D&D 5E Do you care about setting "canon"?

[Shasarak]

Dimension Door remains 4th level in 5e.

Misty Step is 30' (25' for 4e Eladrin) and requires LoS, vs Dimension Door's 500' to a place unseen (in AD&D, it is 30'/level, so starts at 210' and grows from there).

Misty Step in AD&D would be a 2nd level spell - Jump is 1st level and allows 30', and so the main advantage of Misty Step is that it allows passing through transparent barriers that don't otherwise block teleportation, such as windows and grilles. It's clearly weaker than Fly, which is 3rd level.

I think you would be lucky to convince your ADnD DM to let you have Misty Step as a 2nd level spell. I think that Misty Step is a lot more versatile then Jump.

 

[Hussar]

No, of course not. What is important has nothing to do with if you like it or not.

So, when is a change important?

 

[Hussar]

If I'm remembering correctly Planescape is silent on the matter... thus bringing us back to my point about changes vs. additions...

Sigh. Semantics and pedantry. It is impossible to add something without changing whatever it is that you added to. "Additive changes" is just sophistry trying to masquerade as something it's not. Adding "slave race" and "enslaves other races" CHANGES the races we're talking about. Salamanders used to have nobility too. That's gone. Why aren't you complaining about these changes. They've flat out CHANGED (and not even additive here, they've flat out removed something that's been part of that race since 1e) game lore. Why aren't you complaining? If canon was important, and subtractive changes are bad, why are you defending this?

Your one example above doesn't really support the case you are making here.

Am I making changes or additions? What changes? Is it changes or additions? How widespread are these so called changes? These are the relevant questions in my mind. DO I have to tweak one race that's easy enough... or do I have to change an entire cosmology, change numerous races, eliminate vast swathes and so on.

In all honesty Planescape is a peculiar case b ecause part of it's canon is that primes often get the details of the planes wrong... and since we know the default for 5e is FR... well they are primes.

Nice dodge

Yes as long as I pay premium prices for it (either through ebay or in getting it printed for use at the table) while also supplementing the new canon you want that I have no need for.

Umm, how is free a premium price? All that Planescape lore is on the net, somewhere or other. It's all there. What premium price are you paying? And, why is it bad that you have to pay for stuff that you don't want, but, you're perfectly fine with me paying for stuff I don't want?

 

[Hussar]

I think you would be lucky to convince your ADnD DM to let you have Misty Step as a 2nd level spell. I think that Misty Step is a lot more versatile then Jump.

How so? About the only time you can use Misty Step, that you can't use jump, is if you are in a cage. Note, Jump can be used without LOS, so, I can use Jump to clear a wall, but, I cannot use Misty Step.

And, I'm not really sure how 50 fire bolts balances with a single Misty Step. Or 50 Acid Splashes. How do you imprison someone that can melt through any door or bar in a few minutes? You can defeat Misty Step with a door. How do you defeat unlimited Acid Splash?

 

[Shasarak]

How so? About the only time you can use Misty Step, that you can't use jump, is if you are in a cage. Note, Jump can be used without LOS, so, I can use Jump to clear a wall, but, I cannot use Misty Step.

Just look through an Arrow slot and bam, straight through that wall.

And, I'm not really sure how 50 fire bolts balances with a single Misty Step. Or 50 Acid Splashes. How do you imprison someone that can melt through any door or bar in a few minutes? You can defeat Misty Step with a door. How do you defeat unlimited Acid Splash?

Just dump them into a pit. Maybe they can Acid Splash their way to China but good luck to that.

 

[pemerton]

There is a small step in between knowing Tieflings have different traits and implementing the change.

Sometimes it's hard to tell if your posts are serious or just joking.

On this issue: if I know that PS tieflings had varying appearances, and didn't all look like 4e PHB ones, I can easily Google up some images (https://www.google.com.au/search?q=...X&ved=0ahUKEwj23c7xstLQAhUJwrwKHbK-AM8QsAQIGQ). Or make my tiefling look like Nightcrawler. Or use the random tables in Appendix D of my original DMG. Or anything else.

