Why WoHS can't be a paragon path.

58 posts / 0 new
Last post
A few reasons.

1) It means everyone is a renegade wizard for the entirety of the heroic tier.
2) You'd have to wait until paragon level to finally play the class you rolled?
3) Limits multi-classing for arcane characters and makes everyone cookie cutter as every white robe would have the same paragon class.

My thoughts: All below would have controller aspects.

Black robes would be arcane strikers a la warlocks (odd isn't it that in the books most wizards with "mentors" and "masters" were black robes...) This also plays into their desire for quick power focusing on illusion and necromancy.

White robes would be arcane leaders kind of replacing bards (as krynn never had them) this works well as the abjuration and scrying could fullfill a bardic niche.

Red robes: pure arcane controller, most phb of the "wizard" class.


This allows much freedom for wizards of high sorcery to multiclass and take paragon paths to make each character unique.
----------------


Or....They're all just wizard/controllers but are differenciated by the "at will" powers they take similar to what all classes get now (dark pact, fey, infernal, for example)

----------------

The benefit of the first is that black robes for example could be focus on illusion or necromancy, whites: abjuration type spells or scrying etc...


thoughts?
Or everyone could be assumed to have a robe colour from level one but you only get the benefits of specialisation as your paragon path.

Or robe colours could just be done as a background and are otherwise almost entirely flavour.

Or robe colours could be a feat that give you bonuses to certain spells.

I'm more inclined towards a dedicated "Knight" class with Knight of Solamnia/Neraka PPs than I am to mechanical effect for the Orders of High Sorcery. Especially given that warlocks, sorcerors and wizards should all be able to join the Orders.
hehehehe Tobi is a good boy.

it will be a paragon path in all consideration

and no apprentice wears a colored robe until after the test, they usually wear the color of their master until such time.
( remembers some dumb image of Raistlin as a young apprentice wearing a white colored robe)

in the FRPG we got a dark pact for the warlocks, in the dlpg we will likely get a new wizard class feature explaining it all.

ad something for sorcerers.

the knights of whatever, well It kind is abit off.
at least 3 active armies that contain aleast two ranks.

making feats or awarded powers at promotion time....

t
a mask everyone has at least two of, one they wear in public and another they wear in private.....
or sorcerers, warlocks (except moon pact..? star pact?) could just be what the DL setting classifies as renegades.If everything "core" about DL is fluff (white robe wizard doesn't mean anything different than some wizard who wears a white robe in forgotten realms) why bother honestly?

Waiting for paragon path for a "wizard of high sorcery" goes against the fluff of the setting, and as I said screws heroic tier campaigns.I'm curious if any of you have read the 1ed campaign guide for dragonlance that had all the different rules for wizards and knights of solamnia?
-------

My impression is people against using the rules to deal with the core "classes" of dragonlance are the same type of people who are against providing combat stats for dieties, "You can just RP you don't need rules!"

am I wrong?
Just because there are WoHS paragon paths doesn't mean that all WoHS have these paragon paths.

Looking at all PP linked to organizations/backgrounds/regions in 4E Forgotten Realms and Eberron settings gives you a pretty good indication of this.
So choosing a PP called "White Robed Wizard of High Sorcery" would mean being fully dedicated to the ideals and strengths of the White Robes; to make it your specialty and your focus. Doesn't mean you don't belong to the order when you're into the heroic tiers or if you choose another PP.
My impression is people against using the rules to deal with the core "classes" of dragonlance are the same type of people who are against providing combat stats for dieties, "You can just RP you don't need rules!"

am I wrong?

No, I'm saying that if we get a 4th Edition Dragonlance Player's Handbook it's only going to have X number of pages. We're going to get, at best, two new classes and two new races (more likely one class, one build, and two races) and I just don't think that fully-fleshed Heroic Tier mechanics for the Orders of High Sorcery is the best use of that space.

I'll also put this out there, that we don't WANT our wizards to be bound in by mechanics. Flavour-wise, every legal good-aligned magic-user is a white robe. Do you really want every good-aligned arcane character you build in Dragonlance to have to take the White Robe class / build / paragon path / feat? That sounds pretty boring to me.

It's far better to have it be flavour - you can be a member of whatever order for free, it's all fluff - and then let you get the benefits of that order by buying into specific feats, or paragon paths, or what have you, but still let you maintain membership if you want to build your character some other way.
My assumption is that people who would buy a DL campaign source book would be big DL fans and would want to play as closely to the style of a DL game as they could.

