Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ripzerai" data-source="post: 3446046" data-attributes="member: 38324">No, I can't, but I can't point you to a description that says it can. I can point you to many descriptions that say the Spire is infinitely tall, and you're free to interpret that as you will.What is this "need?" I certainly don't feel the need to interpret Sigil that way, and I'm the one defending that interpretation. You need to interpret it the way you feel most comfortable interpreting it.My issue here is that people are assuming that Sigil's appearance is a given, when in fact it's as much a fan-created idea as anything official. I for one often accept fan-created ideas as more interesting and binding than official ones, anyway.Y'know, it'd be pretty easy to say it could be seen from the Outlands, too. That's a pretty vital thing to just leave unmentioned.This is just something I've noted, rereading Planescape books. I used to take for granted that Sigil was visible from the Outlands, but I noticed that it doesn't actually say that specifically. The closest it gets is in A Player's Primer to the Outlands, page 4, but even then it only says that Sigil is on top of the Spire, not that this is something PCs can see for themselves (although this is a finer point than I remembered it being, and I can see the standard view being a valid conclusion from the text there).This sort of "Where does it say you can/Where does it say you can't?" argument is ridiculously pointless and inconclusive, though. Neither question has priority over the other.So am I, actually. I spent seven years in art school, if we're throwing qualifications around, painting/drawing/printmaking/photography/digital. But this sort of playing with the conceptual frame is something that happens in a lot in Planescape - for example, we see the pages "torn aside" in places, with characters peaking in through previous pages.You're probably right that DiTerlizzi was mostly just trying to get Sigil to stand out against the background, but at the same time, due to this technique, it can't really be seen as a  photorealistic representation.Not in that way - I see the books as offering possibilities, not barking orders. It determines what plane you're on. If you've got a +1 sword forged in Tradegate, and it's still a +1 sword in Sigil, Sigil must be in the Outlands. It doesn't have to be over the Spire, but we've narrowed down its plane.Sigil is on a plane, is the point. At least, that's the assumption. The celestial etheroscope is mainly a tool for divination, predicting events on the various planes. It's my assumption that a device used to study the planes in such detail that it can predict the future would tell you what plane you were on. It might very well even tell you where."According to the etheroscope, the city seems to be built on top of the Spire itself, just above its field of anti-magic!"There are other tools, too - the Sextant of the Planes from the Planar Handbook, and the Dimensional Sextant from the Manual of the Planes, which would both be useful tools in determining local planar relationships. There's also the etheroscopic viewer from Beyond Countless Doorways, which Monte Cook has said was closer to his original idea for the etheroscope (which he didn't think quite worked with the Planescape cosmology, though I disagree).You could rule that the etheroscope and similar devices can't do that, or even that it just goes haywire if you try to use it that way in Sigil. If you're looking for a reason that planewalkers think Sigil's above the Spire, however, that's a very handy one.</blockquote>

Verification