Pathfinder 1E Paizo - Scourge of Old Worlds?

[dead]

How did my halfling's flabby gut turn into a trim waist?

How did his feet suddenly become hairless? (in a poof of smoke?)

How did his pipe o' tabacco go missing?

Why can't said halfling take a portal from Sigil to FR/Mystara/Dragonlance/Darksun/Spelljammer/Ravenloft/Birthright anymore?

Why can't I shake hands with a priest of Zeus on the Outlands, or sip tea with a priestess of Bast in the Lady's Ward?

Why haven't I seen any spelljamming ships come to dock in Waterdeep these days?

Why have all the bullywugs taken the last portal from Oerth and gone to the Realms?

Why don't Mordenkainen and Elminster keep in touch anymore?

 

[BrooklynKnight]

On the topic of Sean and The Realms (sorry to hijack, but, lets just consider this thread about campaign changes eh?), the original reason, from memory, was that in 2e, the realms was shoehorned into the great wheel.

I know Sean has a nice large rant about it somewhere. I remember reading it, and I remember Sean posting about it. He also mentioned it during the first chats i ran for him.

I'll be honest with you. I could go searching for the post on his boards...but, im far to tired/buzy/lazy to find the answer for you. I apologize, I know the burden is on me.

Sean posts at Enworld often enough. If ya poke your head on his boards, and ask him to explain it again, and/or ask him to come here. He prolly will.

---

Merric is right. With massive rules changes you cant really hold on to everything from the past. Some things need to be-reconstructed, OR reprinted in 3.x form. I do however belive, that changes should be made with reason, Not just to make changes so books sell. Those books will sell anyway.

*yawn*

 

[Alzrius]

Here's the thing: a significant number of people (of which I am one, despite having played D&D for 22+ years) have never played Planescape. It's utterly irrelevant to us.

And there's nothing wrong with that. However, when you begin to talk about the problems with the established cosmology, it doesn't help your case to have not read a significant amount of material about said cosmology. It's all well and good if you didn't ever read a Planescape product, but if you didn't, don't talk about where the planes need work, since you aren't fully up to date on the subject matter.

Furthermore, to keep things in line with "established continuity" with respect to the fans of the setting, one must be familiar with every aspect of a setting, including some of the most obscure pieces of lore.

Not necessarily true. Paizo said that they can't possibly update everything about a setting, so some stuff get's glossed over, and this is true - hence, complete familiarity, while good, isn't a necessity.

That said, if you're changing (or even covering) a specific aspect of a place in some level of detail, it's harder to justify not glancing over products that dealt with that specifically.

There is a certain amount of continuity that is desirable, but too much makes everything just rehashes of old material. Conversely, you don't want to change things just because you don't want to look it up.

I did say that there was a difference between in-character changes and altering the mechanics of something. It's one thing to say that, for example, Andropinis returned...it's another to say Athas has sorcerers and paladins.

Major changes - such as the reorganisation of the entire planar structure - are really problematic. OTOH, such a change was 2E -> 3E: the entire rule structure changed significantly. There are times when it must be done, because what has come before limits what you can do later.

But back to the original hand, the 2E-3E changeover gave us in-character reasons...namely Die Vecna Die! and The Apocalypse Stone. That said, those changes were also necessary, since the new edition was released...were the changes I outlined above equally as necessary?

 

[the Jester]

On the topic of Sean and The Realms... the original reason, from memory, was that in 2e, the realms was shoehorned into the great wheel... (snip)

Right, but that's not an in-game reason. It doesn't offer me a solution to the problems inherent in the revision of the cosmology.

Just as an example, if a city on Oerth was renamed after Elminster when he plane traveled to Greyhawk and saved it from a bad guy, how would you explain the city's name in 3e?

But back to the original hand, the 2E-3E changeover gave us in-character reasons...namely Die Vecna Die! and The Apocalypse Stone.

Now, to be honest, I've read neither Die Vecna Die! nor the Apocalypse Stone; so if those give an in-game, story-based out that doesn't break continuity, then my opinion might be swayed.

I think dead hit the nail on the head when he mentioned one of my biggest annoyances regarding continuity.

When the hell did bullywugs become a Forgotten Realms monster???

Nyargh!!!!

Didn't they first appear in a Greyhawk module?

 

[BrooklynKnight]

For the record, Oerth and Aber-Toril are still officially linked.

The Players Guide to Faerun clearly states that you can cross from one cosmology to another through the Deep Shadow (Shadow Plane), and that you can still make Portals that directly link the two worlds.

 

[Spiteful Dwarf]

Revisionism and all of its ugliness...

I think this is the most lucid, well-thought-out, and well-presented argument ever posted on ENWorld...

My 2 bits:

I completely understand the urge to stay relevant to newly minted supplements and settings... D&D in stagnation is just like those scary people who obsess over the minutiae of Napoleon's day-to-day life.