This being the case, I would assume a player with a good aligned wizard *not* wanting to be a WoHS would be the exception, not the rule.

My anology would be player character drow in FR. Players like to play renegade drow a la drizzt...but that doesn't mean that WotC should change the fluff and the rules to reflect that in fact *most* drow are chaotic good rangers! Or that evil drow are the minority and that the default class for drow is ranger.

So too, a DL campaign guide shouldn't follow the path that says, "Oh, we don't want to discourage players who want to be a white robe WoHS infernal warlock/paladin or a Crown Knight kender bard/barbarian by making actual classes in dragonlance unique."

Because nothing says, "Dragonlance" like a Kender Barbarian Knight of the Crown amirite? Or letting a wizard get a +1 to damage on a full moon really captures the essence of what makes a black robe mage stand out from some guy who wears a black robe in the Greyhawk setting for example.
1) It means everyone is a renegade wizard for the entirety of the heroic tier.
2) You'd have to wait until paragon level to finally play the class you rolled?
3) Limits multi-classing for arcane characters and makes everyone cookie cutter as every white robe would have the same paragon class.

All very good reasons, and all right. If we use Raistlin as an example, he was a full-fledged Wizard of High Sorcery by the time that he was 6th level. You don't want folks waiting until paragon levels to play such an iconic role, especially since many games don't even make it that high in level.

There are alternatives. First, moon magic can become a feat or can be saved for an advanced paragon path (perhaps a moon disciple). Secondly, spells set aside for each order might be accessed in a similar manner as the spellplague powers. Take a feat, and you gain powers appropriate for your order.

Likewise, paragon paths are better suited for more specialized roles, like the Kingfishers and Renegade Hunters.

Or everyone could be assumed to have a robe colour from level one but you only get the benefits of specialisation as your paragon path.

Or robe colours could just be done as a background and are otherwise almost entirely flavour.

That's pretty much what they were in AD&D, with some minor differences in spellcasting tables (in DLA) and schools. Many players like taking the Test, though. I would leave this as optional and let the DM and players decide if it is background or if the player will go through the Test during play.

Or robe colours could be a feat that give you bonuses to certain spells.

That would work too. So maybe Black Robes get a +2 with spells that have the necrotic keyword.

I'm more inclined towards a dedicated "Knight" class with Knight of Solamnia/Neraka PPs than I am to mechanical effect for the Orders of High Sorcery.

The tools for the knight classes are already there. At its simplest:

Crown = Fighter
Sword = Paladin
Rose = Warlord

Multiclassing and hybrid classes can enhance this further.

Especially given that warlocks, sorcerors and wizards should all be able to join the Orders.

I disagree here, as sorcerers use a different type of arcane magic than wizards. They are at odds with each other. Likewise, warlocks gain magic from the entities they make pacts with, not with the moons. If there were moon pacts, they would be great.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
Just because there are WoHS paragon paths doesn't mean that all WoHS have these paragon paths.

Looking at all PP linked to organizations/backgrounds/regions in 4E Forgotten Realms and Eberron settings gives you a pretty good indication of this.
So choosing a PP called "White Robed Wizard of High Sorcery" would mean being fully dedicated to the ideals and strengths of the White Robes; to make it your specialty and your focus. Doesn't mean you don't belong to the order when you're into the heroic tiers or if you choose another PP.

You could simply go with a Master of the White Robes paragon path. Someone who is so dedicated to their order that they've unlocked arcane secrets.

Flavour-wise, every legal good-aligned magic-user is a white robe. Do you really want every good-aligned arcane character you build in Dragonlance to have to take the White Robe class / build / paragon path / feat? That sounds pretty boring to me.

But we're talking wizards here, not every arcane magic-user. The world has advanced a fair amount since the War of the Lance, after all.

I foresee several possibilities for wizards, from Kingfishers to Moon Disciples to Renegade Hunters and so on. I foresee an Academy Sorcerer and a Legion Sorcerer. I see a dragon pact for warlocks with a paragon path to go with that. All of these things are possible. The world is not as limited as it once was, and mortals now have more choices than ever.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
Sorcerers and/or Warlocks will be renegades...and should be in my opinion. Arcane magic in Krynn is a gift, of sorts, from Solinari, Lunitari and Nuitari. It requires study and dedication to utilize this gift however. Sorcerers and Warlocks do not play by the rules of magic in Krynn.

