Planescape, 4e, and the problem of worlds without history

[Taureth]

I've been a big Planescape fan since the materials were first released and I do understand your feelings.

That said, the best part of PS for me was always Sigil, less so the planes themselves. And I -like- the new structure of the planes, in a number of ways, which is quite an admission -- because I don't care for 4e and have no immediate plans to play it (Of course, it also took me years to finally warm up to 3e, so, we shall see...) or buy the books. Manual of the Planes may be an exception, though, because I am intrigued with what they've done.

Bottomline: So many gamers out there are familiar with the Great Wheel cosomology that it sure ain't gonna go away overnight. If you still have a hankering to go a roamin' the Ring, I'm certain you will be able to find companions for a long time to come. And don't rule out the younger generation of gamers, either. Some of those are taught older RPG systems by siblings and parents and end up preferring them, just as there are some teens today who would rather listen to Led Zepplin than the Kings of Leon.

 

[Toras]

As someone who has played in Shem's planescape games, there is a sense of wonder and history you really don't get from any of the current stuff. Frankly I've yet to see a 4e book that I would ever just read or get excited about. (There weren't alot of 3e books either, but as I said, wrong way shamus)

The world builders are gone and those who remain can only scavenge from their bones. Which now that I think about it is a bitching idea for a campaign setting, but I digress.

The Good planes were not boring, though I will admit that they never got the full fleshing out that Evil did. Of course, this assumes that this is a party of less than moral people have never tried to raid the heavens or those slightly more moral have never tried to steal from the Gods. I was working on some material for that, but College has a way of interfering.

Infinite planes meant there was no end to the exploration, and in truth that was what Planescape was, an exploration. You were as much an explorer and trailbraker as adventurer. While some of the older settings might come with a similar history but there was a sense of wonder and the unknown that you just can find at your local kobold den.

Planescape is like a high performance supercar with a manual transmission. Do it wrong, and you'll strip the thing down and leave yourself wishing for a more accessible and dependable honda. But get it right, and it will sing for you and be like nothing else on the road.

 

[TwinBahamut]

The elemental planes didn't deprive anyone of adventure just by existing. Crazy cool things analgous to your examples were always available elsewhere in the great wheel, or even the inner planes if you were an enterprising DM. It's important to remember that, in Planescape, the inner planes were the building blocks of the multiverse. Visiting the inner planes was like visiting the world's most dangerous tool shed. Their explicit purpose was something more than awesome PC adventures, and that, to my mind, is okay.

The inner planes may not have "deprived" anyone of adventure, but I don't really think they provided much adventure, which means they were something of wasted space in a book and were certainly a waste of a good concept. After all, the "building blocks of the cosmos" concept is indeed a solid one. It has been around in myth and literature forever. However, in the vast majority of myth and literature, such a realm of the building blocks of the universe more closely resembles the Elemental Chaos than the Inner Planes.

Just as the Inner Planes were the building blocks of the Planescape setting, the Elemental Chaos contains the stuff of creation that was used to form the worlds of the 4E cosmology. It has the same element that you praise about the Inner Planes, but it also is a somewhat more accessible adventuring site. What is more, it has several advantages on top of mere accessibility, such as its more dynamic nature and greater visibility within the cosmology.

My point about the fortress of minor inconvenience was not intended to describe how pleasant the elemental chaos is. I simply wanted to show that increasing accessibility can remove interesting challenges, such as those associated with the inner planes. Your argument that these challenges were not meaningful just doesn't ring true to me. They were meaningful in their connection to their in-game justification (see my above paragraph) and in their binary, unforgiving nature, an aspect that you don't enjoy. But that's how many serious dangers work--you can either swim in lava, or you can't.

I don't see the logical connection between increasing accessibility and removing interesting challenges. I will claim that the Elemental Chaos is both more accessible than the Inner Planes (using multiple definitions of the word), and at the same time contains every interesting challenge from the Inner Planes, plus several more interesting challenges that are not possible with the Inner Planes. If anything the unpredictability of the plane simply makes those kinds of challenges more pronounced and actually challenging. Finally, as I just wrote above, the Elemental Chaos has the same meaningful justification, except it has stronger mythological resonance backing that justification than the Inner Planes do.

 

[avin]

Again, it's "more acessible", it's a dungeon playground, all colorful.

Elemental Chaos should be the place where all elemental planes collide, in my opinion, not this big dungeon.

Come on, I have the books, I have the DDI subscription and it's just "dungeon everywhere" so far.

 

[kenmarable]

You "can't stomach" that they explicitly made changes so that more cool stuff could happen in actual games -- instead of in discussions on message boards -- and that DMs would be more, rather than less, likely to do all the cool stuff many felt intimidated by in previous versions?

