Ares wrote:
I'm not entirely certain...but I think you just called me stupid. That's not a very good way to start off with someone.
To me, it sounded like you just said, "I obviously know more than you...but I'm interested in hearing your simpled minded view on things." How am I supposed to respond to that?
You talk about these "basics" that you've grasped. Yet you don't seem to be very forth coming with your knowledge. You want a debate...then start talking. Prove to us how smart you are.
What are the basics that we are so desperately lacking?
Daaaaaaammmmmmmnnnnn, calm down. The codename suits you, man. I'm not calling you an idiot, I was paying you a compliment. By saying "I want to pick your brain" is a phrase meant to indicate that a person would like to hear someone's thoughts and perspectives on a subject. Just read what I posted in the war of the lance thing, or do a search for my posts from a few months ago. if you want to have a real discussion of things, fine, as i said before, I'd love to. but I'm not getting into a shouting match with Joe Pesci.
"Hey Brim, you're a smart guy"
"Oh yeah, you sayin' I'm an idoit?"
"what? No I'm just saying"
"THat's IT!"
Breath. Count to ten.
Daaaaaaammmmmmmnnnnn, calm down.
Actually, I am calm...a little insulted, but calm. I don't want a shouting match...I actually want to hear (well, "read") what it is that you're talking about.
By saying "I want to pick your brain" is a phrase meant to indicate that a person would like to hear someone's thoughts and perspectives on a subject.
Except that what you said was you have a better grasp of the basics than me "although I'd love to pick your brain."
I'm quite curious as to what you consider the basics to be. I wanted to know, that's why I asked (if the post was a bit venomous, I apologize for that...but can you see where I'm coming from on that? I don't know how you expect me to respond.)
Actually, I said facaulty tipes were at my level, and I've been a supporter since 96 as well. Just because I wasn't a poster doesn't mean I wasn't around when Nexus first came out and was asking for contributers. Not being confident in my game mechanic skills, I opted to not submit anything. But I was around, just as you were.
And what I mean to get across is not a stupid claim of ego, I mean it as well, a reprimand. I came to sites like this for many years and watched in awe of some of the posters. Other than you elder tipes, many of the newer dl fans were completly oblivious to some of the basics of the series. Finally I thought after years of watching this, that I would put in my two scents. I started by talking about simple cosmology questions and the force of neutrality in the series. Everybody else looked at me as if I had two heads. I'm not really trying to play "nerd king of the mountain" its just that some of the older members apparently aren't setting some of the most simple dl questions or claims some newer fans have tried to make. I'm not talking about dl collections, mine's pretty sorry. I'm talking about the 101's, the basics. I've heard people on this board talk about how refreshing it is that the "Neutralist perspective" in dl has ended. I'm flabergasted and a little apauled. That's like saying "I'm glad all that romance is out of Romeo and Juliet". I'm just trying to get some of you elder fans out their to raise your hackles up, to get you folks to set some things straight whenever a newer fan is confused about something. Every time I've tried to help with a question on this board (do a search on me, if your interested), I get met with confusion and a misguided notion that I'm trying to start a lively debate rather than hand out facts of the series to answer thier questions.
Thanks,
Ares
oh, and "how was I supposed to respond?" Calmly, without fire and Brimstone.
"if it seemed venomous" I think you turned my hair white... and you even personally called me out, a violation of Netiquette... never mind I'm letting it go... I'm letting it go...
I've heard people on this board talk about how refreshing it is that the "Neutralist perspective" in dl has ended. I'm flabergasted and a little apauled. That's like saying "I'm glad all that romance is out of Romeo and Juliet".
I guess we're not reading the same posts, because I'm still not sure what you're talking about. (which is actually quite possible as I don't read every single thread like I used to)
(do a search on me, if your interested)
Search still doesn't work.
oh, and "how was I supposed to respond?" Calmly, without fire and Brimstone.
Heh heh...clever.
"if it seemed venomous" I think you turned my hair white... and you even personally called me out, a violation of Netiquette... never mind I'm letting it go... I'm letting it go...
Um...I did what?