Saying Krynn didn't have Bards is silly in my opinion. Technically, none of the settings had Swordmages...but they all do now. They can paint a new role for them in Krynn if they want to but there is no reason because there were always mulitclass characters. Gilthanas was a Fighter/Mage...he would be fine in 4E as either a Swordmage, Bard or a Multiclass/Hybrid Fighter/Wizard...heck, add in Swordmage and or Bard into those Multiclass/Hybrid options.

Krynn proper, meaning the initial books, didn't have a Feywild or a Shadowfell for the most part, but I think we can all rest aassured they will now.

The only thing that is really being lost is the flavor that Wizards of High Sorcery accessed different spheres of magic. That, however, isn't really hardwired into the setting anyway. Raistlin started off as a Red Robe and had access to Evocation magic. When he became a Black Robe he was still casting Lightning Bolt so it is really a matter of what schools of magic the Orders encouraged study in as opposed to what they are capable of.

A PP is just fine for giving further definition to the Orders of High Sorcery. Not to mention the fact that if things were done the way the initial poster wanted we would never see a PC Wizard with Necromantic spells since neither White nor Red Robed Wizards could cast them. I don't like it.

The only real thing to fit in is Bards. They are more instinctive casters but also seem to focus on learning. They don't fit thematically, at all, with the renegades since they are expected to be able to integrate easily into society. It could just be that they are not considered potent enough casters to be part of the Orders and need not worry one way or the other. It seems to me, however, that in this edition they are not the dabblers they once were.
The only real thing to fit in is Bards. They are more instinctive casters but also seem to focus on learning. They don't fit thematically, at all, with the renegades since they are expected to be able to integrate easily into society. It could just be that they are not considered potent enough casters to be part of the Orders and need not worry one way or the other. It seems to me, however, that in this edition they are not the dabblers they once were.

In 3.5, bards and sorcerers both used the arcane magic of Wild Sorcery, whereas wizards used High Sorcery. If you want, you can still say that they do the same in 4e. They just access the magic in different ways. Whatever the case, bards would not be part of the Orders of High Sorcery.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
Yes, I would be inclined to agree. I do not, however, like the idea of them being seen as renegades and essentially hunted down by the Orders of High Sorcery. It doesn't fit the class at all to be hunted since they are actually the direct opposite and not only accepted but welcomed by society by and large. I was only thinking of how those to items would work together. For instance, if the Orders saw them as dabblers in magic they wouldn't care one way or the other about how they accessed their power.
I disagree here, as sorcerers use a different type of arcane magic than wizards. They are at odds with each other. Likewise, warlocks gain magic from the entities they make pacts with, not with the moons. If there were moon pacts, they would be great.

You don't see Raistlin as pretty much the prime example of a vestige-pact warlock? (Archetypally, I mean. Obviously he uses wizard powers in the books.)
You don't see Raistlin as pretty much the prime example of a vestige-pact warlock? (Archetypally, I mean. Obviously he uses wizard powers in the books.)

You could write it that way, sure, but you could also say that Fistandantilus gave him an edge over his peers by offering knowledge in the form of books, spells, training essentially, where a Vestige Pact Warlock goes about things the easy way. Raistlin clearly learned his magic. You could Multiclass or even Hybridize him I suppose. I think, however, there would be considerable community reaction if he was changed from a Wizard to anything else. I dunno that it would be worth it. You saw how the reaction was to the changes in FR was and the relief that the lack of changes to Eberron caused. I am pretty sure he will be a Wizard.
All very good reasons, and all right. If we use Raistlin as an example, he was a full-fledged Wizard of High Sorcery by the time that he was 6th level. You don't want folks waiting until paragon levels to play such an iconic role, especially since many games don't even make it that high in level.

Just one quibble with this, however. Back then, the level limit was functionally level 20, as any character that pushed beyond that was to be removed from Krynn, with Raistlin being the one exception at the height of his power. Does that mean we have to toss out the entire Epic tier? Wouldn't it make much more sense to extend that limit out to 30? If we do so, then 6/20 is approximately equivalent to 10/30. So with the new level limits, it would actually make sense for the Test to take place at the cusp between 10th and 11th level.

Also, if you think of the tiers, it makes sense also. Raistlin, Caraman and Tanis, if you look at the Tales, took care of some fairly substantial local threats before the brothers ever went to the Tower. It was not long after the test, that they were thrust into the broader conflict of the War of the Lance, much more a Paragon level tale, than merely a heroic one, in my opinion, as it involved multiple countries, and the actions of deities themselves.

My 2 steel pieces,
Ryuna
You don't see Raistlin as pretty much the prime example of a vestige-pact warlock? (Archetypally, I mean. Obviously he uses wizard powers in the books.)

