends book say that it has to be a mage of the black robes.
You are correct, it does say in ToHS that a powerful, throughly evil, Black Robe wizard, accompainied by...
I stand corrected...for now. muhahahaha!
As for the reason why....hello! Would you ever think of a throughly good Cleric of Light and a throughly evil Black Robe Wizard to ever work together willingly?!?! Especially to open a portal to the Abyss that was sealed because it let the Queen of Darkness out once already!!!!
In my campaign, I have a long running (in the sense that it trancends two timelines) objective of a Red Robed wizard (Luther Flamestriker) whose power and travels to the other realms have vested him with long life and power. And while the Orders are declaring him a Renegade, they do so more out of fear of what they don't understand or whom is not actually 'paying them lip service' anymore. The wizards know he can still draw upon the powers of his moon, but are more or less blinded by 'internal politics' then anything else.
Remember, they are in the end men, women, elves and so on, and are subject to jealousy and everything else that being such a wizard entails.
You are correct, it does say in ToHS that a powerful, throughly evil, Black Robe wizard, accompainied by...
I stand corrected...for now. muhahahaha!
As for the reason why....hello! Would you ever think of a throughly good Cleric of Light and a throughly evil Black Robe Wizard to ever work together willingly?!?! Especially to open a portal to the Abyss that was sealed because it let the Queen of Darkness out once already!!!!
Bah, they were all morons anyway. Why leave a loop-hole when you know someone's going to happen along and make use of it? Stupid storyline ... hehe.
Bah, they were all morons anyway. Why leave a loop-hole when you know someone's going to happen along and make use of it? Stupid storyline ... hehe.
Yeah, it was kinda a dumb idea. One of those things that was just begging to let it happen. Alas that the ancient wizards did not know that there would be some authors that wanted to make a story out of it.
To me, after reading the KingPriest Trilogy, I came away believing that the Kingpriest's faith was more in tune and his 'purity' more there then Crysannia's were. So to me, I think Crysania was more flawed then the Kingpriest, yet Fistandantillus believed the KingPriest was too flawed to for the Portal to open for him.
Perhaps Fistandantillus did not want to take the chance, of taking all the problems that it would take just to get the KingPriest out, only to find out the door would not open for him, whereas he saw Denubis was the perfect vessel for him to use to open the door.
My two cents.
LoL! I swear there are some comedians on these boards. His first post was @ 08:17, his second post was @ 09:58.
~~~
REPORTED!!!! Please do not goad my friend CAM or be rude towards him, these are against the CoC.
Love Always!
GCS
Green you need to settle down. This wasn't a big deal just by saying you think someone is a comedian. And I'm sure Cam can defend himself just fine if he thought there was any slight towards him.
I don't think every little thing needs to be "reported" or commented on by people other than the people incolved(which is the person who said something and the person who it was about... or whatever).
I dunno, I'm sure this may come off as bad but it almost seems like you come off real strong in order to get these people to like you a lot or something? It happened with Serena also when you defended her honor or some such.. asking someone to apologize heh. I think you defended that one by commenting about how the novels were taken off, but they were taken off because people were talking about people's work and the quality of it, without thinking about the designer's/author's feelings.
Again, when someone says something that may not be the nicest thing, but certainly isn't a personal attack or just mean, it doesn't need to be handled by others. Having 15 people going back and forth and reporting people just doesn't sound like a fun time heh. I think saying "someone is a comedian" is a very small thing and also Cam just blew it off and defended his statement by saying he thought Amaron was impatient. That was about as far as it needed to go. I dunno, I dont think there is any reason for there to be a knight in shining armor! :D
For instance, LoI saying anything along the lines of what he said, and having only a bit ago jumped up and down on someone's head for their "nitpicking."
Yeah, it was kinda a dumb idea. One of those things that was just begging to let it happen. Alas that the ancient wizards did not know that there would be some authors that wanted to make a story out of it.
To me, after reading the KingPriest Trilogy, I came away believing that the Kingpriest's faith was more in tune and his 'purity' more there then Crysannia's were. So to me, I think Crysania was more flawed then the Kingpriest, yet Fistandantillus believed the KingPriest was too flawed to for the Portal to open for him.
Perhaps Fistandantillus did not want to take the chance, of taking all the problems that it would take just to get the KingPriest out, only to find out the door would not open for him, whereas he saw Denubis was the perfect vessel for him to use to open the door.
My two cents.
I think the fact that Paladine rebuked the Kingpriests divine spellcasting but not Crysania's/Denubis' is what led him to select Crysania/Denubis over the Kingpriest. Not only did he need them to open the door but to protect him in the Abyss. After all, he would need the spellcasting ability if he were to enter the Abyss to challenge the Queen.
REPORTED!!!! Please do not goad my friend CAM or be rude towards him, these are against the CoC.
Love Always!
GCS
Noooooooooooo!!!!! Wait a minute....
..I always thought that the moderators decided what was against the CoC ? Silly me.
Thanks for the support LordofIllusions!
The description, if I remember correctly, in Towers of High Sorcery as well as in the Legends book say that it has to be a mage of the black robes.
Not a problem. Amaron can I assume that you already have a copy of the Towers of High Sorcery book based on the latter portion of your post ? If so, where did you purchase it ?
~~~
The kingpriest was not in the favor of Paladine, after all, look at how the entire pantheons responded to his request and Paladine forsook even his mercy from the Kingpriest in the book.
LORDOFILLUSIONS, my brother works part time at a local gaming store and the owner is my friend so he ordered one for me long ago. Other people ordered but only MINE came in!
How would you rate the accessory on a scale of 1 to 10 ? I was thinking of picking the book up for my group; but then the group wizard bit the dust.
~~~
It happened with Serena also when you defended her honor or some such.. asking someone to apologize heh.
My honor was defended???? Awww shucks......Im speechless
haha
Green you need to settle down. This wasn't a big deal just by saying you think someone is a comedian. And I'm sure Cam can defend himself just fine if he thought there was any slight towards him.
I don't think every little thing needs to be "reported" or commented on by people other than the people incolved(which is the person who said something and the person who it was about... or whatever).
I dunno, I'm sure this may come off as bad but it almost seems like you come off real strong in order to get these people to like you a lot or something? It happened with Serena also when you defended her honor or some such.. asking someone to apologize heh. I think you defended that one by commenting about how the novels were taken off, but they were taken off because people were talking about people's work and the quality of it, without thinking about the designer's/author's feelings.
Again, when someone says something that may not be the nicest thing, but certainly isn't a personal attack or just mean, it doesn't need to be handled by others. Having 15 people going back and forth and reporting people just doesn't sound like a fun time heh. I think saying "someone is a comedian" is a very small thing and also Cam just blew it off and defended his statement by saying he thought Amaron was impatient. That was about as far as it needed to go. I dunno, I dont think there is any reason for there to be a knight in shining armor! :D
First meh, if Cam can defend himself ok, but still tired of LoI goading people, gets old fast.