No, I believe I said "I just can't stomach a lot of the attitude used to explain design decisions." There's a difference. Obviously the new cosmology works for people, and I'm fine with that.

I have tried very hard not to say the new cosmology sucks, or that the decision to change the cosmology is stupid, or that the Great Wheel is the One True Cosmology because I don't believe any of those.

Does the new cosmology work for me? No, not in my current campaign. I really like the Great Wheel.

Was I annoyed by the "everything before 4e sucked" undercurrent to a lot of the marketing? Heck yeah, and I'm glad they've backed off of that.

Am I sad that decades of great D&D lore and material are being left behind with 4e? Sure. That doesn't mean WotC is wrong or stupid for doing so. I was also sad there wasn't a 6th season of Babylon 5 (another decade old cult favorite that is teh awesome), but anyone familiar with the show would know that a 6th season just wouldn't have worked as well. Now, I may disagree with how necessary some of the changes are in 4e, but I can certain stomach them and/or ignore them easily in my campaigns.

My rant was just against the attitude defending the changes, not the changes themselves. The worst reaction I had to the changes themselves was scratching my head and letting out a "Bwuh???"

 

[underthumb]

The inner planes may not have "deprived" anyone of adventure, but I don't really think they provided much adventure, which means they were something of wasted space in a book and were certainly a waste of a good concept.

I suggest that this is the crux of the disagreement. The mental model being applied is one of implicit zero-sumness. You write that the inner planes took up space that could have been used by something else, something more fun to adventure in. But, as many have been quick to point out, the total amount of content devoted to the inner planes was much smaller than that devoted the outer planes. Further, as I stated, this didn't constitute a net loss in adventures, because the rest of the planes existed.

We didn't need to sweep away the inner planes, or turn up the volume on their coolness. Some things in the multiverse can just "be", like the Lady of Pain.

 

[hexgrid]

I think Ken's probably talking about a number of instances where some (not all) of WotC's 4e designers made some statements about the 1e/2e/3e planes that can only come across as either A) astoundingly arrogant and disrespectful to previous writers and previous editions, or B) equally astounding ignorance of non-obscure prior material, which is disturbing when you're paid professionally to write material for the game's next incarnation.

Or C) willfully misconstrued by internet diehards looking for something to be upset about.

As for #2, I can just see the 4e adventure anthology "Tale from the Limited Staircase".

Sorry, the Infinite Staircase has already been described in 4e as the Infinite Staircase

 

[hexgrid]

Planescape is like a high performance supercar with a manual transmission. Do it wrong, and you'll strip the thing down and leave yourself wishing for a more accessible and dependable honda. But get it right, and it will sing for you and be like nothing else on the road.

That sounds like a good argument against using Planescape as a core cosmology. Something more more accessible and dependable is exactly what the 4e designers decided to go with.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Again, it's "more acessible", it's a dungeon playground, all colorful.

Elemental Chaos should be the place where all elemental planes collide, in my opinion, not this big dungeon.

Come on, I have the books, I have the DDI subscription and it's just "dungeon everywhere" so far.

I have no idea what you're talking about, unless Sigil in 2e PS is a "dungeon" because you can go there. Just because you can go there doesn't make something a "dungeon." I have no clue how people can make this assertion with a straight face.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

My point about the fortress of minor inconvenience was not intended to describe how pleasant the elemental chaos is. I simply wanted to show that increasing accessibility can remove interesting challenges, such as those associated with the inner planes. Your argument that these challenges were not meaningful just doesn't ring true to me. They were meaningful in their connection to their in-game justification (see my above paragraph) and in their binary, unforgiving nature, an aspect that you don't enjoy. But that's how many serious dangers work--you can either swim in lava, or you can't.

Basically, spells like Resist Fire or the MotP Avoid Planar Effects spell take the meaningfulness out of a challenge. It's a binary thing, and the solution is not problem-solving but reading your spellbook. Maybe this is indeed a thing people just won't agree, but I think if the solution to a problem is "find the right spell", it is a very disappointing challenge to me. The solution needs to be more intricate. It's not just finding the right tool(s), but to use it effectively.
Take the "pool of lava" problem. You need to cross it. You don't have a fly spell or a Resist Fire spell. But the Barbarian owns a Ring of Fire Immunity (let's pretend it exists and isn't broken ). So the Barbarian could cover it, but he can't just slap his comrades on his back. So maybe you use a portable hole (3E style) to carry his allies with him. Or the Wizard uses Telekinesis or Mage Hand to move the gauntlets back from the Barbarian to the rest of the group.
If the Barbarian didn't have the gauntlets, maybe they would have needed to secure help, or find a different path to their goal.
The solution is not just as obvious "use the spell designed for my problem" but "combine tools to find a solution to my problems."