No, I don't. He is, first and foremost, a wizard. However, he may be multiclassed with the warlock with the vestige pact, or he may be a hybrid wizard/warlock.

All of that being said, I don't see Raistlin as the example we should use for the rule. He was the exception to the rule.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
Just one quibble with this, however. Back then, the level limit was functionally level 20,

Level 18, since we're quibbling. ;)

Does that mean we have to toss out the entire Epic tier?

Of course not. The game has moved forward, and the world adapts to it.

Wouldn't it make much more sense to extend that limit out to 30? If we do so, then 6/20 is approximately equivalent to 10/30. So with the new level limits, it would actually make sense for the Test to take place at the cusp between 10th and 11th level.

Okay, I see where you're coming from, but the correlation you're making doesn't quite mesh. In editions past, the game was played from levels 1 - 20. Everything above was considered epic. Dark Sun's Dragon Kings book is perhaps the first to give really good rules on epic abilities, and Forgotten Realms Adventures was perhaps the first book to give us spellcasting progression above 20th level. In 3rd edition, the Epic Level Handbook was also above 20th level.

The difference in 4e is that now epic levels are part of the core. We're not raising 20th level to 30th level. We're including ten levels that have never been included in a core rulebook before. So levels in prior editions remain true even in 4e.

The fact that Raistlin was over 20th level shows that he is one of the few, rare people to have achieved epic levels in Krynn. Most adventurers only reach heroic or paragon levels.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
I'm of those who sees 4e as taking of 20 levels of previous editions and just spreading the power growth roughly over 30 levels instead. At least, it fits when you take a look at monster CR.

A pit fiend used to be CR 20 and is now a level 26 elite monster.
The balor went from CR 20 to a level 27 elite monster.
Storm giant went from CR 13 to level 24.
Aboleth was CR 7 and is now a level 17 monster.
Beholder has gone from CR 13 to level 19 solo.
The roc has gone from CR 9 to level 14.
The griffon went from CR 4 to level 7.
Etc.

While challenge ratings were not simply multiplied by 1.5, there's still a pretty strong correlation. Unless can find a way to explain how all the monsters suddenly got stronger, it seems to me like the power of characters and monsters is just measured on a new scale, so that a character that was level 20 in 3.5 has about the same relative power as one that's reaching level 30 in 4e.
Okay, so let's say we do make the WoHS, KoS, KoT, and LoS classes into paragon paths. How, then, would they be able to take on specialized roles? There would no longer be room for Kingfishers, renegade hunters, griffon wizards, winternorn, and so on.

You would also have the problem of people wanting to play mostly during the paragon levels just to hit those iconic roles.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
Okay, so let's say we do make the WoHS, KoS, KoT, and LoS classes into paragon paths. How, then, would they be able to take on specialized roles? There would no longer be room for Kingfishers, renegade hunters, griffon wizards, winternorn, and so on.

You would also have the problem of people wanting to play mostly during the paragon levels just to hit those iconic roles.

Well, I was all in favour of rebooting back to the War of the Lance, so "griffon wizards" (whatever they are) would be happily wiped from continuity.

But that aside - look, if you don't do the orders of sorcery as paragon paths, how the hell are you going to do them? You simply don't have the game space to do three new classes that don't tread on the existing wizard, warlock and sorceror. You could do them with feats, that's fine. Doing them as wizard builds might work but it locks other arcane classes out of the orders and provides a disproportionately large amount of love to Wizards compared to ever other class, which they don't really need.

I'm happy enough with the orders of sorcery being all fluff; all fluff, with an associated feat, would be pretty much perfect.
Well, I was all in favour of rebooting back to the War of the Lance, so "griffon wizards" (whatever they are) would be happily wiped from continuity.



But that aside - look, if you don't do the orders of sorcery as paragon paths, how the hell are you going to do them? You simply don't have the game space to do three new classes that don't tread on the existing wizard, warlock and sorceror. You could do them with feats, that's fine. Doing them as wizard builds might work but it locks other arcane classes out of the orders and provides a disproportionately large amount of love to Wizards compared to ever other class, which they don't really need.

You do them as organizations that existing classes can join. Yes, it's entirely fluff, but you can add in some mechanical stuff like feats to even it out some. Moon magic is self-balancing, so it could be a condition of the world. Or, you could go on to say that you don't get the benefits of moon magic until you reach paragon level, at which point you take a Master of the Black Robes/Red Robes/White Robes paragon path.