Second, I feel no need to work on getting Cam to like me nor Trampas(DragonHelm) or Talinthas, or Jamie, or anyone else. I have met them all and conisder them friends, and they are all great people. There is one thing I don't stand for over anything in this world and thats people being rude to my friends, as my friends are closer to me than most of my family is. Not to mention, Cam did have a point, post somthing eventually someone will reply, be patient. There was no need for LoI to put in his 2 cents. I will admit it was not really needed for me to post that I reported him but meh, whats done is done.
Third, it was not Serena I was defending, no offense Serena, but I would defend you too if you needed it. It was Jamie, and ALL of Sov Press. Also, it is said you are not to come on to these boards and attack authors. Though I am getting the feeling that you don't like me, and thats ok True, I have no prob with you and if someone was bad mouthing you I would stand up for you too. But I notice you do seem to pick me out when it comes to people stopping people who bad mouth authors, but like I said no hard feelings.
Fourth, last time I checked (and we discussed this not to long ago) Serena is a guy... or did that change Serena. Not that its my business if it did, but just incase I am getting that wrong I can apologize to you both.
Fifth and last, nothing wrong with a Knight, we have our Kender here and Wizards, but not any Knights don't you think its time we have them?
GCS
With regard to the Legends trilogy, wasn't it something of a political maneuver on the part of the Conclave not to label Raistlin a renegade? After all, it would have just proven their ineffectiveness against Raistlin if they labeled him a renegade and were unable to bring him in for punishment.
I think the fact that Paladine rebuked the Kingpriests divine spellcasting but not Crysania's/Denubis' is what led him to select Crysania/Denubis over the Kingpriest. Not only did he need them to open the door but to protect him in the Abyss. After all, he would need the spellcasting ability if he were to enter the Abyss to challenge the Queen.
Except that by the time Fistandantillus escaped Ishtar in the Kingpriest #3 with Denubis and Pheragar, the KingPriest had not rebuked the KingPriest as of yet, although it was about to happen. THe only way that the KingPriest could bring about the Cataclysm was if he had the rapport of the god's that he had. it seems that if that were so, that the KingPriest would have had the power then to do his part in opening the Portal, which is the ONLY thing that Fistandantillus had in mind. It did not seem that Fistandantillus was aware that he had the DwarfGate War's ahead of him.
Fourth, last time I checked (and we discussed this not to long ago) Serena is a guy... or did that change Serena. Not that its my business if it did, but just incase I am getting that wrong I can apologize to you both.
GCS
lol....It didnt change....and by the black moon it sure aint' gonna change! ;)
I acted hastily when I named my account after a character of mine. perhaps it is time that I made a new account and got rid of this one.
lol....It didnt change....and by the black moon it sure aint' gonna change! ;)
I acted hastily when I named my account after a character of mine. perhaps it is time that I made a new account and got rid of this one.
Aww. We like Serena though. Steve DarkMyst just doesn't have the same ring to it. :D
Except that by the time Fistandantillus escaped Ishtar in the Kingpriest #3 with Denubis and Pheragar, the KingPriest had not rebuked the KingPriest as of yet, although it was about to happen. THe only way that the KingPriest could bring about the Cataclysm was if he had the rapport of the god's that he had. it seems that if that were so, that the KingPriest would have had the power then to do his part in opening the Portal, which is the ONLY thing that Fistandantillus had in mind. It did not seem that Fistandantillus was aware that he had the DwarfGate War's ahead of him.
The Kingpriest and the clerics who followed him were all stripped of their spellcasting ability long before the Kingpriest made his demand to the gods. Fistandantilus was forced to choose Denubis because he was the last cleric after all the true clerics were raptured. Raistlin was forced to use Crysania for the same reason, because in this past Denubis chose to go rather than stay. The Kingpriest was corrupt and evil and thus did not meet the requirements to open the portal.
As we see in Legends, Raistlin needs Crysania to not only help him open the portal but to protect him as long as she could through the Abyss so he could battle the Takhisis on the other side. Fisty/Raist needed the cleric so they didn't have to expend all their might trying to escape the Abyss as well as assisting in opening the portal. They knew this ahead of time and that's part of the reason that Denubis/Crysania was chosen rather than someone else (ie. the kingpriest, who most likely couldn't have opened the portal to begin with). So Fistandantilus would have used Denubis for the same reasons had he no blown himself up at Skullcap trying to open the portal.
P.S. It's spelled Istar not Ishtar.
The Kingpriest and the clerics who followed him were all stripped of their spellcasting ability long before the Kingpriest made his demand to the gods. Fistandantilus was forced to choose Denubis because he was the last cleric after all the true clerics were raptured. Raistlin was forced to use Crysania for the same reason, because in this past Denubis chose to go rather than stay. The Kingpriest was corrupt and evil and thus did not meet the requirements to open the portal.
I gotta disagree with you on all this.
1)THe KingPriest maintained his spellcasting abillity right up thru the Cataclysm. If you remember, even as the Cataclysm was going on ,he still had some of his spell's left.
2) There were still True Clerics within the Church, but they obviously all left when THe Night of DOom arrived. After that, yes, we were left with only Denubis (in Fistandantilu's time) and Crysannia (in Raistlins time) as the only true clerics left on Krynn....after the KingPriest.
3) Despite anything else, the KingPriest WAS NOT Evil and COrrupt. Despite it all, he always maintained his belief in good and everything he did was a part of that. Well, maybe the corrupt part was still in him, but he was corrupted to do good.
4) When you read THE KINGPRIEST TRILOGY, you will see that he was far less flawed then Crysannia was. Things were a lot darker in the KingPriest Trilogy, though, but when you look at the flaws of the KingPriest, I thought they were less then Crysannia.
As we see in Legends, Raistlin needs Crysania to not only help him open the portal but to protect him as long as she could through the Abyss so he could battle the Takhisis on the other side. Fisty/Raist needed the cleric so they didn't have to expend all their might trying to escape the Abyss as well as assisting in opening the portal. They knew this ahead of time and that's part of the reason that Denubis/Crysania was chosen rather than someone else (ie. the kingpriest, who most likely couldn't have opened the portal to begin with). So Fistandantilus would have used Denubis for the same reasons had he no blown himself up at Skullcap trying to open the portal.
P.S. It's spelled Istar not Ishtar.
1) When Raistlin went into time, he did so believing it was just a matter of going to the Tower of Palanthus and opening the portal. Neither seemd to have any prenomition that the Portal had already been moved to Skullcap. Remember how stunned he was when the Portal was gone? Or how he had to offer up some merchandise to Astinus to find out where it had gone?
I suspect up to that moment, that Raistlin may well have intended on bringing Caramon with him into the Abyss to help protect him against whatever was going to be found there, and he probably did not intend Crysannia to do much more then open the door. But once he found out the Portal was gone, and that he had to follow Fistandantillus's lead in forming an Army and heading to Skullcap and to fight the DwarfGate war's, he realized that now Caramon had a new purpose, especially when he knew that Caramon would die in the Dwarfgate Wars (as Pheraghar did). And then Crysannia would then be needed to protect him once in the Abyss.
