• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Planescape Do You Care About Planescape Lore?

Do You Care about Planescape Lore?


The exceptions were fun though, and honestly for the latter one you called out, it's going to be rather hard for pretty much anyone to pry that artifact away from Dregoth to go planeshopping.
My own group destroyed the mirror, but it was a good excuse for one of my players to bring a gnome PC into the game, so...

Oh, and I'd forgotten about Kalidnay. So Ravenloft, too, at least in a later retcon.

Basically, Athas's isolation is grossly overstated.

-O
 

log in or register to remove this ad

This strikes me as more of an issue of convenience than anything else. If you've got planar creatures, they're probably going to interact. If they're heavily troped, like Angels vs. Demons, they'll interact all the more. If you've got planes of existence that are implied by core material but never fully fleshed out, there are going to be questions that remain. Treating every aspect of planar core material as existing in a vaccuum saves room in books, and is useful in that there's no pre-existing setting information that a homebrewing DM will have to strip out, but that'll leave a lot of work for the DM to do, and it always has; that's one of the reasons the campaign worlds exist in the first place. Unless you're willing to have the core books be perfectly modular, without context, then you'll need a default; some common ground in fluff and/or crunch. Considering how much work went into the Planescape setting, that might as well be it. It beats the crap out of having to make up the whole damn cosmos yourself, IMO. And it goes double if 5th is supposed to be backwards compatible; more available material makes for a richer setting, and keeping Planescape material as canon will reduce contradictions.
 

Funny thing is, I don't recall ever seeing anything about the Blood War until 2e. I don't recall ever seeing anything about Sigil until Planescape. I don't recall anything about Yuguloths being the source of all demons until Planescape.
The Blood War was introduced in the 2e monster binders, as part of the edition's demon/devil mommy-friendlying.

The differences between the 1e MotP and Planescape are pretty big, and for completely understandable reasons. The 1e MotP sets almost all of planes as incredibly hostile to non-immortal life, and specifically sets them up to screw over high-level adventurers. Planescape massively tones them down and makes them more "adventurable" even at lower levels. I love the mystique and flavor of the 1e MotP, but it was largely unusable for actual games.

As I understand it, this was part of the whole design philosophy of Planescape, so it's weird to see that major shift in focus and intent just glazed over. It's a weird argument, and one I honestly don't get.

(And as an aside, Planescape changed up the names of somewhere around half the Outer Planes, so there's that, too.)

-O
 

There's no getting around the fact that D&D has traditional lore and setting. And while I understand the desire of some for it to become a more generic fantasy toolbox, I don't think it's going to happen and I don't advocate for it.

Instead, I advocate that D&D should have a generic implied setting that is essentially The Forgotten Realms and Planescape, but without the names. Cleric Deities are a good example of the philosophy. They're generic in concept, but map one for one to Forgotten Realms gods. The same should be true for monster lore. Let monsters be tied to the great wheel. Just leave Sigil, the factions, and most of the specific details of the outer planes out. Instead of The Blood War, just mention an eternal conflict between Demons and Devils.

Yes, this is going to be more detail than some people want. But it's also going to be exactly the kind of detail that most new players need. It's just enough framework to build something around.
 

There's no getting around the fact that D&D has traditional lore and setting. And while I understand the desire of some for it to become a more generic fantasy toolbox, I don't think it's going to happen and I don't advocate for it.

Instead, I advocate that D&D should have a generic implied setting that is essentially The Forgotten Realms and Planescape, but without the names. Cleric Deities are a good example of the philosophy. They're generic in concept, but map one for one to Forgotten Realms gods. The same should be true for monster lore. Let monsters be tied to the great wheel. Just leave Sigil, the factions, and most of the specific details of the outer planes out. Instead of The Blood War, just mention an eternal conflict between Demons and Devils.

Yes, this is going to be more detail than some people want. But it's also going to be exactly the kind of detail that most new players need. It's just enough framework to build something around.

I'd argue that the information we receive in gaming materials is often the least useful information about the given element. When I open a monster entry I'm usually inundated with detailed histories, eating patterns, etc. I'm given the national geographic treatment, but given little insight into how the monster should be used at the gaming table.

What I Want
  • How to present the monster to players in a way that engages their senses.
  • A conceptual overview that highlights what is distinct about the monster.
  • Advice on how to use the creature to generate adventures that make use of the monster.
  • How to use the monster in encounters of all types.

Legend of the 5 Rings gets high marks for providing more meaningful detail that highlights how to use setting material in the game. 4e almost gets it right, but fails to provide meaty enough adventure hooks and advice on using monsters as allies and social encounters. New DMs need targeted information that is easily processed. There's no need to fumble around in the dark.
 


Concerning [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] concern about the Planescape police discarding a Wandering Monsters idea because it was not PS compatible : it happened in the "salads and morons" thread, and I expressed there my opinion on PS.
By its meta nature, PS is not fit to be core
Not because of the slang, the art, the names.
Because the idea of a Multiverse containing each and every setting is too big/weird/awesome/mind-blowing/whatever to be in the comfort zone of every player/DM, and gives a very specific tone which can be unsettling for some taste (as was expressed by many posters) and many stories (such a vast multiverse quickly cheapens any "big plot" happening in any particular setting, and PS cosmology is too specific to accomodate many classic tropes).
Because the context of intrigue and meta schemes is a push toward some DMing habits of storytelling I think the game should not promote (even if it may support them).