Now, remember that sorcerers (and likely the other arcane classes) gain power from Krynn's ambient arcane magic, so they would not be joining the Wizards of High Sorcery. However, if you would rather include them, then go ahead.

Base class choices can work for the other roles as well. The Knights of Solamnia are easy enough:

Crown Knight - Fighter
Sword Knight - Paladin
Rose Knight - Warlord.

The Dark Knights would probably be statted up as monsters. If you wanted to play one, though, it may look like this:

Lily Knight - Fighter or warlord
Skull Knight - Any divine class, perhaps multiclassed with fighter.
Thorn Knight - Wizards, sorcerers, warlocks (infernal pact), and swordmages. I don't see bards in the Thorn Knights.

Then the Legion of Steel might look like this:

Legion Warrior - Fighter or warlord.
Legion Mystic - Any divine class (though cleric is the best fit)
Legion Mage (formerly Legion Sorcerer) - Any arcane class (though wizards are rare)
Legion Scout - Ranger or rogue.

There are various ways you can tackle each role. You could be more restrictive, or keep each role open. Personally, I'm using the 3.5 sourcebooks from Margaret Weis Productions as my guideline.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
In 3.5, bards and sorcerers both used the arcane magic of Wild Sorcery, whereas wizards used High Sorcery. If you want, you can still say that they do the same in 4e. They just access the magic in different ways. Whatever the case, bards would not be part of the Orders of High Sorcery.

Honestly, I don't it's appropriate in 4e to assume that wizard(class) = mage. Or that Bard(class) /= mage.

If I wanted to do the three colors I would encourage my players to consider: Bards White Robes, Warlocks Black Robes, and ...Red is hard because they ride the line between helping and hurting. :P Maybe a multi-class...IDK. The mechanics of those classes fit the flavor of the DL positions.

Someone made a comment about only whites and reds being pcs. Why? Black robes aren't auto evil. In fact, they work within the Order as a whole, helping Krynn in times of crisis. Also, it's 4e, there are PC archliches. :P
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
No, I don't. He is, first and foremost, a wizard. However, he may be multiclassed with the warlock with the vestige pact, or he may be a hybrid wizard/warlock.

All of that being said, I don't see Raistlin as the example we should use for the rule. He was the exception to the rule.

he's sort the exception to a lot of rules.
Love that guy. So brutally messed up. So much cooler than Drizzt. :P (I've heard the comparison more than once.)
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
he's sort the exception to a lot of rules.
Love that guy. So brutally messed up. So much cooler than Drizzt. :P (I've heard the comparison more than once.)

Yet most people miss the true comparison. They go to the same hair stylist. :D
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
Yet most people miss the true comparison. They go to the same hair stylist. :D

Indeed.

So, I was really hoping that there would be some kind of response as to why black robes can't be PCs, or why in 4e you would have to be in the wizard class to be a mage, rather than just being an arcane class whose mechanics fit the flavour of a mage of the colour you want to be in.

I'm bummed.
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
It's actually quite simple how it can work.

All arcane character will pick one of the towers, or being a hedge mage at 1st level. The only mechanical benefit this gives is that it acts as a prerequisite for feats, paragon paths and the like.

This way being a White Wizard or Red Wizard can have a mechanical impact for players who want that to be a defining trait of their character, but allows characters who do not want to be pigeon-holed by the color of their robes to not be forced into renegade status.
It's actually quite simple how it can work.

All arcane character will pick one of the towers, or being a hedge mage at 1st level. The only mechanical benefit this gives is that it acts as a prerequisite for feats, paragon paths and the like.

This way being a White Wizard or Red Wizard can have a mechanical impact for players who want that to be a defining trait of their character, but allows characters who do not want to be pigeon-holed by the color of their robes to not be forced into renegade status.