Personally, I believe having the Kingpriest stay "good" all the way through just opens up a big can of worms. I don't see how a man who encourages other races to be hunted down and either enslaved or killed, enforces mind reading as a "preventive" measure, the hunting of all mages(good, nuetral, and evil) can be considered good. In D&D terms, this kind of cleric would have lost his clerical abilities a long time ago and had to "attoned" about a million times heh.
Now if you say, yea well this isn't d&d, thats all fine. But that means people can do things that go against their Gods ideals and he'll still retain spellcasting ability and special abilities? So he was still being given spells by Paladine... and he was enslaving and killing races? I find that as way too much of a stretch. Even hunting down wizards...white robe wizards.. would be too much because Solinari is Paladine's son and I doubt that Paldaine condones the poaching of Solinari's followers. I just don't see how he could retains pellcasting ability given to him be Paladine.
This all goes back to my old post about Solamnics. Heck you want to know if a Sowrd or Rose Knight is lieing or done something evil? Ask him to cast a spell. Heck if he's a cleric he'd doubly screwed because he can't even use his cleric spells before he became a knight because evil acts would make him lose his abilities from Kiri-Jolith too. Lord Soth's trial would have been pretty easy in my opinion. "Lets see you cast some spells" or "Turn Undead this skeleton we keep locked up just for this reason".
This all goes back to my old post about Solamnics. Heck you want to know if a Sowrd or Rose Knight is lieing or done something evil? Ask him to cast a spell. Heck if he's a cleric he'd doubly screwed because he can't even use his cleric spells before he became a knight because evil acts would make him lose his abilities from Kiri-Jolith too. Lord Soth's trial would have been pretty easy in my opinion. "Lets see you cast some spells" or "Turn Undead this skeleton we keep locked up just for this reason".
Now, wouldn't that be a sight to see .. Solamnic Knights keeping a skeleton in the closet for swift trial. I bet Vinas never thought of that one when he wrote the Measure.
:OMG!
Seriously, that's the difference between a novel and a game. In-game, you tend to use your knowledge of game mechanics even though your character isn't supposed to have any hard info about it. In a novel, the characters use common sense.
Let me use an example. Imagine an engineer was on trial and suspected to be a fraud. Do you think the prosecutor would bring a broken gadget in the tribunal and ask the accused to fix it to prove that he is indeed what he pretends?
About the only thing I can think of is that he didnt want his church to fall apart and then the populace go crazy from a corrupt church. But somehow I think hunting down wizards, enslaving all "neutral and evil" races, and mindreadng is a lot worse thana conspiracy. Sheesh show up toy our true clerics and have them do a regime change... they are the ones with the spellcasting abiltities anyways! I guess the church does control armed forces and such also tho.. but still..my big question is why couldnt Paladine send a vision to a lot of people and say the Kingpriest is unjust. Heck even if his guards knew that I think their loyalties would be divided.
Heh! That's going in my sig with your permission
By all means.
EDIT: Added info. below so I'm not totally off-topic. ;)
In the Kingpriest trilogy, wasn't Beldinas' glowing nimbus of light indicative of the strength of his clerical power? If I recall correctly, the glow began manifesting itself about him once he began manifesting his clerical powers, and the glow intensified throughout his life until the point just before the Cataclysm where it was literally a blinding light about his person. This would seem to indicate he possessed clerical powers, and strong ones at that, right up to the point of the Cataclysm.
I dunno, I still like to think that the Kingpriest didn't have any spellcasting ability anymore. I like to think he was using magical items and such. Also there's been a lot of speculation of how he was able to do all he did. One theory was he was using a trapped Scion and maybe draining his power. I think that might be in the Tales of the Lance softcover.
I suppose if that is the theory you want to keep, then by all means keep it. I know that I am known to maintain by "viewpoints" that have been superceded by official publications. However, I would point out that 1) In TWINS #1, it is made clear he still has the abillity to heal.
Personally, I believe having the Kingpriest stay "good" all the way through just opens up a big can of worms. I don't see how a man who encourages other races to be hunted down and either enslaved or killed, enforces mind reading as a "preventive" measure, the hunting of all mages(good, nuetral, and evil) can be considered good. In D&D terms, this kind of cleric would have lost his clerical abilities a long time ago and had to "attoned" about a million times heh.
Well, in my viewpoint, I like to believe that in a certain sense, that Paladine back before the Cataclysm wanted the balance to be as far to the Good as Takhisis did for the Darkness. Perhaps Paladine too saw this was the time to defeat evil once and for all, and as things kept developing, it essentially drove Gilean and Takhisis together (and Solinari too as he suffered mightily as well). And that perhaps Paladine did not realize or want to see the truth untill the moment the KingPriest made his demand.
Now if you say, yea well this isn't d&d, thats all fine. But that means people can do things that go against their Gods ideals and he'll still retain spellcasting ability and special abilities? So he was still being given spells by Paladine... and he was enslaving and killing races? I find that as way too much of a stretch. Even hunting down wizards...white robe wizards.. would be too much because Solinari is Paladine's son and I doubt that Paldaine condones the poaching of Solinari's followers. I just don't see how he could retains pellcasting ability given to him be Paladine.
Have you read the KINGPRIEST TRILOGY? That kinda explains a lot. WHen it came down to it, the KingPriest had one desire and that was to do good in this world. Everything else was done to make that end happen. Enslavement? Well, he made it clear there would be "good treatment" of slaves, in that they were fed and cared for and such to make it work.
Killing of races? I am sure few area's needed any encouragement to wipe out Ogres and Goblins. Unfortunately, I don't find that a stretch at all. Keep in mind all the genocide that has gone on in our own world, and if you ask your Soviet or Nazi or whatever trooper why they are doing what they are doing, they are going to answer "For the Good of the Fatherland/Motherland". Unfortunately, when there is a large powerfull government sanctioning something, it is going to come across as doing good in the eyes of the people. I believe your average Soviet Soldier wiping out resisters in the Urals of Russia; or the Nazi trooper wiping out Jews and Gypsies REALLLY thought that what they were doing was "good". So in a DragonLancd world, where the forces of evil are more tangible, it will be a lot easier to "direct" your followers to wipe out their followers, so to speack.
Wiping out the Orders of High Sorcery- To be sure, I am sure it started with the Black Robes, but when it was decided that the Black Robes could take sanctuary at their towers and be protected by the Orders there, that you want to take them out too. To be sure, they made it clear that it was more directed because of a "power you did not know" and I can only imagine that Solinari was as shocked by this as anyone else. And perhaps when Solinari confronted Paladine about this, he may well have been "rebuked" by the other gods of light, whom wanted this to bring their world order about, and this probably forced Solinari to side with Lunitari, Nuitair, and all the gods of Neutrality and Evil as a result.
This all goes back to my old post about Solamnics. Heck you want to know if a Sowrd or Rose Knight is lieing or done something evil? Ask him to cast a spell. Heck if he's a cleric he'd doubly screwed because he can't even use his cleric spells before he became a knight because evil acts would make him lose his abilities from Kiri-Jolith too. Lord Soth's trial would have been pretty easy in my opinion. "Lets see you cast some spells" or "Turn Undead this skeleton we keep locked up just for this reason".
