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: 6381736" data-attributes="member: 2067">I would say the risk with this is that your early adventures don't capitalize on what the characters themselves believe in, and that the characters' beliefs don't become archetypal or central in your games, mechanically speaking, because other things matter to them more at first. Not saying that's good or bad, just A Thing That Might Happen. PS:T let factions emerge from the gameplay and as such, they weren't considered a formative aspect of The Nameless One's character (compare the player's identity in, I dunno, the the Sensates, to the identity of Fall-from-Grace as a Sensate to get a sense of the gulf that exists there). What TNO believes about the multiverse now is up for debate, not something that makes him who he is. The mechanics reflect this, as he can't join just any faction, he needs to prove his worthiness during play via quests, and the benefits are not usually particularly unique. Faction allegiances also don't play a major role in the central story. Big hurdles, low incentive. The game also doesn't care if you finish all the quests and get all the benefits and then just abandon ship for the next faction, emphasizing how little TNO's own philosophical organization isn't exactly important to the story of the game. Torment finds its philosophical roots in other places (like the concept of a character who cannot die). In an adventure path, while some curious PC's might join up with a faction introduced organically, those that don't will miss out on this element of gameplay, missing out on this unique element of PS. It's also possible that if the faction provides actual benefits (mechanically, or even in the story), that not joining it will be considered a sort of "punishment" unless you create some parallel structures. Which can be a HUGE headache. It's important to emphasize that this is only a risk. PS:T certainly didn't need faction allegiances to play up themes of philosophy and Big Questions, but it had dying immortals and chaste succubi and living beings who were always on fire, and it's hard for a "generic" adventure to presume that the characters going on it are equally as interesting and weird and provocative. It's certainly not impossible to bring these things to bear on starting characters without factions, but it'll demand some effort from you as a writer if you don't use the tools the setting provides you as a default if you still want to highlight this element. Your risk here is making the adventure path, or at least that part of it, another "Trek From Point A to Point B and See the Sights" kind of adventure. This might diminish the aspect of PS that pushes things to the extreme and keeps the stakes high, making the threat something distant and brooding rather than immediate and confrontational. Those paths serve like other PS locations in that the reason you are on them in "normal play" is because you want to be on them, not because you're forced to go through them while getting to other locations. I think more broadly, this decision might risk going "spellplague" on you. Which is to say that if you take something iconic and unique about a setting (like a benevolent goddess of magic that makes powerful magic possible) and try to make the setting interesting by wrecking that thing (like killing off that goddess and making powerful magic dangerous), it risks having a reaction where people go, "What's the point of going to this setting if I'm not going to get to do its iconic and unique thing?" So, "What's the point of going to Planescape if I'm not going to jump through portals to new planes all the time!" might be a concern. Again, only a risk. An adroit writer can totally still pull this off, and could easily keep the feel of immediacy and conflict central on some sailing over the Oceanus (for instance). But, again, it is something you'll need to bring to bear yourself rather than relying on the mechanics that the setting gives you if you're going to shut down portals. You'll need to actively bring it in. A lot of PS adventures were written in that 2e heyday of railroads-where-the-PCs-don't-matter, and they bear that mark strongly. I think recurring elements that change are a good way to telegraph this. Making the PC's more central in the planes is also a way to telegraph this -- they can't fight a god, but they can earn the loyalty of a god who then fights enemy gods for them. And I know I probably sound a little negative here, but I'm not trying to present a critique, just trying to give you a heads up about some of the consequences that might shake out if you make certain decisions. They might be acceptable consequences, unimportant consequences, consequences that might never materialize, or consequences that you totally have a handle on addressing. You're the writer, that's for you to figure out. I'm just the peanut gallery! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />It's also probably important to note that different DM's emphasize different elements of the planes. People have run journey-heavy stories about isolated parties who don't leave a mark in PS, I am sure. Probably even a few official adventures that run that way. While these adventures are possible, I don't think they highlight the unique feel of PS, the things that set it apart from other settings. If what you want is "iconically PS," that might not look like how some DMs (possibly including you!) have used the planes before. Again, stick that adventure between the PS design aesthetic and you probably have something that'll be called a good PS adventure despite, IMO, not really leveraging the setting at all.</blockquote>

Verification