I like that solution. Approved.
Seriously. I hate to be a broken record, but I've got a player who may want to play a black robe.
Is there any legitimate reason not to allow this?
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
Well, in the past wizards of the black robe had to be evil aligned. This meant they were villains/evil PCs only. But since 4e's alignment is very, VERY hands off this shouldn't be an issue. You could conceivably have a lawful good black wizard. However, there will be an in-character stigma about it. No matter what it behavior is, people who do not know him, but know what he looks like will assume he is evil. And not just kinda evil, but murdering babies to gain more power evil.
Alignment has to paly a role in DL even if it changes it from the default in 4E. The balance between good and evil is a huge element to the setting. Black robes would still have to be evil as far as I'm concerned. The only problem with a PC being a black robe is how he would get along with the rest of the players in the game.
Alignment in 4th-edition, as a mechanic, is desinged to that is can not be the prerequisite for anything other than what god divine character draw their power from. This means alignment only needs to matter on a cosmic scale, the alignment of the divine entities.
And the balance of good and evil on Krynn has always been related to how much influence those divine entities have over the mortals. There is no need for that to hinge on the alignment those mortals are. Nuitari the black moon would still be evil. The magic mages draw from him would be touched by evil. Even dooing deeds of heroism andbeing a paragon of law and good would still feed his evil.
Seriously. I hate to be a broken record, but I've got a player who may want to play a black robe.
Is there any legitimate reason not to allow this?

The only reason is the same reason that many evil characters are banned to begin with - they tend to cause party strife and don't work well with the group. If you talked with the player and he could justify how the Black Robe would work with the group, then you might allow it then.

You could conceivably have a lawful good black wizard.

No you couldn't. Black Robes are evil. They practice an evil magic and are dedicated to an evil god (Nuitari).

This is Dragonlance, folks. In Dragonlance, good wizards are White Robes, neutral wizards are Red Robes, and evil wizards are Black Robes. This is established continuity, dating back 25 years.

And not just kinda evil, but murdering babies to gain more power evil.

Black Robes don't just go out and murder babies. They're evil, but their responsibility is first and foremost to the magic. Anything that jeopardizes the magic, such as the random murdering of children, is a no-no. Only in a rare case where the murder of such a child would lead to greater magical power could it really be justified.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
No you couldn't. Black Robes are evil. They practice an evil magic and are dedicated to an evil god (Nuitari).

So, what, only the Sith deal in extremes?
If All members of a single order wear a specific color that whole portion of the story where Raistlin wearing the white robe made his miraculously good aligned?
No, people wear whatever color they want, the orders try to only allow people of a specific moral compass into their order, and for the most part they do a smashing job. However there can be exceptions/mistakes/changes in personality.

This is Dragonlance, folks. In Dragonlance, good wizards are White Robes, neutral wizards are Red Robes, and evil wizards are Black Robes. This is established continuity, dating back 25 years.

This is Dragonlance in Dungeons and Dragons 4th-edition folk. This is the game where you can have a cleric of a lawful good god turn evil and not lose his powers. You can have evil Paladins and lawful good Bards; breakign traditions that are just as old if nor older.
Having good-aligned Black Robes is not a stretch.

Black Robes don't just go out and murder babies. They're evil, but their responsibility is first and foremost to the magic. Anything that jeopardizes the magic, such as the random murdering of children, is a no-no. Only in a rare case where the murder of such a child would lead to greater magical power could it really be justified.

What a way to take a simple joke about how NPCs would be prejudiced against a black-robe wizard regardless of how he behaved and blow it out of proportions.
So, what, only the Sith deal in extremes?

See the Kingpriest. ;)

If All members of a single order wear a specific color that whole portion of the story where Raistlin wearing the white robe made his miraculously good aligned?

The only time that Raistlin wore white robes was before the time that he took the Test. He was a Red Robe when his alignment was focused on neutrality, and when it turned to darkness, he wore the Black Robes.


No, people wear whatever color they want, the orders try to only allow people of a specific moral compass into their order, and for the most part they do a smashing job. However there can be exceptions/mistakes/changes in personality.

And when those changes in personality, or more specifically one's moral outlook, happens, the robe colors change to match. Sure, a good character can say that black is a far more fashionable color for him and wear it. However, the Orders will definitely frown on this practice.


This is Dragonlance in Dungeons and Dragons 4th-edition folk. This is the game where you can have a cleric of a lawful good god turn evil and not lose his powers. You can have evil Paladins and lawful good Bards; breakign traditions that are just as old if nor older.
Having good-aligned Black Robes is not a stretch.

That's not the same, though. Do we go into Greyhawk and say that the Circle of Eight is now a Circle of a Baker's Dozen? Do we say that the Harpers of the Forgotten Realms play the kazoo? I'm not talking about game mechanics here. I'm talking about setting elements.

It is important to the story of Dragonlance for each order to maintain its own moral alignment. If you don't, then Raistlin's change from the Red Robes to the Black Robes is meaningless, as are the Robes themselves. If we ignore alignment, we might as well not have the Orders of High Sorcery, or differing knighthoods, or the pantheons of the gods.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
If All members of a single order wear a specific color that whole portion of the story where Raistlin wearing the white robe made his miraculously good aligned?