The only thing I can add is that in Lord Soth's heart at the end, it was corrupt and evil and thus, what happened to him, ahppened. The KingPriest NEVER had evil in his heart and thus, is why I don't think you will see him as a Lich or anything like that.
I also kind of find it amazing that Paladine has enough power to give spells to his followers, but yet never shows up and says "Hey I don't condone what the Kingpriest is doing". Or even show up to the Kingpriest and say "Uh this is wrong... you are my cleric and I don't like that" Even a vision would be nice. You would think he could do soemthing...
About the only thing I can think of is that he didnt want his church to fall apart and then the populace go crazy from a corrupt church. But somehow I think hunting down wizards, enslaving all "neutral and evil" races, and mindreadng is a lot worse thana conspiracy. Sheesh show up toy our true clerics and have them do a regime change... they are the ones with the spellcasting abiltities anyways! I guess the church does control armed forces and such also tho.. but still..my big question is why couldnt Paladine send a vision to a lot of people and say the Kingpriest is unjust. Heck even if his guards knew that I think their loyalties would be divided.
Well, I mention it above, but I think that Paladine on a certain level was probably pulling for the Kingpriest. I imagine that he back then wanted the powers of good to prevail. And when Takhisis and GIlean no doubt confronted him and told him "If the KingPriest goes thru with his demand, we are going to bring together such an event that it will shatter the world and we are both aware that it will allow Takhisis back into this world, as well as her Dragons". Paladine probably had to take it seriously, and perhaps ordered the Night of Doom and the other "signgs", believing 100% that it would convince the Kingpriest not to do this. But in KingPriest #3, when the KingPriest enters the chamber, he is aware of Paladine and "somebody else". Perhaps there was a "Tasselhoof" like character that tormented Fistandantillus in his times there; but I think it was Gilean and Takhisis, there to witness what was going to happen and ready to do what happened.
Who knows? Perhaps if Paladine had failed to "do what needed to be done" with the KingPriest once he made his demand, perhaps just like Takhisis was stripped of her powers, so Paladine would have been stripped of his own.
The problem with Paladine was one that was ultimately beyond his control. It was the fact that somehow, the churches got beyond the control of the gods themselves. If you ask me, I imagine Takhasis was involved in a few of these as well....maybe intending to corrupt the church of Paladine before she realized that she'd lost her authority in these places. Effectively, Paladine found he had wonderful PR men but poor evangelists.
Effectively, Paladine found that evil people and neutral people were being drawn to his church by the dozens. Why the hell should a would be Fisty or Verminaard go to the Queen of Darkness? There's more money and power available in the order of Ishtar's Paladine priesthood than crawling around on the ground trying to build oneself a altar for human sacrifice.
Paladine, Gillean, and Takhasis didn't really know what to do here because this sort of thing was unprecendented. The corruption was already deeply in place by the time of the Kingpriest and Paladine had already sent dozens of horrific plagues, signs, portents, backyard profits, pulled away spells....etc to try to get the church reformed.
The Kingpriest he HOPED would see the error of his ways and for the most part he had many a chance to do so. Paladine knew that a great deal of the edicts and so forth had been originated from false information and it was his hope Ishtar's kingpriest had the force of will to change society for the better.
In effect, Paladine gambled and lost.
Even if Paladine had shown up in person they would have shrugged him off as a wizard's illusion
Killing of races? I am sure few area's needed any encouragement to wipe out Ogres and Goblins. Unfortunately, I don't find that a stretch at all. Keep in mind all the genocide that has gone on in our own world, and if you ask your Soviet or Nazi or whatever trooper why they are doing what they are doing, they are going to answer "For the Good of the Fatherland/Motherland". Unfortunately, when there is a large powerfull government sanctioning something, it is going to come across as doing good in the eyes of the people. I believe your average Soviet Soldier wiping out resisters in the Urals of Russia; or the Nazi trooper wiping out Jews and Gypsies REALLLY thought that what they were doing was "good". So in a DragonLancd world, where the forces of evil are more tangible, it will be a lot easier to "direct" your followers to wipe out their followers, so to speack.
So because you don't think you're doing something evil or wrong means you're not??? That's just crazy!! What kind of reasoning is that!?!?
If that's the case then Charles Manson isn't evil, he's actually good, because he doesn't believe he's done anything wrong. Osma Bin Ladin isn't evil or wrong because to him blowing up civilians is OK. That's just asinine!! That's the most absurd justification for something I've ever heard! There's no moral ground for them to stand on. Your morals are determined by your heart, your actions are determined by your morals.Kingpriest aside, there's no 'downside' to being evil in Dragonlance. There's a place for people to go to be rewarded supernaturally for acting out their evil impulses.
See I like the way Eberron does their gods. Anyone can be any alignment because their gods do not take an active interest in the everyday affairs of their followers. But this is Dragonlance, and the gods are very active in the future of the world.
I don't see how anyone can let evil things be done, as long as they think they are doing good. Actually, I don't mind it too much, but it pretty much kicks alignment out the window if you do it this way. You'll have evil people in the clergy (because enslaving people and taking their free will away is evil).
I dunno as it is right now, I don't think there's no way that the Kingpriest was still considered good and gaining clerical powers since theyw ould go away once he started doing evil acts on a regular basis.
So because you don't think you're doing something evil or wrong means you're not??? That's just crazy!! What kind of reasoning is that!?!?
I hate to burst your bubble, but if you go back and actually read what i posted, and see what I saw saying, you are going to see that a lot of bad things have been done by people who thought they were doing good out of it. The average Soviet and German trooper REALLY believed they were doing good when comitting the attrocity's they did. So Hitler was able to convince his people that the Jews and Gypsies and others needed to be purged "for the good of the fatherland". Stalin did the same with Christians and other undesirables. And in your Manson example, he convinced his followers to murder these people for the reasons they did.
based on that, how hard is it to convince a population in a world where the deity's of it's world direclty answer prayers and provide omens, that they needed to destroy or enslave the Ogres, Minotaurs, and Goblins of the land?
As I said, if you let the Kingpriest retains his clerical powers up until the Cataclysm you open up a big can of worms. This means anyone is considered good as long as they think they are doing good, no matter their actions. That means the only difference between evil and good is the way you think. I personally believe this is the wrong way to go about alignment, but alignment is funky.
See I like the way Eberron does their gods. Anyone can be any alignment because their gods do not take an active interest in the everyday affairs of their followers. But this is Dragonlance, and the gods are very active in the future of the world.
I don't see how anyone can let evil things be done, as long as they think they are doing good. Actually, I don't mind it too much, but it pretty much kicks alignment out the window if you do it this way. You'll have evil people in the clergy (because enslaving people and taking their free will away is evil).
I dunno as it is right now, I don't think there's no way that the Kingpriest was still considered good and gaining clerical powers since theyw ould go away once he started doing evil acts on a regular basis.
