D&D 5E Planescape shows up in the wild. Tease from Chris Perkins.

[Xamnam]

I'm allowed to prefer his previous work, thank you. I'm also allowed to speculate on WotC's motivations.

Absolutely. I just think the thing I bolded in your previous post, said that way, is why you're getting more push back than mere opinion typically warrants.

 

[Demetrios1453]

224 2E era pages. The new set is 288 5E pages. Importantly, their "gazetteers" are both 96 pages, but word count for the 2E era pages is definitely higher. Even so, I was under the impression that Planescape was 64 page books, so there is more room in there than I thought, and therefore it might not be as shallow as I assumed.

ETA: I was completely wrong about word count per page. Completely. Huh.

2e Planescape on the left, 5e Spelljammer on the right. I really don't know how this myth keeps getting perpetuated...

Edit. I see others have already stated this, but I'll leave it up as a visual reference just in case anyone else tries to make the claim.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I've been pretty unhappy with everything WotC has released since Tasha's, and their recent work on settings made by their predecessor are particularly egregious. I have no reason to believe their version of Planescape would be any better than their version of Spelljammer, or (ugh) Ravenloft.

You are probably right. They will have butchered planescape too. And this is proven by them using NEW art, and rubbing salt in the wound by having the old artist draw it for them.

 

[Reynard]

2e Planescape on the left, 5e Spelljammer on the right. I really don't know how this myth keeps getting perpetuated...View attachment 295065

Edit. I see others have already stated this, but I'll leave it up as a visual reference just in case anyone else tries to make the claim.

I posted a similar picture earlier a page or so back.

 

[Demetrios1453]

I was actually going to comment in my post at the very start of this thread that there would be those who would be making the exact complaints since expressed.

All we need in this set is a description of Sigil, a description of the Outlands, and information on the Factions. If it has that, it will be perfectly fine and be as complete and as playable as the original box set was. Beyond that, there is simply no way to distill a dozen or so 2e products into a single 5e product without it being both ridiculously large and prohibitively expensive.

 

[Scribe]

I was actually going to comment in my post at the very start of this thread that there would be those who would be making the exact complaints since expressed.

All we need in this set is a description of Sigil, a description of the Outlands, and information on the Factions. If it has that, it will be perfectly fine and be as complete and as playable as the original box set was. Beyond that, there is simply no way to distill a dozen or so 2e products into a single 5e product without it being both ridiculously large and prohibitively expensive.

I'd like a bit of Manual of the Planes, and Gods. If they can get that in as well, and there are no major flaws (like removing alignment or halfling strongmen) then I'm in.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You are probably right. They will have butchered planescape too. And this is proven by them using NEW art, and rubbing salt in the wound by having the old artist draw it for them.

The sarcasm is strong with this one. A powerful poster they will be...

 

[Dire Bare]

Controversial opinion: I don't see the point of getting Diterlizzi to do the Art. His stuff doesn't look like it did in the 90s anymore. All I can see is Nodwick now, especially that very cutesy Lady of Pain.

Nodwick is Aaron Williams, not Tony DiTerlizzi. Completely different art styles.

What's the point? Please. Like his work or not, DiTerlizzi's artwork is iconic to the original Planescape release. DiTerlizzi is to Planescape what Brom is to Dark Sun.

Has his style evolved since then? Yes, as it does for all working artists who don't stagnate. But it's not so far from his original Planescape pieces that you should be asking, "Who dat?"

It's okay if you don't care for the art we've seen so far, or DiTerlizzi's newer work, or all of his work . . . but your opinion isn't controversial so much as odd, at least how you state it.

 

[Dire Bare]

No one is saying the new stuff is bad, but it isn't the same as it was, and as using him in the new product was clearly because he was associated with the brand originally, his presence here now serves no purpose other than to entice fans of his older style to buy something they otherwise might not.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

WotC didn't have to ask DiTerlizzi back to do the new covers but . . . it makes perfect sense! If they ever release a Dark Sun book, I want them to at least consider bringing back Brom to do that cover.

DiTerlizzi was not, of course, the only artist to illustrate the Planescape line back in the day . . . but his art is iconic to the setting.

So . . . did they have him do the cover "for no other purpose" than to entice existing fans? Well, duh! I mean, other than DT is a fantastic artist. Why is that a bad thing?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The sarcasm is strong with this one. A powerful poster they will be...

My counter to pessimism.