The only time Raistlin wore white robes was when he attended Solace's mage school. And the reason he wore white as a student, was because it was tradition to wear the colour of ones sponsor. And who was Raistlin's sponsor? Antimodes, a white robe.

In Dragonlance -

White robed wizards who have passed their test are good aligned.

And red robes are neutral aligned.

And black robes are evil aligned.

Fantasy is my passion, insanity is my lifesblood. "I am a Knight of Solamnia. I am the hand of Paladine, of Kiri-Jolith, and of Habbakuk on this world. You are on Krynn. You are mine, Queen of Darkness." —Huma Dragonbane, The Legend of Huma For he today who sheds his blood with me, shall be my brother - William Shakespeare
In essence, Dragonlance is not a "shades of gray" setting when it comes to alignment.
Hi. I had to remove some content from this thread because it violates the Code of Conduct

Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
See the Kingpriest. ;)

Oh, yeah, a servant of the good gods who believed he was good, was surrounded by white robed wizards, and good priests. All of whom are guilty of one of the greatest evils in all of Krynn.

The only time that Raistlin wore white robes was before the time that he took the Test. He was a Red Robe when his alignment was focused on neutrality, and when it turned to darkness, he wore the Black Robes.

Then he should have never worn red robes at all. After fusing with the undeniably baby-murdering evil Fistandantilius he was evil. Yeah, he thought he was neutral, but the mages who punished his evil with the hourgrlass eyes knew otherwise.

And when those changes in personality, or more specifically one's moral outlook, happens, the robe colors change to match.

Oh, good lord no. A wizard's robes are not some magical mood-ring changing color to reflect the moral outlook. Wizards who value the tradition of the robes, such as Rasitlin, change their robes willingly when they realize time has come.
4E has no detect alignment magic, so there is no way for a magic-user to know when that has happened in character.

Sure, a good character can say that black is a far more fashionable color for him and wear it. However, the Orders will definitely frown on this practice.

By why does this require there to be alignment as a prerequisite?

That's not the same, though. Do we go into Greyhawk and say that the Circle of Eight is now a Circle of a Baker's Dozen? Do we say that the Harpers of the Forgotten Realms play the kazoo? I'm not talking about game mechanics here. I'm talking about setting elements.

It is exactly the same, and you are moving the goal posts. Removing the player-level impact of an intangible is not changing something to it's fundimental core.

It is important to the story of Dragonlance for each order to maintain its own moral alignment. If you don't, then Raistlin's change from the Red Robes to the Black Robes is meaningless, as are the Robes themselves.

Gah! No. If anything it puts more weight into his actions. Raistlin's conscious decision to change his robes was because he knew exactly what what he had become, and out of respect to the tradition he changed his robes.
It shows he embraced the darkness, and welcomes the change, but even then no matter how powerful he became he still owed it all to the teachings to the orders of high sorcery.

If we ignore alignment, we might as well not have the Orders of High Sorcery, or differing knighthoods, or the pantheons of the gods.

*facepalm*
Why are you blowing everything out of proportion. Like I had already said, the gods alignments matter. That is the only thing where they matter.
The gods themselves stay their alignments, that means the grand majority of people who worship/follow them are of a similar alignments. Peoples perceptions of the followers are colored by the alignment of their deity or the color of their robes or the icon worn on their shield.

In essence, Dragonlance is not a "shades of gray" setting when it comes to alignment.

For that to work the 4e shades of gray alignment would have to be thrown out for the objectivist system of older editions. Why is this a good thing?

---

also, how would Red Robes work in 4e?
There is no Neutral alignment anymore.
There is Unaligned, but that is not the same thing.

Red Robes were concerned in the balance between darkness and light.
Unaligned people are unconcerned with anything dealing with a moral compass.
double face palm.

you two wont agree with anything the other says or thinks.
gets old when people read to much into the others posts.....


why continue?
but then who am I to say? carry on if you wish




as for the unaligned red robes, one would have to play with the term unaligned in another definition of the word and then go from there.
a mask everyone has at least two of, one they wear in public and another they wear in private.....
Wow, WizOs are now known as ORCs? Huh.

Of course, they used to be called TSROs, IIRC. ;)

Then he should have never worn red robes at all. After fusing with the undeniably baby-murdering evil Fistandantilius he was evil. Yeah, he thought he was neutral, but the mages who punished his evil with the hourgrlass eyes knew otherwise.

