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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 9167187" data-attributes="member: 2067">Absolutely. It'd also be pretty trivial to restore the Sign of One and the Believers of the Source and the Xaositects. There's not even significant mechanics attached to these things. It's basically down to "Literally Just Do It." I may even do that for my own inevitable PS campaign.I do wish I understood a bit more about the design logic, here. Maybe it was just down to the Mind's Eye being a very good faction for classic D&D adventurers and wanting to not use the term "Anarchist" and the Xaositects being kind of on the sillier/CN-as-an-excuse-to-be-LOLRANDOM side? Or pure pagecount considerations? I like knowing the meta-why so I can take that into account if I make changes, but I don't imagine we're likely to learn that at any point.I don't personally need an in-setting explanation for the changes. This is a new edition, a new game, a new vision. They kept it mostly intact, and where they broke with tradition, I don't have much of an objection, and it's easy to change if I want to. As the focus on the gate-towns here telegraphs, the planes are in a state of constant change. I also kind of wish they had ways for PC's to acquire some of the abilities of the faction NPC's (or similar ones). I want my "power of belief!" But, y'know, the specter of pagecount and it's probably not strictly necessary. If they do a Manual of the Planes or a Planewalker's Handbook or something, maybe then. I don't think the release is perfect (They do cool stuff with the Gate-Towns, but I think it's debatable if that was a good call for the page count, and I'm just not a fan of big adventures these days - gimmie the same pagecount filled with one-shots!), but it's quite good in this grognard OG setting super-fan's opinion.</blockquote>

Verification