Ok, if we go by the DLCS description of the KingPriest, they potray him as wicked, corrupt, borderline evil and psychotic.
However, I have read THE KINGPRIEST trilogy and as such, I have a completely different version of the KingPriest. I don't believe in how the Kingpriests were potrayed as in the DLCS, as ALWAYS being corrupt and doing bad thigns in the name of their faith. I always thought that sucked.
That is why I like the way I am potraying the KingPriest's in my own campaign set 2000 years before the Cataclysm. Istar is a city/state, like Tarsis at this point, but is not a world power yet, content to control it's small section of the world. But in it, the KingPriests are true clerics and true servants of the God's, and as such, are well respected by the other nations of the world. There is no way that Istar could have ever gained the respect and control over the other nations if it had always been the way the books potrayed them ,and as such, there needed to be a time where the KingPriests of istar were pure in their faith, able to do such good that others wanted to be a part of it.....and thus sow the seeds eventually for what would happen.
I think of the Kingpriest as being originally good also. I really do see him as a good cleric who went wrong. My whole argument is with the Kingpriest having clerical powers right at the Cataclysm. I don't see it as possible with how good is determined in Dragonlance and D&D. In D&D his powers would be taken away quikcly just for doing several evil acts in a row. And I think everyone can agree enslaving, mind reading (taking away the right for people even to think things), and hunting down of good people(White Robes). It doesn't matter if they think "well they should follow our ways", they still know that some of these people are "good".. i.e. white robes. Even if you say.. well novels are different than d&d, thats fine.. but I still have a hard time believing Paladine would condone these things and still give full support (full spellcasting abilities) to someone who was doing bad things in his name. And if you believe that yes he just might because he wants him to "win" or is "rooting for him" than that opens up the possiblity of other people being able to do bad or evil things as long as they think Paladine is "rooting for them".
Alignment is so funky that I've almost all but gotten rid of it. What the Knights could think is Good could be totally different than the Clerics of Kiri-Jolith, so how do you determine what is right? Unless the God comes down and says "Hey this is wrong", there really isn't clear cut things that people can and can't do. So even though I've been arguing that I don't think the Kingpriest should have had clerical powers at the Cataclysm, I'm starting to switch my campaign where there might actually might have something like this come up and he would. If you follow alignments strictly, I don't think things like the Kingpriest and Lord Soth could happen. One random Detect Evil spell or something would take care of the whole situation. I would rather there not be an exact good and exact evil...but I haven't seen a good system of "grey".
So while I would like the Kingpriest still to be able to have spells because he thinks he's bettering the world and goodness, the way alignment and clerics are set up, its not possible. There's no way that he would have had spellcasting ability after the evils he had commited.
GCS, and LordofIllusions, can we not put our differences aside for the good of the magic (that is the boards)? Even I a black robe can see the importance of this.
What difference ? I don't have any problem with GCS, never did. However I do recall GCS posting something about trying to get back online so that he could "goad Amaron Blackthorn and LordofIllusions into an arguement" and then attempting to cloak it in sarcasm. ;)
~~~
A great deal of what's stated here might under the right lens appear to be good. Paladine might have been giving Bel's heart the benefit of the doubt because he suffered from controlled information.
* Enslavement: The idea isn't that its racial slavery but prison labor for those sentenced to death, i.e. life imprisonment. It furthermore removes the idea of prisoners but keeps them in society.
In Ishtar the Kingpriest might rightly question a society that puts people to death and locks them away in dark castles away from a chance at rejoining society in any meaningful fashion.
* The concept of thought control is a necessity of every religion. It's actually part of the New Testament that we must strive to clear our mind of wicked ill towards others.
Frankly, he's blatantly right that people obeying out of fear is not winning any souls for paladine. Most likely the edict is MEANT to promote evangelism though and helping others come to terms with their feelings.
* The White Robes are acting out of misplaced sympathy or all too easily, are actually evil people pretending to be good.
The fanaticism that people show the Kingpriest basically has him at the top of a much deeper sickness infecting all of society. I, at least in my games, argue that the Kingpriest was only a figurehead to his personality cult really.
nothing arrived on his desk without some serious d*** spin on it. The edict to ban the neutral faiths becomes "officially removing sanction on state support for faiths that detract people away from the path of goodness."
Genocide of Dwarves, Kender, and the like? "Program to encourage humans and elves to reach a higher accord with divine providence as the children of the gods" and "Minimizing the expansion of monsters created by the Graygem with extermination in pre-approved by local clerical authorities cases"
Bel knew something was up but for the life of him, couldn't figure out what it was and could only sense Paladine's anger. Furthermore, he knew people hated him but didn't know why. I imagine he also suspected that people were lying to him but being a country bumpkin like he was, he wasn't smart enough to really go see the truth for himself like the 'true' Kingpriest was supposed to have.
And while yes people are encouraged to only have "good thoughts", the act of arresting someone or harming them because of thoughts is evil. Everyone in this world has had a thought or two that was bad or evil. Do you think the head god of good would sanction the penalizing of people who had made one or two stray thoughts? If everyone has had a thought or two, than that means that if everyone was caught at that time, there would be no one left. There is no way that I could see Paladine sanctioning the taking away of free thought. In alaignment terms in d&d, the cleric would have spellcasting ability taken away the moment he was doing these evil acts.
The enslaving of races is probably the thing I most find evil. I just don't see how a God of good would even sanction the act if his clergy enslaving people. Not even to "better their lives with homes". While I can see how people may think this is acceptable, I don't see how a God of good would condone this. And yes I realize that the Kingpriest did not always know the exact policies that were happening, but he did know that the gladiator games existed and he also knew about the bounties on the heads of races. I'm not sure if he was the original one who places the bounties, or a sub person.
The hunting of wizards is probbaly the one I can most forgive, but again I have a problem with Paladine letting his followers hunt the followers of his son and not seeing anything wrong with it? To me, that just doesn't add up. I'm sure if he didn't like wizards, he could have done something way before this time to get rid of the moon gods. I always thought him and Solinari had a loving relationship, so i dont see why the hunting of Solinari's followers would be ok.
This all leads into alignment and how people see it. Personally as I said in my other post, I think the Kingpriest should still have his clerical powers and that there should be a lot of grey area. The Knights of Solamnia and the Kingpriest don't agree on what is Good, so they do what they think is right. Sometimes bad things happen because of it. The reality is that that isn't how alignment works. Clerics lose their abilities when they do something that is against their god's alignment or ideals. I think enslavement, mind-reading and the taking away of free thinking, and hunting down of the god's son's followers falls goes against Paladine's alignment and ideals.
Now you can take a more real world approach and say "yea well I like the grey area and the Kingpriest was just doing what he thought was right so he still has spells" but now that opens up for other people and PC's to do the same thing... Hey my character things that all dwarves should worship Kiri-Jolith, when they don't, I enslave them to try to save their souls. This is now valid. I kind of like this way of thinking and since I'm very nonstrict on alignment it could come up. But for regular, by the books d&d and alignment, this isn't valid.
