Spelljammer D&D Direct Live Report: 9am PDT (5pm BST) SPELLJAMMER CONFIRMED! DRAGONLANCE!

Parmandur · Apr 26, 2022

overgeeked said:
Ah. So you’re objecting because you have a mistaken view of what Spelljammer fans called the use of Spelljammer ships in 4E. Planejammer is not a combination of the Planescape and Spelljammer settings into a single thing. It’s Spelljammer where the ships cross into other planes. That’s it. Spelljammer ships leaving the prime material plane. So, Spelljammer as mentioned in 4E, where the ships plane-hop…Planejammer. So, now in 5E, where the ships plane-hop…yep, still Planejammer. That’s literally all it means.

As I said, semantics. People here were arguing that Sigil and Planescape factions would be in the same place as Spelljamming, product wise. Doesn't seem to be the case, though obviously they were always going to share a cosmology.

overgeeked · Apr 26, 2022

Parmandur said:
As I said, semantics.

The meanings of words are important, so when you use a word wrong, it’s not “semantics” to call you out on that. Spelljammer fans use that word to mean a specific thing. You’re using it to mean something else, and therefore arguing with people you don’t need to…all because you insist on using the word wrong. But hey, you do you.

Parmandur said:
People here were arguing that Sigil and Planescape factions would be in the same place as Spelljamming, product wise.

If you mean in the Spelljammer books, not likely. They will barely have enough space to cover Spelljammer stuff.

Parmandur said:
Doesn't seem to be the case, though obviously they were always going to share a cosmology.

Sure. We can fly our Spelljammer ships from Wildspace into the Astral Plane and go find the other planes, maybe eventually even Sigil. That’ll be fun.

Parmandur · Apr 26, 2022

overgeeked said:
If you mean in the Spelljammer books, not likely. They will barely have enough space to cover Spelljammer stuff.

Well, there you go, exactly. I'm arguing against what people were arguing for on these boards, and have bow been pointing out to people that there is an equivocation in play...so we agree.

overgeeked · Apr 26, 2022

Parmandur said:
Well, there you go, exactly. I'm arguing against what people were arguing for on these boards, and have bow been pointing out to people that there is an equivocation in play...so we agree.

Not really, no. 5E Spelljammer is Planejammer, regardless of how much Planescape material is or is not published in the Spelljammer books, because, again, crossing the settings has literally zero to do with what people mean when they say Planejammer.

Veltharis ap Rylix · Apr 26, 2022

overgeeked said:
Ah. So you’re objecting because you have a mistaken view of what Spelljammer fans called the use of Spelljammer ships in 4E. Planejammer is not a combination of the Planescape and Spelljammer settings into a single thing. It’s Spelljammer where the ships cross into other planes. That’s it. Spelljammer ships leaving the prime material plane. So, Spelljammer as mentioned in 4E, where the ships plane-hop…Planejammer. So, now in 5E, where the ships plane-hop…yep, still Planejammer. That’s literally all it means.

If you'll forgive me jumping into the discussion, while I can't pretend to know what every Spelljammer fan meant when they advocated for "Planejammer" in 5e over the years, pretty much all of the people I've argued with on the subject were explicitly arguing for a unified Spelljammer/Planescape setting of one form or another, in a way that would completely negate any chances of getting a solo release of either after the fact (usually by dismantling the Great Wheel, dropping anything of value as "islands" in the Astral Sea a la 4e, and then throwing the rest in the garbage).

I have no problem with the Astral Sea/Plane being opened up to Spelljammers as seems to have been done, so if that's what you mean by "Planejammer", that's fine by me.

It's the angle that basically raids Planescape for scrap and leaves everything left over to rot that I take issue with, and with what we've seen thus far, this Spelljammer release doesn't seem to do that, so it is not "Planejammer" as I have understood it in the past.

Parmandur · Apr 26, 2022

overgeeked said:
Not really, no. 5E Spelljammer is Planejammer, regardless of how much Planescape material is or is not published in the Spelljammer books, because, again, crossing the settings has literally zero to do with what people mean when they say Planejammer.

No, my point is that we agree that there is an equivocation in play here. As @Veltharis ap Rylix says, I've only seen "Planejammer" to refer to the flattening and dismantling of both Spelljammer and Planescape, which is not happening, so by that meaning which many people on this very forum were arguing for a few weeks ago, this is not "Planejammer."

By the definition of "involves the Astral Plane in some way," sure. 0lanejammer by thst definition, but I didn't see that before this thread.

overgeeked · Apr 26, 2022

Veltharis ap Rylix said:
If you'll forgive me jumping into the discussion, while I can't pretend to know what every Spelljammer fan meant when they advocated for "Planejammer" in 5e over the years, but pretty much all of the people I've argued with on the subject were explicitly arguing for a unified Spelljammer/Planescape setting of one form or another, in a way that would completely negate any chances of getting a solo release of either after the fact (usually by dismantling the Great Wheel and dropping anything of value as "islands" in the Astral Sea, a la 4e, and throwing the rest in the garbage).

First time I saw that version was Thursday after the announcement. I’ve been a Spelljammer fan since it first came out and legit never heard that argument before. None of my social circles, none of the forums I visited, nowhere on social media. Nada.

Veltharis ap Rylix said:
I have no problem with the Astral Sea/Plane being opened up to Spelljammers as seems to have been done, so if that's what you mean by "Planejammer", that's fine by me.

It’s generally used as a negative because it strips out a lot of what was fun and unique about Spelljammer to begin with. But that hammerhead has sailed.

Veltharis ap Rylix said:
It's the angle that basically raids Planescape for scrap and leaves everything leftover to rot that I take issue with, and with what we've seen thus far, this Spelljammer release doesn't seem to do that, so it is not "Planejammer" as I have understood it in the past.

There’s enough cool stuff in both that they shouldn’t need to do that.

Parmandur · Apr 26, 2022

overgeeked said:
First time I saw that version was Thursday after the announcement. I’ve been a Spelljammer fan since it first came out and legit never heard that argument before. None of my social circles, none of the forums I visited, nowhere on social media. Nada.

It was very big in these parts this year, plenty of people explimaking the case that standalone Spelljammer and Planescape would be absurd.

overgeeked said:
There’s enough cool stuff in both that they shouldn’t need to do that.

Precisely.

overgeeked · Apr 26, 2022

Parmandur said:
equivocation

If you mean ambiguous, sure. If you mean a deliberate attempt to be elusive or evasive, no.

Parmandur said:
By the definition of "involves the Astral Plane in some way," sure. Planejammer by that definition, but I didn't see that before this thread.

Likewise, before Thursday, I’d never seen the “smash Planescape and Spelljammer together” version.

Veltharis ap Rylix · Apr 26, 2022

overgeeked said:
First time I saw that version was Thursday after the announcement. I’ve been a Spelljammer fan since it first came out and legit never heard that argument before. None of my social circles, none of the forums I visited, nowhere on social media. Nada.

My account here is pretty old (joined 2008), but I've only recently started doing more than lurking.

Certainly can't claim my experience is universal, but I have had a number of conversations to this effect on YouTube, Reddit, etc.