The Orders recognized this. Par-Salian was hoping the hourglass eyes would teach Raistlin some compassion, but that was not meant to be.

Oh, good lord no. A wizard's robes are not some magical mood-ring changing color to reflect the moral outlook. Wizards who value the tradition of the robes, such as Rasitlin, change their robes willingly when they realize time has come.
4E has no detect alignment magic, so there is no way for a magic-user to know when that has happened in character.

Right, I'm not talking about "mood ring robes." I'm just trying to say the same thing you are here, where wizards realize that their moral viewpoint matches that of another robe, so they make the choice to change.

By why does this require there to be alignment as a prerequisite?

Well, what are we talking a prerequisite for? Perhaps that's where the disconnect is. If we're talking for a paragon path, then no, I wouldn't use alignment since that's now how 4e is presented. I would say, "must worship Nuitari."

If we're talking about membership in an order within an organization, then I would use alignment since we have 25 years of established Dragonlance continuity that says that Black Robes are evil.


Gah! No. If anything it puts more weight into his actions. Raistlin's conscious decision to change his robes was because he knew exactly what what he had become, and out of respect to the tradition he changed his robes.
It shows he embraced the darkness, and welcomes the change, but even then no matter how powerful he became he still owed it all to the teachings to the orders of high sorcery.

So he recognizes that he has become evil and changes his robes to black in order to match his alignment. ;)

*facepalm*
Why are you blowing everything out of proportion. Like I had already said, the gods alignments matter. That is the only thing where they matter.
The gods themselves stay their alignments, that means the grand majority of people who worship/follow them are of a similar alignments. Peoples perceptions of the followers are colored by the alignment of their deity or the color of their robes or the icon worn on their shield.

I'm not blowing things out of proportion. I've been playing Dragonlance for many years now, and I believe that it is important for certain setting elements to remain constant, no matter the edition. If you change the setting for the edition in a way that runs counter to existing history, then you lose a little something of the setting.



For that to work the 4e shades of gray alignment would have to be thrown out for the objectivist system of older editions. Why is this a good thing?

4th edition's alignment system is not as good of a match for Dragonlance as the alignment systems of prior editions (meaning D&D-based systems, not SAGA). It can be managed, but various things do not work out as well. For example, we no longer have a LE alignment, which is exactly what the Knights of Takhisis are. Plus, you hit the nail on the head here...

also, how would Red Robes work in 4e?
There is no Neutral alignment anymore.
There is Unaligned, but that is not the same thing.

Red Robes were concerned in the balance between darkness and light.
Unaligned people are unconcerned with anything dealing with a moral compass.

I think, in order for Red Robes to work in 4e, you have to define unaligned to mean neutral. Either that, or you really have to re-define them.


Truthfully, I don't feel that 4th edition is the best match for Dragonlance. Don't get me wrong, I really like 4th edition. However, the moral outlook in 4th edition runs counter to that of Dragonlance. Dragonlance was made with AD&D tropes in mind.

When we worked on 3rd edition Dragonlance, we found that 3rd edition worked fairly well with the setting. It may not have been 100%, but then again, not even AD&D was 100%. Some things, like prestige classes, worked pretty well with the setting. In fact, I'd say that DL was a prime world for prestige classes. Other elements, such as the ability to have kender wizards, ran counter to established continuity. Luckily, fluff text was our friend.

Dragonlance can work in 4th edition. Make no mistake of that. But in order for that to happen, concessions have to be made somewhere, whether it be in the rules or in the setting. I'm certain many folks and WotC themselves will place rules over setting. I'm just the opposite. I feel that setting trumps rules. So yes, Dragonlance's views on alignment are dated compared to today's rules. Yet I feel that alignment is an important part of the setting, and that 4th edition's alignment system doesn't match DL as well as that used in prior editions (again, excluding SAGA).

4th edition gives us some cool things, such as the warlord class, which is a natural for Rose Knights. At the same time, you have things like no negatives to ability scores, which makes creating a gully dwarf kind of hard. It isn't a perfect fit by any means. So ask yourself what is more important in your games, the rules or the setting, and decide what concessions you are willing to make. The rest, then, will fall into place.
Trampas Whiteman ---DragonHelm---> Whitestone Council Dragonlance Nexus Long Live the Lance!
The setting should always trump the general rules. The cool thing about settings in 2E was that they changed the general assumptions. Many of the settings changed the general rules to make it unique. Unfortunatley I don't think WotC will do that. I think if we see 4E Dragonlance everything will be forced into the setting even though it has been what made DL different than any other setting for 25 years.