Planescape Check Out The Planescape Character Options

WotC has unveiled some of the character options to be found in the upcoming Planescape: Adventures in the Multiverse setting in a D&D Beyond article and a video.

The player options include two backgrounds and a handful of feats. The backgrounds are the Gate Warden and the Planer Philosopher, and the feats include Scion of the Outer planes, which gives you a damage resistance and a cantrip based on the plane you have a connect with. For example, a chaotic Outer Place give you resistance to poison and access to the minor illusion cantrip, which the Outlands give you resistance to psychic damage and the mage hand cantrip. Also included are a couple of new spells and some magic items.

Preview Planescape Character Options for Your Multiversal Adventures

This article is a deep dive into the backgrounds and feats found in the three-book set Planescape: Adventures in the Multiverse!

www.dndbeyond.com

​

 

[Parmandur]

Sure thing. But the statement was that WotC markets the book to all hobbyists, not just DMs. This was a response to a question about why WotC would put out a preview of the player options.

Yeah, they always preview the player options in their books.

 

[Imaro]

Example 867 of why the name 'summoner' is a bad name for the Pathfinder summoner class, and any theoretical dnd equivalent.

Any time the fact that it's not a horde class is explained, you get someone a few messages later assuming it's a horde class.

That just goes to show where the expectation for it sits...

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

My own idea of D&D summoner mixes elements of vestige pact binder and incarnum totemist. The "sha'ir" summons a planar ally using a game mechanic like the vestige pact magic, and this can be changed in the same way. The planar ally can be "upgrade" using points of essence in chakras "body slots for magic item".

But I am afraid it would be a lot of work with playtesting and feedback to sell enough number of sourcebooks.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

That just goes to show where the expectation for it sits...

Pathfinder 2e 'summoner' is essentially a dedicated 'pet' class. Where you have a single summon which takes up the majority of the power budget, and you can upgrade it over time. Tons of different creatures types as options which are essentially the 'subclasses'. There is also an alternate route you can take where you merge with the summon and it becomes a 'play as the monster' class.

 

[Parmandur]

Pathfinder 2e 'summoner' is essentially a dedicated 'pet' class. Where you have a single summon which takes up the majority of the power budget, and you can upgrade it over time. Tons of different creatures types as options which are essentially the 'subclasses'. There is also an alternate route you can take where you merge with the summon and it becomes a 'play as the monster' class.

Yet those sorts of pet Subclasses have bombed in UA. Tend to doubt WotC cab make a version that gets tgst 70% satisfaction.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Yet those sorts of pet Subclasses have bombed in UA. Tend to doubt WotC cab make a version that gets tgst 70% satisfaction.

The drakenwarden made it through UA, but the subclass is awkwardly designed and fully of clunkyness. Doesn't even work in dnd beyond that smoothly.

People hated the primeval druid because it was a full caster with a stronger pet that the beastmaster ranger. Dandwiki has a better balance standard than that thing.

 

[Imaro]

My own idea of D&D summoner mixes elements of vestige pact binder and incarnum totemist. The "sha'ir" summons a planar ally using a game mechanic like the vestige pact magic, and this can be changed in the same way. The planar ally can be "upgrade" using points of essence in chakras "body slots for magic item".

But I am afraid it would be a lot of work with playtesting and feedback to sell enough number of sourcebooks.

Pathfinder 2e 'summoner' is essentially a dedicated 'pet' class. Where you have a single summon which takes up the majority of the power budget, and you can upgrade it over time. Tons of different creatures types as options which are essentially the 'subclasses'. There is also an alternate route you can take where you merge with the summon and it becomes a 'play as the monster' class.

Soo a companion... like the Ranger? Do we need another pet class (but magic)? Especially since there are spells that summon creatures?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Soo a companion... like the Ranger? Do we need another pet class (but magic)? Especially since there are spells that summon creatures?

More options are better than fewer. Use or don't use what you wish, and leave the preferences of others alone.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Soo a companion... like the Ranger? Do we need another pet class (but magic)? Especially since there are spells that summon creatures?

Ranger.... except most of the power budget is in the pet. And the pet can be large size to ride it. And you can become the pet and play as a monster. And you can also select pet options from any creature type. And you can upgrade your pet as you level.

So ranger, but nothing like ranger in any way. The closest would be the Tasha's/Fizban's summon spells by far.

This is the flaw of the 5e subclass system. Almost any concept can be made a subclass. But many of those things made into subclasses end up losing their entire mechanical and thematic identity in order to fit. Eldritch Knight is another example. It's the 5e swordmage, but does nothing which the swordmages from 3e, 4e, and pathfinder were known for.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

More options are better than fewer. Use or don't use what you wish, and leave the preferences of others alone.

Ironically, due to how the subclass system is being abused, 5e is ending up with both content bloat and lack of content simultaneously.

It's kind of impressive.