You're the one who wanted a trivia game to prove how you were smarter than everyone. I started a new thread becasue I wanted to hear what you had to say about the basics of Dragonlance (since the War of the Lance thread had pretty much spiraled away from the topic).
I'm being serious when I say you're putting to much into that first post. I like to use emoticons and the like to try and get the feel of what I'm saying across (I know I use them more than a lot of people). If I were really mad and out of control...I would have at least used an exlimation point or two and probably at least an angry face or rolled eyes or something.
This however serves no purpose. So just shake hands and settle down.
Oh and search works fine Brim.
Oh and search works fine Brim.
Hrm...I can't get the darn thing to ever work properly...even after the "fix." Maybe I'm just not patient enough with it.
)the neutralist perspective
what I mean by this is something fans have begun to do. they wave around the appendix written by "Valthonis" as the diffinitive look at the cosmology of Krynn. They believe that goodness is the actual way that Krynn is supposed to be. Any one who has read, well, anything about dragonlance (hence my assertion that it is "101") Knows that Neutrality is the cardinal force on Krynn. Not too much of any one thing. some fans on the board have agued to me that Istar wasn't an example of goodness out of control. 101.
Okay, just as my opening statement: Here's the basics I was talking about:
The appendix written by Val is just that, written from Val's perspective. Val was Paladine, and Paladine is the supreme exemplar of lawful good. He couldn't help but write things in a way that made lawful good look, well, good. You folks go ahead and read Val's treatise again, this time looking at it with my statements in mind. some of the stuff good ol' Val will say will have you remarking upon the sanctity of manure out loud! "Paladine is the strongest of the gods" or "Majere knows even more about the High God's plan than even Gilean" WHHHAHAAAAAAATTTT! You mean gil, who was given the written copy of that plan, called the Tobril? Gimme a break. There is a reason why that thing was written in character, folks.
The Dark Queen is going to overthrow the Balance, who does it take to stop it? The Good. Who stopped the Dark Queen during the age of Huma? The Good. Who stopped the Dark Queen the last time? A whiny snot nosed elf who makes Anakin Skywalker in Attack of the Clones look dignified...errr that's beside the point. The Kingpriest of Ishtar was condemned by Paladine and his plagues.
Who will stop Chemosh' beloved? It looks like Good again in Majere's servant (I don't buy he's working really for Zebomin).
Seriously, what was Gilean doing to support this so called Balance? What were ANY of the gods? The only god who has ever tried to do anything remotely resembling activity is Reorx, the only god who seems actively unconcerned with the Balance. Paladine has always been the one protecting it.
Frankly, I think it should be outright stated that "Balance" is good allowing for freedom of choice with the 'option' of evil. Frankly, Gilean and company are beneath contempt for their lack of action and I count myself amongst those who say that the neutralist perspective being gone doesn't effect Krynn one wit.
The entire Neutral Pantheon but Reorx could be eliminated with a few changes frankly.
what I mean by this is something fans have begun to do. they wave around the appendix written by "Valthonis" as the definitive look at the cosmology of Krynn.
I certainly don't (and never have). It's just one point of view.
Frankly, Gilean and company are beneath contempt for their lack of action...
I have the exact opposite opinion of the neutral pantheon. While the good and the bad have been bleeding themselves dead (literally) neutrality has been using their resources extremely wisely and have now become the dominant force on Krynn.
It's amazing, I have nothing but respect for Anstius but hate Gilean.
All the power in the world and nothing to use it on.
Aaah, but they don't need to do anything. They already have everything under control. ;)
what I mean by this is something fans have begun to do. they wave around the appendix written by "Valthonis" as the diffinitive look at the cosmology of Krynn.
You mean that's what this is all about? How disappointing.
The Dark Queen is going to overthrow the Balance, who does it take to stop it? The Good. Who stopped the Dark Queen during the age of Huma? The Good. Who stopped the Dark Queen the last time?
Well...when you put this in perspective though...as an average...Dragonlance is neutral. The pendulum swings freely...and it is supposed to swing freely...and that's what it's doing. So, doesn't that make Neutrality the main force in Dragonlance?