If I literally have no ideas (tails, horns, vestigial wings, hooves, brimstone smell, etc) about what a child of the lower planes might look like, then why would I even be interested in the fact that PS was different from 4e?

 

[pemerton]

I think you would be lucky to convince your ADnD DM to let you have Misty Step as a 2nd level spell. I think that Misty Step is a lot more versatile then Jump.

How so? About the only time you can use Misty Step, that you can't use jump, is if you are in a cage. Note, Jump can be used without LOS, so, I can use Jump to clear a wall, but, I cannot use Misty Step.

Just look through an Arrow slot and bam, straight through that wall.

I'm with Hussar on this one.

Misty Step is clearly higher level than Jump. So at least 2nd. It's clearly lower level than Dimension Door. So no more than 3rd.

The question becomes, therefore, is it 2nd or 3rd level. The obvious 3rd level spell to compare it too is Fly. It's clearly weaker than Fly - which allows avoiding any number of obstacles for an hour minimum, and has a range beyond Self. Hence 2nd level.

(The ability to go through arrow slits - but self only - makes it comparable to Knock. Which is also 2nd level.)

 

[Hussar]

Just look through an Arrow slot and bam, straight through that wall.



Just dump them into a pit. Maybe they can Acid Splash their way to China but good luck to that.

Lol. You realize that this also defeats misty step right?

And why in heck do you have ground level arrow slits?

 

[Sadras]

It might be useful, to those of us who appreciate the various changes/additions throughout the editions, to compile a tome which lists the lore changes in the editions, especially the monster lore. I imagine this would be quite an exercise given the numerous core books, magazines, supplements and modules that exist.

When I ran a mini-campaign in the Nine Hells, I found I did a lot of research on the Nine Hells and how it had changed through the editions - trying to weave all the lore together to make it work.

Maybe its just me and my madness

When it comes to mechanics it is even more involved
I cant imagine I'm the only one who looks through various monster manuals, not just the current one, when planning to use a new/iconic monster in the adventure.
I read the 2e Monstrous Manual for the lore, 3.5 MM for the stats and numerous abilities, 4e for any stylistic combat attacks and 5e for the current iteration which has decent lore and the current editions mechanics since we play 5e. I then weigh 5e's mechanics with how I envision the monster to be - amending where I feel they have made the monster weaker or negated a resistance or immunity or even a spell-like ability, based on previous canon.

 

[Imaro]

Sigh. Semantics and pedantry. It is impossible to add something without changing whatever it is that you added to. "Additive changes" is just sophistry trying to masquerade as something it's not. Adding "slave race" and "enslaves other races" CHANGES the races we're talking about. Salamanders used to have nobility too. That's gone. Why aren't you complaining about these changes. They've flat out CHANGED (and not even additive here, they've flat out removed something that's been part of that race since 1e) game lore. Why aren't you complaining? If canon was important, and subtractive changes are bad, why are you defending this?

Sigh... if it was just semantics and pedantry the words wouldn't have two different definitions in the dictionary. Here let me make it simple for you...

If something hasn't been touched on or defined in a setting and you do so... it's adding lore and inevitably happens as more and more source books are released.

If something has already been touched on, defined or established and you make it something different... that's changing it.

Has the relationship between Salamanders and Efreet ever been detailed before? If so where and what was it? If not then they are adding lore but haven't actually changed anything. I say this because it's clear all salamanders aren't slaves to the Efreet since they slay those who serve other masters. So what they've done is flesh out the relationship between Salamanders and Efreet while still leaving the earlier canon intact by making a note that there are Salamanders who are not enslaved.

Also... Salamanders still have nobility... read the Domineering Nobles section of their lore in 5e...

Nice dodge

Not a dodge... canon.

Umm, how is free a premium price? All that Planescape lore is on the net, somewhere or other. It's all there. What premium price are you paying? And, why is it bad that you have to pay for stuff that you don't want, but, you're perfectly fine with me paying for stuff I don't want?

First I'm not going to torrent the books, too much respect for authors and their work to do that... so please tell me where can I get the official lore (not someone's interpretation of it) for free on the internet. I'm honestly hoping you can since I would love to replace my Planescape stuff legally and for free...