Planescape 3E by WotC

[dead]

Is a 3E Planescape produced by WotC at all feasible? It seems that with WotC's new take on cosmologies (ie. each Material Plane has its own cosmology), that Planescape could no longer have the same feel it used to have. Yes, yes, I know the Plane of Shadow connects alternate Material Planes, but this isn't just the same as ALL material planes sharing the Great Wheel with Sigil in the centre.

Also, the connectivity between Krynn, Toril, Oerth, etc. is unlikely to ever happen again even with the Plane of Shadow.

What do others think?

And if Planescape was handled by another publisher, what Material Planes would they include? They certainly would have trouble adding Oerth, Krynn, and Toril due to copyright issues. They'd only be able to get away with adding the Mythical-Earth-type gods and Material Planes (as featured in Legends & Lore and On Hallowed Ground).

 

[RenoOfTheTurks]

Aside from the problems of 3E's relativistic cosmologies, which can be explained away as primes all being berks, there is the money issue. If WotC doesn't think it will make major money off of a Planescape setting, they won't do it. And further, Planescape is apparently far too expensive for a third party to ever obtain the rights. I heard somewhere, I think from a PS3E.com blood, that Hasbro considers the Planescape name to be extremely valuable due to the success of the PS:Torment video game. The prices demanded by the suits to use the Planescape copyrights are incredible. That's the last I've heard about it, anyway.

You bring up another good point regarding third party publishers, in that they might not be able to make much use of material from other WotC settings. In the treatment of powers and their realms, this would be...suck.

 

[Staffan]

In the chat about the Planar Handbook a few weeks ago, Andy Collins mentioned that WOTC considers making new settings more profitable and less risky than trying to relaunch "failed" settings.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

And if Planescape was handled by another publisher, what Material Planes would they include? They certainly would have trouble adding Oerth, Krynn, and Toril due to copyright issues.

I don't see this as a significant element of Planescape, in the first place, so I'm not sure it would be a problem. Seriously - Krynn? For the gods' sake (heh), the two most important deities in the Dragonlance pantheon were relegated to "aspects" of Bahamut and Tiamat. The various Prime worlds were hardly Planescape's concern.

 

[Piratecat]

The interview I just did with the old Planescape design team may have some relevance here.

http://www.enworld.org/forums/article.php?a=91

Beyond Countless Doorways seems like it's as close to Planescape as we're likely to get.

 

[Desdichado]

I think there's several issues here:

Is a 3E Planescape produced by WotC at all feasible? It seems that with WotC's new take on cosmologies (ie. each Material Plane has its own cosmology), that Planescape could no longer have the same feel it used to have. Yes, yes, I know the Plane of Shadow connects alternate Material Planes, but this isn't just the same as ALL material planes sharing the Great Wheel with Sigil in the centre.

The feel of Planescape was all about playing in the various planes, not hopping from one campaign setting to another. I honestly believe that was tossed in as an afterthought to the setting at best, perhaps a method to "convert" any game at any time to a Planescape game if the DM wanted to. The Planescape setting itself, and all the published material for it (that I read, at least; I don't claim to be a Planescape guru like Shemeska) barely mentioned that aspect as a footnote, and the adventures for the game were all about tromping around Sigil, Nirvana, the Abyss, the Outlands, etc.

And if Planescape was handled by another publisher, what Material Planes would they include? They certainly would have trouble adding Oerth, Krynn, and Toril due to copyright issues. They'd only be able to get away with adding the Mythical-Earth-type gods and Material Planes (as featured in Legends & Lore and On Hallowed Ground).

Same as above. Except that I doubt any third party will ever get that license. Ryan Dancey's famous article on the demise of TSR and the buy-out by WotC specifically mentioned Planescape as a product that was too esoteric to please most fans and was therefore a drain on resources that should have been better spent on material that had a stronger customer base. However, the setting does have some legs, notably due to the Torment computer game. I've heard through the grapevine from companies that have wanted to pick it up that the licensing fee Wizards would charge for the setting is prohibitively expensive.

 

[Psion]

After seeing the Planar Handbook, I am convinced I would rather see WotC cover new ground instead of try to reinvent the wheel.

 

[Shemeska]

In the chat about the Planar Handbook a few weeks ago, Andy Collins mentioned that WOTC considers making new settings more profitable and less risky than trying to relaunch "failed" settings.

That wasn't all he said. *rolls eyes* Personally I left the chat feeling belittled and insulted.

Given the comments and the direction that 3e has gone in, I can't see WotC actually doing a 3e Planescape. A watered down generic version that lacks all of the flavor, atmosphere and depth of PS? I can see that, but that's what filled the back 32 pages of the PlHB more or less.

And while I don't know the actual price, I've heard from multiple sources that the cost for the PS license was "extraordinary". As well, it seems that WotC has moved away from the licensing of older properties, even the ones they don't plan to utilize.

That vitriol out of the way, I think the setting has legs and will continue on even in lieu of seeing print for an entire edition. Perhaps it'll return eventually, I can't say. In the meantime I'm still running a 3e Planescape game, indoctrinating new folks into the setting, sharing what I create, and being living proof that 3e noobs can discover an old setting and fall in love with it.

 

[Desdichado]

In the chat about the Planar Handbook a few weeks ago, Andy Collins mentioned that WOTC considers making new settings more profitable and less risky than trying to relaunch "failed" settings.

Is there a log of that chat? I'd like to read it...

 

[johnsemlak]

In the chat about the Planar Handbook a few weeks ago, Andy Collins mentioned that WOTC considers making new settings more profitable and less risky than trying to relaunch "failed" settings.

Is Planescape a 'failed' setting?