Sure, the neutral gods don't tend to take an openly active role in the major events. They don't need to. They're there every day nurturing free will. They do this so that when the pendulum starts to swing one way, the other way fights to bring it back. This free will between good and evil is the corner stone of Dragonlance. I don't think the Neutral gods have to take an active role in the major conflicts for this to be true.
Frankly, I think it should be outright stated that "Balance" is good allowing for freedom of choice with the 'option' of evil.
The freedom of choice between good and evil is by definition (at least I think) "Neutrality." There's good, there's evil, and there's the ability to choose between the two.
And of those three things, I think the biggest and most important part (pantheons aside) is the ability to choose between the two.
Example..
If evil is winning an all out war against the good of Krynn and the nuetral step in and help the good then they are in essence good not nuetral. Same thing for if good is winning an all out war.
The second that Nuetrality steps into something and acts in one way or the other they are no longer being Nuetral.
In terms of Balance, Nuetrality can only be represented by Aboslute Balance.
If neither good nor evil have an advantage over the other then you have absolute balance. Since I do not foresee this happening in DL at any time I would say that DL is not nuetral..... but
In all the books that I have read they pretty much swing from good to evil never really stopping on nuetral. So I do not see how DL can be considered a good or an evil setting either.
It is a balance setting.
The freedom of choice between good and evil is by definition (at least I think) "Neutrality." There's good, there's evil, and there's the ability to choose between the two.
Freedom to choose between the two is not nuetrality it is free will.
It looks like Good again in Majere's servant (I don't buy he's working really for Zebomin).
From Amber and Ashes I got the distinct feeling that Majere was nuetral and not good.
SPOILERS
He told his monk that he should not avenge his fallen monks. That he should accept it and continue on with his existence.
Anyway just my two cents
It is a balance setting.
.
.
Freedom to choose between the two is not nuetrality it is free will.
I think in Dragonlance, the true essence of Neutrality is balance and free will.
I think I have to disagree with that analysis.
Arilien... you say Majere is neutral because he told his cleric to turn the other cheek and not seek vengence?
I think I have to disagree with that analysis.
If anything, it is telling him not to follow one of Sargonnas's precepts, which is showing that he is good. I still think that it was reverse psychology, but that is me.
"All that evil requires to prosper is for good men to do nothing."
If Gilean and company keep not intervening then as Valthionos predicts, they will fall to the cause of evil.
Majere not making a stand against the Beloved of Chemosh is tantamount to condemning countless to die and an act of abomination. At the very least, the monk owes people warning.
I think there was trickery involved, even if I don't see how. The monk was revolted less at the actual murders than the dangers involved to others by his brother.
"Majere knows even more about the High God's plan than even Gilean" WHHHAHAAAAAAATTTT! You mean gil, who was given the written copy of that plan, called the Tobril? Gimme a break. There is a reason why that thing was written in character, folks.
Gilean understands the 'what'; Majere understands the why. Part of this is because Gilean doesn't think the Plan is working any more, and is more interested in seeing how Krynn unfolds than either directing it or understanding how even Evil and Chaos fit into the High God's plan.
Matthew L. Martin, who can speak with some authority on the subject of the Appendix.
So long as this well-oiled machine works the way it does, with Good and Evil in opposition and Neutrality acting as warden of the Balance, the progression of souls proceeds as the High God intended.
Cheers,
Cam
Matthew L. Martin, Absolutely Clueless About Dragonlance
Possibly, if Paladine is right then Zivilyn understands the "Why" of the Good and the Evil and holds them in equal value.
BTW-I found your "sequel" to the appendix with Gilean most informative. I thank you for posting it. While Mina's is obviously wrong, especially with how quickly she dropped the One God like a bad habit....I liked how Gilean's first inclination is that Chaos is equal to the High God.
While Mina's is obviously wrong, especially with how quickly she dropped the One God like a bad habit....