I also understand that fans will never, ever be able to uniformly agree as to what constitutes a "sacred cow" in terms of which features can be ditched or otherwise bulldozed over to make room for growth. People will always be ambivalent to nearly every facet of a setting.

But what I cannot abide is when people use revisionism... WOTC or Paizo doesn't want to support Planescape *(or any of the other TSR expired worlds) as they were previously written... Fine. But don't be wishy-washy. You can't get both the interest of die-hard fans as well as new players when you invalidate a goodly portion of previously published material. (and yes, I realize the difference between 2e and 3e.)

But if you believe that the reason Planescape became such a cult sensation had anything to do with mechanics, and not substance (i.e.: characters, background, intertextuality, and all that other stuff that makes a campaign more than a bunch of wonky PrCs, races, and templates), then you're missing the spirit of the setting.

Neither of the companies should try to profit from the concepts of Planescape, without at least trying to stick with the themes of the original. You never cared for Planescape? Fine. I see nothing wrong with starting a new page. Inventing new cosmologies is okay, as WOTC is basically saying that FR and other settings like the new Eberron campaign world, are wholly separate from the past mythos of TSR. This is their right, due to ownership, etc... But, for all that is mythic... Don't pee all over the place, trying to spread your own individualized scent so that it not only affects the present, but the past of D&D... It's (daresay I use a horribly misused internet excuse) very fascist. It's also very fascist to use the one news/cultural magazine to try and convince me, through good ol' doublespeak, that I ACTUALLY DON'T LIKE something that I used to like just fine.

Stick to the present and future of D&D, WOTC/Paizo... And quit screwing with the past. You want to release the Planar Handbook, and many, many fans are clamouring for it as well (myself included). Create a new mythos, one that will fit to the newness of 3e... Just don't go on telling me about how much better you're making things from the past. Only time will tell about that one.

Thanks for making me think, Alzrius.



P.S.: Planescape rules

P.P.S.: I've bought nearly every supplement that WOTC has produced, so I am not a naysayer whose only goal is to overthrow the shackles of tyranny in our hobby, etc... On the contrary... For the most part, I wholeheartedly love the shackles and the quality of product they USUALLY produce. But it just bugs me to all hell and back that in the process of selling the "coolness" of their newest book, they have to tarnish the old ways. Very depressing... Kinda like a corporation and a young punk rocker teaming up to tell us about how stupid and unrealistic people who listened to motown were "back-in-the-day", and oh, by the way, if you want to be with the "new hotness" you should $$$ more on this wee little product right here...

 

[RichCsigs]

I believe you need to take that post and send it off to WotC and Piazo. That was well put.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

On the topic of Sean and The Realms (sorry to hijack, but, lets just consider this thread about campaign changes eh?), the original reason, from memory, was that in 2e, the realms was shoehorned into the great wheel.

I don't see how anything was "shoe horned" into the Great Wheel. Each god has a domain and an alignment; their domain was found on the plane that most suited their alignment. I wouldn't say FR's cosmology was any more "shoe horned" in than that of Greek, Egyptian or Norse mythology (in other words, you don't need to "shoe horn" in anything that fits just fine into an infinite cosmology designed specifically to fit everything into).

Obviously, I'm going to have to file this next to his meaningless rant about Fantasy Terminology vs Game Terminology (i.e., under "S" for Statements Made by Someone Trying to Look Informed and Innovative).

 

[Zappo]

I am a huge fan of Planescape - heck, these days I hardly play anything else - and I absolutely agree with the process of giving each world its separate cosmology. While some degree of "contamination" might be a nice quirk in some settings (FR), for most of them the concept of having extraneous elements pop in from another plane is a mood-killer. For example, start bringing external elements into Dragonlance, and it stops being Dragonlance with a remarkable speed.

Or, for that matter, start using Planescape as a subway to get from a setting to another, and it's no longer Planescape. During the years, I've seen that most of the issues that people who dislike Planescape bring up can be reduced to this - throw out established Primes entirely, except maybe as something in the background, and the setting really shines.

For this reason, I love the idea that settings are now separate, because it means that Planescape is separate, too.

 

[Henry]

I do agree against making settings comform completely to 3E; If there are no Sorcerers in Athas, and if Giff are in Spelljammer, then by Jove they should stay that way!

However, I do see his point about shoehorning. I'll give you two VERY good examples of shoehorning: Planescape and Spelljammer in the Dragonlance setting. There was at inception no heavens, hells, Bytopias, Olympias, etc. - There was the World, the Abyss, Reorx's Forge, wherever the heck Paladine and the Gods of Good stayed, and THAT WAS IT. Linking the Great Wheel to Dragonlance did it a disservice. Same with Spelljammer - in order to explain why no ships visited Krynn, they had to make the "sphere" cold and inaccessible and dangerous!

Come to think of it, they had to CLOSE OFF Athas to Spelljammer - no one could make a dent in its crystal sphere, man or god, and that's how it had to be.

That's why you still have to have a dividing line, but the line shouldn't step over something as basic as Gods or Races or Classes.