I just don't personally see how Paladine would let this all happen, and nothing be done about it. I mean he couldn't even have sent a messenger or something? Granted the Kingpriest may think its a scam, but then send it to other followers. Heck I would think getting half your followers to follow your edicts again would be better than throwing a mountain on top of everyone to "teach them a lesson". Sheesh you are Greater God.. do something. Instead.. you send 13 vague plagues.. way to go..obviously no one cracked your little code.
On a side note, does anyone else think that its weird Lord Soth was the only one able to stop the Cataclysm? I mean, there couldnt have been anyone else Paladine could have gotten to try to stop him? Did Paladine just throw all his hope into Lord Soth and figure..eh if he fails..welp I guess I'll throw the mountain. Couldnt he have empowered more than one person to try to stop the cataclysm?
You don't remove them if you heal a man you don't know and he turns out to be Toldaz the Destroyer.
I'm going to side with Bel here and also say that the man was deeply ignorant, deeply self-justifying, and deeply misguided by those beneath him with no idea how to run a kingdom or understanding of the machinations of Ishtar.
We should also note Paladine is not always Fizban, its fairly clear he's also got a side of him that is willing to be ruthless at times.
If I wanted to give a justification. Paladine allowed the Cataclysm because he felt every last trace of the abomination of Ishtar had to be wiped out to go back to the system of evil people serving Takhasis, Gilean getting neutrals, and the good worshipping him. Lord Soth was chosen along with Belenis as essentially examples of "flawed good"
If Lord Soth and Bel can turn around and overcome the disgusting wickedness of Ishtar then the rest of the world can be allowed to go on its normal course. I imagine also that Soth would be the only man in the world who could reach Bel after the failure of his best friend to do so. Lord Soth as an evil man who turned good would show paladine values redemption.
I do think though that the idea that Paladine should just SHOW up is even worse than him doing the Cataclysm. Does it really take a GOD to show up and pronounce dooms to tell you its not right to torture and murder in his name!?
If he did show up, its out of fear that they'd obey. That's worse than anything becase it doesn't cure the malaise that's no doubt the most offensive thing imaginable to paladine....self righteous pursuit of evil.
Let me give a better example of how a religious entity can do wrong, in this case, based on our own world's history.
Before I begin, I hope I do not offend any catholics with this.
In the 16th Century, the Catholic Church was facing in Europe the Protestant Movement. Henry the VIIIth of England flat out annexxed the Catholic Church and replaced it with his own Anglican Church. THe Lutherans made an amazing show of gaining followers and supporters in Eastern Europe and seccessions did happen.
And also, at the same time, the New World, the Americas, were being discovered. Tobacco, Sugar, Cotton and all manners of new crops and treasures were being found, but it was going to need laborers to farm them. Vast amounts of Silver were being found in South America, and that mean the Spanish and Portugese needed peoples to mine it.
And then, to answer that, the African Slave Trade began, with all the tragic consequences that it entailed, including the unholy passage from Africa to the NEw World for those poor Africans unfortunate enough to end up in the bellys of the slave ships.
Obviously, it takes no imagination to say that the Slave Trades were a "act of evil". If the Pope had communed with God on this (and I believe he does) he knows that Slavery is evil and needs to be stopped.
But lets face it: Slavery back in those days was IMMENSELY profitable. The Spanish and Portugese granted Charters to Slave Traders, whom in turn gave a portion of their profits to their respective governments and to the Catholic Church via Tithes. Furthermore, had the Pope flat out condemened Slavery and ordered it opposed by all Catholic Nations, would they have obeyed? Or would they have followed the lead of England, and would we have seen Spain and Portugal and France seceede from the Catholic Church and enact their own state religions.
Regardless, the fact remains that the Catholic church condoned the Slave Trade for almost 400 years, untill the Slaves of the Central and South America's freed themselves.
So in a sense, it becomes VERY easy for someone like the Kingpriest to be pressured into doing things that may not have been "good" but needed to be done. In this case, he did stop capital punishment, at the price of slavery.
This is my argument. I understand that people can do evil or bad things and think that they are doing it for the betterment of the deity. My problem stems from Paladine letting these things go and not letting the cleric know that he is doing wrong. You actually believe that Paladine was hoping the Kingpriest would realize enslavement, murder (hunting the mages down), and mind reading (the taking away of free thinking) was wrong, so he let the kingpriest keep his clerical powers? I personally believe that the way clerics and alignment go.. that it wouldnt happen.
As I said, in my games I have a huge grey area and can let certain things go, if the person truly does believe his actions are just. The gods don't travel to Krynn everyday or automatically take away powers because the person isn't perfect in my campaign. But according to the way Dragonlance and alignment run, I still don't see how the Kingpriest could have had powers.
As I said before, I understand that mortals have failings. My problem isn't with them. Its that you guys are saying that Paladine wouldn't withhold his powers when the kingpriest did do evil things. You can't do evil things because you think they are right, and still retain your powers from Paladine with the way things are written.
Remember when Caramon ponders why Paladine would have ever allowed some things to happen? And how Astinus tells him immediately it is not for him to question the God's ways?
I would also add, based on the KINGPRIEST Trilogy...that it is entirely possible that the KingPriest MAY have actually succeeded on somelevel, that he may have actually been able to actually do what he wanted to do. It would be no different then Raistlin achieving what he did, despite what it would have done to the world.
This means that according to all we know, Paladine is able to withdrawel his support(spellcasting and powers) when he feels his tenets are being violated. And I personally just don't see how he wouldnt think that his followers were doing something bad and therefore take away their powers. If Paladine let the Kingpriest have his powers even though he was doing things that went against Paladine's tenets, that means PC's and other people could theoretically do so with other gods also. That means if you do something evil, you don't need to expect right away loss of powers and spellcasting abilities. Personally I favor this kind of play, but.. thats not the official way it goes.
I guess I'm just repeating myself, so I'll try not to so much. Maybe we just need to agree to disagree, although personally this argument has really gotten me thinking. I like topics like this.
What difference ? I don't have any problem with GCS, never did. However I do recall GCS posting something about trying to get back online so that he could "goad Amaron Blackthorn and LordofIllusions into an arguement" and then attempting to cloak it in sarcasm. ;)
~~~
And if you look at the post a few pages back it also says I was just kidding. Amaron and I are cool now, hes a good kid, as you LoI, just it does seem like you like to goad people. As True_Blue said to me b4 people can defend themselves on these boards, and Amaron is very cool headed about these things. I gotta give him lots of respect for that cause as we all know I'm not. Its in my blood to have a short temper. Though I do try to control it, I don't do so when people come in and be little the authors and thier works, this isn't a board to share porn and slander othere anonymously. Not saying you do this LoI cause I have never seen you do that. Just stating thats one thing i don't think any fan should stand for unless its was some kind of major mess up.. ie Dalamar's golden hair in Wizard's Conclave
In short, LoI i have no problem with you and it was a joke, a light hearted joke.
GCS
GCS, maybe another Charm Person spell would help you out? Tee hee!
