Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6137756" data-attributes="member: 42582">This is what I don't agree with. Planescape is not simply an "extension" of Gygax's planar appendix, anymore than the Greyhawk campaign setting is simply an "extension" of Gygax's PHB and DMG.I've shown by posts above (and/or in the other thread - they blur together in my mind), for instance, that the distinction between demons and daemons/yugoloths that is pretty central to Planescape is pretty peripheral in original AD&D.I don't really agree with this either, though I do think it's less contentious than the "Planescape as extension of Gygax" idea.My reason for disagreeing is this: in the same way that Planescape riffs on what came before, but injects a whole lot of new ideas, so 4e clearly riffs on what came before, but injects a whole lot of new ideas. The 4e gods are mostly not new, for instance - they're taken from a range of sources, from Roger Moore's old demihuman god articles (which for reasons I don't really understand have since become associated by many with FR) to Ed Greenwood's Bane to Gygax's Asmodeus and Lolth. The planes are a mix of old (Abyss, Seven Heavens/Mt Celestia) and new (Hestavar) and renamed (Chernogar as a somewhat repurposed Acheron).I don't think this is best described as cherry-picking - which implies a type of suspect opportunism. It's riffing and reconcepting and homage and reimagining.If D&Dnext is going to come with built in lore I would rather it do this sort of thing - try something that the designers think captures the best of what's come before while improving playability and appeal - than simply repackage the past.(And because this seems to have been misunderstood by mutiple posters - this is not an argument for replicating 4e's content. It's an argument for replicating 4e's method.)</blockquote>

Verification