Contradiction mode on :
There is one overarching metaplot I would consider core :
Tharizdun
Contradiction mode off
 

My primary issue with Planescape, and I know this will not go over well here, is it advocated a view of the game in which setting material became important for its own sake rather than as a tool to create an interesting adventures. Particularly galling to me was the notion that it connected every setting, and that Sigil was the true center of the multiverse. Add in elements like the Lady of Pain, raising Demon Lords to the heights of deities, etc. All together it was as deprotagonizing as early Vampire.

I already talked about how PC was part of 2e's broader marketing strategy of "campaign settings for everything" which was bad for the company no matter how much good stuff it presented. Trying to connect every single setting was probably a mistake too; it didn't need connection to anything more than Greyhawk or FR, and only those because those settings both used the core AD&D cosmology, and because FR already had the assumption that it was connected to Greyhawk through the planes.

The Lady of Pain is there as a logical foundation for the setting: if Sigil has all these portals, then why isn't it controled by gods or fiends, or why isn't there a big cosmic war for control of the city? She really shouldn't be used by the DM at all, and players who are "let's kill the Lady and take over Sigil" are kind of missing the point.

And I'm pretty sure at least some elements of the settings (i.e., factions) were a reaction to Vampire too, though deprotagonizing was going on through a good chunk of 2e (*cough* Time of Troubles*)

My personal experience was that is was very playable, though. The whole setting was laced with adventure hooks, "planewalkers" were the equivalent of the "adventurer" sub-culture, there were low threat/high threat zones, and travel could be instantaneous (side quest to get portal key) or require the use of a planar pathway (side quest to traverse the River Styx, Yggdrasil, or Infinite Staircase).

I'd argue for its playability, but definitely not for it universality.

That's always been one of the things I though was good about the setting. The planes aren't just a bunch of high-level dungeons, it shows DMs how you can have lower-level characters interact with the planes. And there were adventure hooks all over the books here and there for the DMs to ignore or use as they saw fit.

Basically, Athas's isolation is grossly overstated.

I'd attribute that to 2e's rather conservative approach to PC power. The edition liked waving around the nerf stick a lot it seemed, and Dark Sun PCs started at level 3 and had an ability score range of 5-20 IIRC. The way 2e liked to approach things, that was overpowered munchkining to the max. So PS continued the whole bit about "Athas is damn hard to get to bit". In Spelljammer this might matter because an Athasian PC is probably stronger compared to someone from Oerth, Toril, or Krynn, but this shouldn't matter at all in PS where the game is supposed to be about more than just physical might. Though it went the other way too, I mean if you're in a Spelljammer or Planescape game, you don't necessarily want things like the PCs making themselves insanely rich by importing metals or water to Athas either.
 
Last edited:

Hiya.

My short 2¢ worth...

PS was/is interesting. The problem I have/had with it is it's blanket assumption that "Sigil is the Centre Of Everything" (more or less), as well as the entire concept of the "Blood War". Why did I find it a problem? Well, PS basically shoved everyone who had a long-standing campaign prior to it's release "on the outside, looking in" as far as the gaming community went. After PS came out, my conversations with other AD&D players and DMs changed from "Ohhh...neat!" to "Oh, uh, but [insert PS assertions] contradicts your game...ergo, your game is not as cool and you don't know what you're talking about".

That was my biggest beef. Second was the slang...I just couldn't get into it. *shrug* That said, I really enjoyed D. Trillizzi's (?) artistic take on things. Unique style at the time, with a nice 'feel' to it.

^_^

Paul L. Ming
 

a ton of what you refer to as being "PS compatible" or "PS specific material" did not originate from the Planescape setting. A ton of the cosmology and monster ecology existed before PS was even a setting. A lot of what you complain about seems to be more about, "Why is this core D&D fluff being pushed on me in my core D&D fluff?" You may as well replace the word "Planescape" with the words "AD&D Manual of the Planes" or "AD&D Monstrous Manual".
Planescape is quite different from Jeff Grubb's Manual of the Planes.

The AD&D 2nd ed Monstrous Manual I can't comment on.

the idea of a Multiverse containing each and every setting is too big/weird/awesome/mind-blowing/whatever to be in the comfort zone of every player/DM, and gives a very specific tone which can be unsettling for some taste (as was expressed by many posters) and many stories (such a vast multiverse quickly cheapens any "big plot" happening in any particular setting, and PS cosmology is too specific to accomodate many classic tropes).
Because the context of intrigue and meta schemes is a push toward some DMing habits of storytelling I think the game should not promote (even if it may support them).
This.

I'd argue that the information we receive in gaming materials is often the least useful information about the given element. When I open a monster entry I'm usually inundated with detailed histories, eating patterns, etc. I'm given the national geographic treatment, but given little insight into how the monster should be used at the gaming table.

<snip>

4e almost gets it right, but fails to provide meaty enough adventure hooks and advice on using monsters as allies and social encounters. New DMs need targeted information that is easily processed. There's no need to fumble around in the dark.
And this too.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top