Planescape Planescape to languish in purgatory?

[Einlanzer0]

Are you sure? I mean, that's @Morrus you're talking to ...

Anyway, I think one factor with these "I wish WotC would republish old settings" arguments is a desire for affirmation. "It's my favourite setting, and I want others to agree that it's amazing."

Otherwise ... you have the lore, you know the rules - update the setting for yourself to suit your own wishes.

Maybe a little, but I mostly think it's just that people genuinely enjoy the settings and like seeing them get updated.

 

[teitan]

I personally think the three settings are Spelljammer, Dragonlance and Greyhawk. Dragonlance because we know new novels had been in the offing even if WOtC dropped the ball, Spelljammer because it hasn’t been revisited since 2e and is one of the few settings that hasn’t had any sort of revision ever. Not even a rebooted boxed set in 2e. Dragonlance is just too danged popular and Greyhawk is so core, so iconic and Saltmarsh has increased demand for more about the setting in 5e. I think we would only get Planescape in a Planar book which I think is coming sort of like Voldo or Mordenkainen. A bit on each plane, some on Sigil, some of the remaining factions and then A bevy of monsters. Sigil is the key to a Planescape setting or at least bridging to one.

Birthright? No. Mystara maybe at a much later date. Dark Sun for sure. I also think we will see a full Wildemount style or FRCS style FR book for an anniversary product.

 

[Zardnaar]

Dragonlance gonna be deader than a dodo. RIP.

Darksuns probably a shoe in.

Wouldn't be surprised Spelljammer gets kicked further up the reprint pole. There's nothing there that's really a problem in modern terms. No cultural appropriation, no potentially annoying belief systems or racial depictions.

 

[tetrasodium]

Dragonlance gonna be deader than a dodo. RIP.

Darjsubs probably a shoe in.

Wouldn't be surprised Spelljammer gets kicked further up the reprint pole. There's nothing there that's really a problem in modern terms. No cultural appropriation, no potentially annoying belief systems or racial depictions.

I agree with this logic. Spelljammer may have had some zany elements amid the darker ones at the time sure, but it didn't try to impose much of anything on the settings themselves & generally kept its lore outside the sphere's themselves with a much more "ok sure" type handling if a setting's handled something different than others inside its sphere

 

[Zardnaar]

I agree with this logic. Spelljammer may have had some zany elements amid the darker ones at the time sure, but it didn't try to impose much of anything on the settings themselves & generally kept its lore outside the sphere's themselves with a much more "ok sure" type handling if a setting's handled something different than others inside its sphere

Planescape theoretically is fine as well but someone will complain about heaven, hell or whatever.

Spelljamners guilty of being a bit silly but it knows it's silly.

 

[Coroc]

That's the thing, isn't it? The recent survey data indicated that 40% of D&D players are 25 and younger. They just don't have the nostalgia that older people do for old settings. Planescape was released in 1994, whereas Theros was 2013. A 25-year old wasn't even born then, but would've been a teenager when Theros came out - to them, that's their nostalgia.

I've talked to younger players and while some might be curious about older settings, they don't always have the same touchstones as older players do. In my one gaming group I talked about Expedition to the Barrier Peaks and absolutely no one knew anything about it.

Now, I think there's absolutely the case that there's room to bring these classic settings back to D&D, to make them relevant for new generations. I'd certainly love it, and love for the old settings and lore is threaded throughout 5e. But like you, said, there are easier wins and low-hanging fruit in newer settings.

current group is 40 i am 54 i dm gh. They heard the name and knew a tiny bit of it since it was 3e standard but that's about it and they did some 1e and 2e stuff as kids

 

[R_J_K75]

Certainly we can take the 2e lore and import it into the 5e ruleset, but wouldn't it be wonderful to have 5e material in these universes?

Absolutely, I'm way too lazy to do the conversions myself, but without those conversions the old settings lose what made them unique in some ways. I've long been somewhat frustrated with the types of products and the format (type and page count) that WotC is putting out and the rate at which they are doing so. I understand why they are doing so as its proved successful and they are targeting a younger demographic. Still that doesn't mean they cant deviate from this from time to time.

Seeing as most of the previous editions books are available on DMs Guild so for the sake of argument here's how I see they could update the old most popular settings with all crunch and no fluff. People who want the fluff can get it elsewhere. For each setting they'd mostly need to update the following:

• Races
• Classes
• Setting unique rules
• Magic/Psionics: Spells, Magical Items, etc
• Monsters

Here what I consider the more popular settings and some either dont need much updating or have already gotten updates.

• Eberron - Updated in RftLW
• Exandria - New setting book
• Forgotten Realms - Updated in SCAG & adventures
• Greyhawk - Besides monsters I dont think much crunch is required and updated in GoS
• Ravenloft - Besides monsters I dont think much crunch is required and updated in CoS

This leaves the settings that need updating that have very specific mechanics that need to be included

• Dark Sun
• Dragonlance
• Planescape
• Spelljammer

I'd prefer hardback or softcover but I'd also support them doing pdfs with POD; they can even offer digital. Whether they address one setting at a time or say a book of races, then monsters for the four settings I think they have more options to consider and still make money than just do a complete update in one hardback per year.

 

[Burnside]

Planescape theoretically is fine as well but someone will complain about heaven, hell or whatever.

I think the biggest issue with Planescape is that in 5E alignment is heavily downplayed (which I like) but in Planescape it's extremely important (which I like, but only for Planescape). Planescape is literally the only instance in D&D where I have found alignments "interesting" rather than annoying and silly.

5E's ethos allows for a fair degree of moral ambiguity and shades of gray, whereas Planescape, despite the fact that philosophical exploration is close to its heart, has the rigid, polar alignment system of earlier editions pretty much baked in.

5E's design and official adventures make the concept of alignment almost completely ignorable - which I strongly appreciate - but in Planescape you kind of need it. And Planescape doesn't just employ alignment "for a Planescape campaign"; it insists that alignments are governing factors across the entire multiverse.

 

[MarkB]

Anyway, I think one factor with these "I wish WotC would republish old settings" arguments is a desire for affirmation. "It's my favourite setting, and I want others to agree that it's amazing."

Otherwise ... you have the lore, you know the rules - update the setting for yourself to suit your own wishes.

That's a factor, but I think it's as much about wanting the setting to actually be on peoples' radar, so that they actually know about it to consider whether or not they might like it.

After all, you can update and adapt the setting for your own purposes as much as you like, but that doesn't get you a set of players who are interested in enjoying it along with you. Having an official setting book published helps with that a lot.

Also, it doesn't gain you the opportunity to join a game in that setting as a player. If you're updating the setting based upon the old products you own, you're pretty much condemned to having to be the DM for those games, unless you already know someone who's as passionate about it as you are.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Wouldn't be surprised Spelljammer gets kicked further up the reprint pole. There's nothing there that's really a problem in modern terms. No cultural appropriation, no potentially annoying belief systems or racial depictions.

The depiction of the Inhuman nations of Goblinoids and Orcs generally has them as just being evil, and that might not fit with some of the directions they're going. The depiction of Gnomes leans very much into Krynn's Gnomes with them being unreliable fools. Shou Lung as a space power had some problems, like one example of despite being Toril's China some of them were just too Japanese. I think there were "Space-Gypsies" down to all the bad stereotypes of the Roma, somewhere in the setting. And while they were depicted as villainous there were the Xenos a Neo-Nazi (or Human Supremacist) faction and the Chainmen slavers.