So it seems that perhaps once a certain level of 'tappage' begins for a Cleric, that it becomes impossible to stop. In this case, by the time Belindas (sp?) reached a certain point, he had such a 'tap' with Paladine, that Paladine could not stop him from drawing on his power the way he did.
This is more or less mentioned at the end, when the KingPriest makes his demand. ANd it is possible that it was working till the KingPriest loses his concentration and things go awry.
If Paladine had taken away the Kingpriests power he would not have been able to heal Crysania nor do I think he would have been able to summon the gods the way that he did.
GCS, maybe another Charm Person spell would help you out? Tee hee!
Hmm good idea, just hope his Will save isn't that high...
GCS
:fizban:"the kingpriest of istar was a good man"
he was good at the end,very much LAWFUL good.see heres the biggie,hes lawful.which means conformity.which means hes going to FORCE you to be good.
good can and is forceful in D&D morality,and it dosent care for freewill,chaos does.
every evilact he supposebly commited is very much lawful.and wait a minute paladine is LAWFUL good too....hmmmm.
replaceing the death sentence with slavery:THE idea of a lawful good punishment,makes them usefull to society and dosent kill them(good includes respect for life)
forceing others to good:lawful,conformity,to good.yep.
slaughtering the red/white robes:they would help defend the blackrobes,thats techniclly being evil.
thought police:harsh,but this is the kind of stuff that happens when lawfull good gets out of hand.
Can't find the exact page reference, but the new ToHS accessory actually labels Raistlin a renegade.
With regard to the Legends trilogy, wasn't it something of a political maneuver on the part of the Conclave not to label Raistlin a renegade? After all, it would have just proven their ineffectiveness against Raistlin if they labeled him a renegade and were unable to bring him in for punishment.
Heh, looks like even Raistlin is succeptable to being RetConned.
1. The concept of 'renegades' doesn't really show up in DL material until after Legends; specifically, DLA and "Wanna Bet?".
2. There's a tendency in DL for 'Good' and 'Evil' to be little more than team affiliations, with little thought given to distinct motives and behaviors. I find Legends and the Second Generation era to be prime examples of this--the former with the assertion that the Kingpriest was objectively Good, the latter with the Knights of Takhisis being more noble and honorable in many cases than the Knights of Solamnia.
3. Actually, DMJ, the popes condemned the modern slave trade from pretty much the beginning. "in 1462, Pius II declared slavery to be "a great crime" (magnum scelus); that, in 1537, Paul III forbade the enslavement of the Indians; that Urban VIII forbade it in 1639, and Benedict XIV in 1741; that Pius VII demanded of the Congress of Vienna, in 1815, the suppression of the slave trade and Gregory XVI condemned it in 1839; that, in the Bull of Canonization of the Jesuit Peter Claver, one of the most illustrious adversaries of slavery, Pius IX branded the "supreme villainy" (summum nefas) of the slave traders"--1914 Catholic Encyclopedia, "Slavery and Christianity", http://www.newadvent.org/
Matthew L. Martin
Raistlin Majere and Fistandalius wore the Black Robes, they taught apprentices who joined the red and black robes, they taught loyalty the Three Moons, and they practiced magic that was entirely in line with the Conclave's philosophy.
In this respect, Raistlin and Fistandalius were not renegades.
They however had no respect for the Conclave and would not abide by its edicts even if the Conclave wasn't too scared to death to actually bother trying to give them an order.
Magius is another example really.
Magius was a renegade through and through yet he was so powerful and did so much that the wizards claim him...the opposite of the above two who WEREN'T but have been disowned.
I wonder if in the Holy Order of the Stars they are going to discuss the spell that the Kingpriest cast in order to summon the gods and to bring back Crysania from Paladine's Realm?
No need for that, it's already in the PHB. It's called Commune :D
So is being considered a renegade something politcal? If you are powerful enough to be able to fight off contenders or escape notice are you allowed to survive if everyone is afraid of you? Is it like being a dark elf?
A few notes:
3. Actually, DMJ, the popes condemned the modern slave trade from pretty much the beginning. "in 1462, Pius II declared slavery to be "a great crime" (magnum scelus);
Matthew L. Martin
Untrue; Pius II condemned only the enslavement of converts to Christianity.
While next year...
You might have all your black robed brethren joining you for a weenie roast and some marshmellows over their smoldering corpses.
Basically, renegades are whomever the Conclave thinks is a danger to the greater whole of magic by his or her actions or whom refuse to abide by the collective will of the organization.
Magius was always viewed as the most powerful after Fisty by Raistlin FYI, perhaps even moreso. He did study under all the moons I should add and his own magical aspects.
When did Magius ever take on the Black Robes?
Supposedly he wore each color of robes in his lifetime. In the end he was a Red robe in that he wore red robes. Really it is difficult to say what order he truly belonged to. Judging by his actions in the 3rd Dragon War, I would put him in the middle of the Red and White robes.
At least, that's what I remember from the Story of Huma.
I think that we forget that slavery was not always motivated by racial discrimination. That is really done in the US where people who were a different color were seen as inferior and as made to serve the white people, after all it was their manifest destiny to rule from sea to shining sea and subject everyone who was different from them.
Actually, enslaving people of differing races, for reasons of feeling superior to them has been going on for ages. This was happening well before the America's were "discovered", and well before the US was founded. So to say that it is something that solely the US did is incorrect and rather inflamatory. It was merely more common, open, and accepted in the south of the US than elsewhere in the world.
Also, prior to the "eurpoean" concept of slavery, it was a common practice for the victor of wars to take slaves and for people who owed a debt to become slaves. Of course under these forms of slavery the slaves could only be kept for a set amount of time. For the conquered it was generally a time of seven years, and in the case of debtors a time determined between the two parties.
i quote from the orginal trilogy.
fizban:"the kingpriest of istar was a good man"
When I read that I took it to mean that, he was a good man, as in the imperfect past tense (or is that the preterit past. I always get them confused). Basically he started out good but slowly strayed from the path, until at the end he was so blinded by his presumed goodness and righteousness.
In fact, slavery still occurs in Sudan and other African countries.
Slavery was not just a crime whites committed against blacks. Blacks committed against blacks (Africa), whites against whites (Ancient Greece) and every religion and ethnicity practiced it at some time.
"While the Kingpriest did evil things with good intentions, Mina does good things with evil intentions."
Now you can say you go against this norm and say there is a grey area that exists and that you can do evil things, but you were doing them because you believe they were good. All this does is open up more instances where it can come up that a PC or NPC can now do things that are "known evil" but point out that their character thinks they are doing right. My example is enslaving the dwarven race in order to teach them the philosophies of Kiri-Jolith because you want to save their souls.
I think everyone eventually needs to make the choice.. and that is are clerics allowed to go against their deity's wishes (I really doubt that Paladine didn't mind the enslaving of the dwarven race) and still be ok with their deity and keep all their abilities or is good/evil clearly defined and if you grossly go against your god's tenets (slavery) , than you lose your ability to channel your god's energy. I'm not talking about little things like maybe slighting a person, maybe keeping a little extra money, or deciding not to help a person. Slavery is a big thing and is by far now seen as evil, and in Dragonlance it is seen as evil.