I knew I had the right idea when I stated that the manuscript was simply 'attributed to' Mina. Left myself an out there. :-)
Matthew L. Martin
He's sane, he's been there from the beginning, he's close enough to Takhasis to give you an idea of his motivations but he's also unlikely to lie about things (he knows that evil is attractive enough on its own)
I'd love to see their justification for their rebellion honestly or whether they think that Val's idea of the High God supporting good was completely hot air.
"All that evil requires to prosper is for good men to do nothing."
If Gilean and company keep not intervening then as Valthionos predicts, they will fall to the cause of evil.
But we are talking about neutrality here. Consider the flip side:
"All that good requires to prosper is for evil men to do nothing."
They can't act directly against either side lest they become a part of that side. It's more about moving the pebbles that start avalanches.
Of course then Good and Evil get into a big brawl as Evil being the evil step brother doesn't like being told no. So Good and Evil duke it out and in the end they being near equal strength subdue eachother until one can gain enough power to repress the attack. I believe that in its self is Neutrality the fact Good stops Evil cause neutrality especially in DL. I say this because everytime one grows to powerful the other is there too stop it. Or there is another effect there to stop it, in one case it was Chaos. After WotL Evil grew extemely powerful because good got lazy thinking they had totally one.
In this case I don't think Chaos was there so much as a act of chaos as he was an act of Neutrality. Because if he hadn't be freed when he was Evil would have taken Ansalon by storm. All be it a Lawful Evil, still an Evil. I've noticed that almost anytime there is a war of any type in DL especially in the last few sets of books both sides come out of it seriously wounded and in great need of rebuilding. I believe the Neutrals change things subtally and unnoticably so no one knows what they are doing, and others view them as weak though they are probably the strongest of all the Gods.
As for Majere isn't that bug Neutral Good? If so in essance the bug is just showing its two sides of its alignment, maybe at this point it was more its neutral side but good at the same time. I don't know bout that its just a though.
One thing i have some what noticed about DL is that Good isn't always good, and Evil isn't always evil.... its more based off of Lawfulness or Choaticness. If you are lawful, even if your evil, people respect you and don't totally hate you. If you are Chaotic and erratic the people of the world dislike you strongly.... examples.. KoT Lawful evil when created, and when they stormed Ansalon people feared them at first until they learned they didn't kill if they didn't have to. Eventually they were just welcomed into cities. Opposite that Kender, usually the most Good and lighthearted group of people you'll ever meet, but they are Chaotic, you never know what they are going to do or steal or say or anything, and most of Ansalon dislike Kender with a passion. Has anyone else noticed this? Or am I alone?
GCS
no Brim that was not "just it" is was just what I said it was "point one".
One thing y'all have to remember is that dl was a predominatly second edition based thing (it was around in first ed, i think, put lets not pick our nits lest they get infected, kay?). In second edition, whether it was in planescape or any place else, the main philosophy of who was "ethically" right would be that of neutrality, not good or evil, becuase the thought at the time was that even beings like archons could show the bad side of good, they could be snotty and impracticle, just as some evils could be selfish but practical, ie it could be reasoned with.
It was in this gaming environ that DL originally flourished. With each area connected, the multiversed was created in a similiar fashion as with any other world. A representation of law (Cosmos) and a representation of Chaos (chaos) each forged the world.
This fundemental concept, although changed in most campain settings, has not changed in DL.
People here believe Paladine does a lot to preserve teh balance. THis is not really true. Y' see, Paladine (and TAk) are the same type of critter that a demon or a celestial is: an exemplar. Pal and Tak were created to embody a solid alignment, they are almost robots to that programing, just like any other exemplar. The appenidix proves that Paladine is that way, Val even goes to the length of making up things about himself and other dieties. The reason why Paladine is able to give a passing nod to the balance is this: he has grown a little beyond his own programming. Pal was a full sponsor or the Kingpriest up until things got too rediculous (read the history on magic in the Tower sourcebook, the empires initial hate of magic was a reflection on teh original opinion of the gods of light!)
Anyway, after the Kingpriest mess, Pal learned his lesson, but he is still a creature of lawful good....
anyway, that's enough for you guys too chew on for now..