Planescape 5e Planescape- What would you like to see in the upcoming setting?

[Henadic Theologian]

I don't think they want to touch any real world gods with a 10 foot pole at this point.

If you look at the Cleric playtest packet, the flavor has removed any reference to a particular deity whatsoever.

Cleric doesn't need it, but particular Pantheons are intimately tied to particular Planes in the lore in major setting defining ways, Greco-Roman Gods to Aborea most specifically the layer of Olympus , Norse Gods in Ysgard. Heck you also have the Grey wastes of Hades and Elysium as Planes. You have the Satanic "Pantheon" in Hell. You have the Gnostic Archon "Pantheon" in Mount Celestia (Tome Archons). You literally have Hell, Limbo, Heaven, & Gehanna as Planes from Abrihamic religions as well.

How do you see them removing these from Planescape?

Other Pantheons that are less tied to a particular planes major lore might get diverted to Divine Domains in the Astral Sea.

 

[James Gasik]

So you think they will import Theros, Amonkhet, and Kaldheim's Gods in to replace real world Gods in Planescape?

I'll point out that Tiamat and Asmodeus come from real world Gods (or fiends in Asmodeus' case). As do Silvanus, Tyr, and Lovitar in the case of the Forgotten Realms, with Silvanus & Tyr showing up on MtG cards just last year.

How would you go about ingrating MtG Gods onto Planescape?

I mean, since they have made those into D&D settings, and they are IP's they own, I don't see why they wouldn't use them. In fact, given the fact that WotC seems terrified of anyone thinking they are insensitive, it absolutely makes sense for them to stop using real-world mythology.*

As for the Forgotten Realms, the Gods there have seriously departed from their real-world origins; FR Tyr has about as much in common with Norse Tyr as comic book Thor has in common with Norse Thor.

*I do want to say this isn't what I think they should do, but at the same time, I remember TSR's take on "Native American Mythos" and how that totally wouldn't fly today.

 

[I'm A Banana]

You don't think they will at least explore the layers of planes (okay only the important ones of the Infinate Layers of the Abyss)?

I imagine each layer will get about a sentence or three of description - just enough for a DM to get a vibe check. They might go into more detail on specific sites that the adventure deals with.

I don't think they want to touch any real world gods with a 10 foot pole at this point.

One of the cool things about PS for me was that it wove in real-world mythologies, but I get the line they have to walk. They can always "leave room" for these things, even if they aren't in the book. Arborea becomes elf-land instead of elf-and-greek-land. (I'm actually really curious about how they'll do Arborea in 5e - they still have the Feywild, and the overlap between the Arborea vibe and the Feywild vibe is significant.)

What's more likely is that they mention, instead of Grecoroman and Egyptian Gods, Theros and Amonkhet.

IDK, the gods of the MtG planes are very much their own thing, not tied to the power of belief or the Great Wheel at all. Like, the Theros gods are part of Theros, not distant beings on another plane. I think they'd be smarter to not mention them. Though given that MtG is another place where "planewalkers" are present, they might do a bit of a "You can walk through a door in Sigil to wind up in Strixhaven or whatever if you want!" Which would be a nice nod without slamming the two together too hard.

 

[Vinicius Lessa]

Frankly, if the setting lacks real world mythological elements it will be a disappointment for me, as that was one of the reasons I found it so interesting in the first place. Making those less overt? Sure. Erasing them completely? A bummer.

About the concept of "layers" in the original Planescape boxes: I never like them, as they gave this idea of planes as glorified dungeons to crawl where the deeper you go the harder the monsters. That always felt so... out of place in a setting that's about beliefs? So, aside from the Abyss where it's a conceptual fit, I would prefer if the concept of layers was purged altogether and the planes were described through different regions, or "mythic realms", etc. instead.

 

[Parmandur]

One of the cool things about PS for me was that it wove in real-world mythologies, but I get the line they have to walk. They can always "leave room" for these things, even if they aren't in the book. Arborea becomes elf-land instead of elf-and-greek-land. (I'm actually really curious about how they'll do Arborea in 5e - they still have the Feywild, and the overlap between the Arborea vibe and the Feywild vibe is significant.)

Yeah, juat a hunch, but i don't think WotC in the 20's wants the noise of even potentially offending someone's religious beliefs.

 

[cbwjm]

I'm pretty sure they'll include the real world pantheon that they've already talked about at least, so I expect to see mentions of Celtic, Egyptian, Greek, and Norse pantheons, these are all mentioned in the PHB. Follow that up with all of the various DnD pantheon and they should have more than enough notes to add to the planes. I'm not expecting any great write-ups, but wouldn't be surprised to see an updated list of deities taking into account all the currently published domains.

 

[Parmandur]

I'm pretty sure they'll include the real world pantheon that they've already talked about at least, so I expect to see mentions of Celtic, Egyptian, Greek, and Norse pantheons, these are all mentioned in the PHB. Follow that up with all of the various DnD pantheon and they should have more than enough notes to add to the planes. I'm not expecting any great write-ups, but wouldn't be surprised to see an updated list of deities taking into account all the currently published domains.

They were mentioned in the 2014 PHB, but this product is being future proofed for compatibility with the Core as of 2024: I doubt the 2024 PHB will include that. The flavor text for the Cleric and Lofe Subclass already removed any specifics about deity.

 

[cbwjm]

They were mentioned in the 2014 PHB, but this product is being future proofed for compatibility with the Core as of 2024: I doubt the 2024 PHB will include that. The flavor text for the Cleric and Lofe Subclass already removed any specifics about deity.

That's just in the UA, they don't always include fluff in them so I wouldn't discount them being mentioned just yet.

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

They were mentioned in the 2014 PHB, but this product is being future proofed for compatibility with the Core as of 2024: I doubt the 2024 PHB will include that. The flavor text for the Cleric and Lofe Subclass already removed any specifics about deity.

I think you're reading too much into it - Cleric PCs draw their mechanics from the domain they choose, not the deity that grants them access to that domain.

For the purpose of the playtest, it doesn't matter whether you get access to the "Fire" domain because you worship Asmodeus, or Lathander, or Hestia, or Imix, or Surtr, or just the abstract concept of the sun - it matters whether the "Fire" domain is functioning properly as designed or needs some tweaks. It'd be a different matter if the Asmodeus "Fire" domain and the Lathander "Fire" domain were mechanically distinct and needed to be tested independently, but at that point each deity would effectively be its own subclass, or even multiple subclasses.

Talking about the deities that exist in the multiverse that the PCs can choose from has a purpose for developing the character's mindset, motivations, backstory, etc., but I wouldn't expect them to devote too much page space to them in the playtest, any more than I would expect the section on wizard school subclasses to deep dive on the Red Wizards of Thay.

That's a topic for the final book, not the playtest docs.

 

[Parmandur]

That's just in the UA, they don't always include fluff in them so I wouldn't discount them being mentioned just yet.

When they are hiding what the test is for, like with Ravnica or Strixhaven: I wouldn't bet on specific real world deities getting mentions in the final product.