There's been a couple of us who have debated this on one or two other threads and I still maintain that by the current rules of Dragonlance and D&D, there is no way that the kingpriest was a good man and had support from Paladine. It couldn't happen. I realize that the novels may say that he was a good man, but I don't think its possible. Personally I'm all for the "grey" way of looking at things, but as I said, this opens up for more people like the Kingpriest who can do what they want because they feel they are doing the right thing. And I'm not sure this is possible with a world where the gods are major players in the world and have the freedom of showing their wishes to their followers.
I think the Kingpriest trilogy makes it clear that Paladine isn't granting Beldinas his powers near the end of his reign.
A few notes:
1. The concept of 'renegades' doesn't really show up in DL material until after Legends; specifically, DLA and "Wanna Bet
Yeah, I think you are right. I don't really remember reading anything about it, and from what I understood, to at least a manner, it seemed even Ariakas to a point conformed to aspects of the Black Robes.
2. There's a tendency in DL for 'Good' and 'Evil' to be little more than team affiliations, with little thought given to distinct motives and behaviors. I find Legends and the Second Generation era to be prime examples of this--the former with the assertion that the Kingpriest was objectively Good, the latter with the Knights of Takhisis being more noble and honorable in many cases than the Knights of Solamnia.
Which I thought was just awful, the part about the "honorable Knights of Takhisis" was just too much too accept and had a lot to do with turning me off to Post-SUmmer Flame setting books.
3. Actually, DMJ, the popes condemned the modern slave trade from pretty much the beginning. "in 1462, Pius II declared slavery to be "a great crime" (magnum scelus); that, in 1537, Paul III forbade the enslavement of the Indians; that Urban VIII forbade it in 1639, and Benedict XIV in 1741; that Pius VII demanded of the Congress of Vienna, in 1815, the suppression of the slave trade and Gregory XVI condemned it in 1839; that, in the Bull of Canonization of the Jesuit Peter Claver, one of the most illustrious adversaries of slavery, Pius IX branded the "supreme villainy" (summum nefas) of the slave traders"--1914 Catholic Encyclopedia, "Slavery and Christianity", http://www.newadvent.org/
Matthew L. Martin
Uh, revisionism may be helpful and I certainly don't want to offend any catholics out there, but the above stuff you were talking about only pertained towards "White Slavery" and to an extent, was part of the reasoning why American Indians were not as "enslaved" as african's were. The American Indians were deemed "souls to be saved" or something like that, and there was a specific edict issued that allowed African slavery, which is why it lasted so long. THe Catholic Church did condem slavery in the Viena and Gregory as well. But what you fail to notice is that the Catholic Church did that in the 1800's, in many cases AFTER the Slaves were freed in part of the rebellions against the Old World powers. At that point, and I am sure there were many Catholic Priests that were flat out advocating that the people of the New World seceede from the Old one.
BUt that does not change the fact you will find no condenmation against African Slavery set from the 1400's to the early 1800's, which is when most of the african slave trade took place. As I said, the Catholic Church as well as the Anglicans and other protestant groups DID indeed contribute their tithes to the Church and the worst thing about the African Slave Trade is that it was immensely profitable to do.
The Kingpriest....I dont know where he was getting his spells.....there's magic items......and then Paladine, but only if Paladine granted sort of a major free will thing, and didnt interfere whatsoever......or another source....but thats a tough call...
Slavery....bad.......not touchin that subject any more....not with a ten foot pole.
And DMJ....no offense intended....its all good to have your opinions....but I think a blatant nasty remark about the 5th Age in your sig is pretty nasty here.....not to mention it is a bash against what the current era of the setting is in the first place. Once again...no offense intended......I just think its a bit....too much???
And the various loopholes are the result of crappy storytelling; Weis really needs to realize her time is up, and she should retire while she still has sales. Either that or pick up her game and give fans what they want, not the same ressurected character crap or this already-tired, extremely boring and weak mina story arc she keeps shoveling down peoples throats.
The people who read her original books are now grown up, yet her writing style, and the rpg has not. ((Thus the laggin dragonlance sales, and why the majority of flgs are not stocking them anymore, and why AMAZON is trying to get rid of its dragonlance stuff as quick as possible without replacement. The rulebook is SIXTY PERCENT off on amazon, and they wont be ordering again. ))
The people who read her original books are now grown up, yet her writing style, and the rpg has not. ((Thus the laggin dragonlance sales, and why the majority of flgs are not stocking them anymore, and why AMAZON is trying to get rid of its dragonlance stuff as quick as possible without replacement. The rulebook is SIXTY PERCENT off on amazon, and they wont be ordering again. ))
I don't think that reasoning holds much water. Many of the said grown-ups (myself included) have grown tired of the same-old ho-hum fantasy that fills our bookshelves these days. This has led many of us old dogs back to our roots. Case in point, me any my old high-school friends who used to play D&D are more into DragonLance now than in the previous 10 years. I am not alone in this regard. The problem I see the DL saga facing is getting new blood into reading the books. However, most people my age got into DL at the start of the series and have grown up with it as they've aged. The trick is getting someone to start from scratch and then work their way up to the current books. Or, get a new set of books out that can start the series rolling anew and then change the focus of the old school stuff as backstory and fill-in for future plots to come.
Don't listen to serena's veiled insults dmj. She is a known troller.
She? ;)
I would recommend getting to know Serena a bit more. He's a great guy. He's been around these parts for a while, and has been a good contributor to discussions.
And the various loopholes are the result of crappy storytelling; Weis really needs to realize her time is up, and she should retire while she still has sales. Either that or pick up her game and give fans what they want, not the same ressurected character crap or this already-tired, extremely boring and weak mina story arc she keeps shoveling down peoples throats.
What did you think about Amber and Ashes and her Dragonvarld series?
The people who read her original books are now grown up, yet her writing style, and the rpg has not. ((Thus the laggin dragonlance sales, and why the majority of flgs are not stocking them anymore, and why AMAZON is trying to get rid of its dragonlance stuff as quick as possible without replacement. The rulebook is SIXTY PERCENT off on amazon, and they wont be ordering again. ))
I can't say I follow your logic here, but you are entitled to your opinion.
Really, I do think the writing is fairly mature, both on the RPG side and the novel side. Amber and Ashes is proof enough of that!
Compare this to Piers Anthony, who has novels such as The Color of Her Panties.
While Margaret Weis is a New York Times bestseller, there are those who don't find her as appealing. To each their own.
If you want to discuss this further, I would recommend starting a new thread.
((Thus the laggin dragonlance sales, and why the majority of flgs are not stocking them anymore, and why AMAZON is trying to get rid of its dragonlance stuff as quick as possible without replacement. The rulebook is SIXTY PERCENT off on amazon, and they wont be ordering again. ))
Just to clarify one point, Amazon is offering the rulebook at 30% off ($27.96 instead of the MSRP$39.95...easy math). This is pretty standard for Amazon.