POLL: What do you want to see in the Planar Handbook?

[Gez]

Here's an interesting bit of trivia about WotC: When they announce a book, it is a book that is already written.

The only thing it still needs is editing, and a bit of enthousiastic butchering in order to make it fit on its 160 or 224 pages.

So, while it's great to poll about "what you want to see in book X", it would be more acurate to ask "what do you hope to see in book X?" or "what do you expect to see in book X?" or "what do you hope to see in a hypothetical book with the same topic as book X?"

 

[WizarDru]

THIS WILL NOT BE THE PLANESCAPE CAMPAIGN SETTING

Not to doubt you, but is this based on some specific knowledge, or just your opinion?

 

[Pants]

I thought I already bought Manual of the Planes.

What makes you think this is the same as the MotP?

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I would like to see new feats and PrCs for planar characters, both faction/philosophy based and otherwise. I'd really like to see information on Sigil, and information to make it easier to run a 3.5e Planescape, even if the book itself will not be 3.5e Planescape.

I'd like to see the Modrons fully statted out, with the exception of Primus, who is, in my opinion, a deity-level being, as well as Half-Modron and Half-Slaad templates to balance the Law versus Chaos and Good versus Evil conflicts (and to make Zenthryi and Chaonds make more sense).

I'd like to see more PC-playable planar races, and more planetouched. I'd like to see Para- and Quasi- genasi. I'd like to see planetouched templates, so that not every planetouched has human blood. I'd like to see planetouched-specific templates that narrow down their Outsider ancestry, changing their abilities in small ways. I'd like to see planetouched feats that expand upon their abilities, making them more powerfully connected to their heritage.

 

[demiurge1138]

Hmm... well, in addition to 3.5 conversions of MoTP material...
Modrons. I love the little guys, and their abscence doesn't sit well with me.
Yugoloths that work. The MoTP and MM2 'loths were pathetic shells of their former glory.
More baatezu and tanar'ri. I like fiends. What can I say?
More/updated information on Planescape-style games, if not actual Planescape. Maybe it could be the setting-within-the-setting, like Rokugan in OA.
Planescape cant.
And, lastly and highly unlikely, DiTelrizzi.

Demiurge out.

 

[Gez]

Planescape cant (Sigil cant, actually) is one of the thing I'm pretty sure we won't see in any WotC product in the coming ten years. Except maybe a novel, but I don't remember they have a PS novel lines.

However, monster conversions, prestige classes, and all that, sure.

 

[WizarDru]

Planescape cant (Sigil cant, actually) is one of the thing I'm pretty sure we won't see in any WotC product in the coming ten years. Except maybe a novel, but I don't remember they have a PS novel lines.

However, monster conversions, prestige classes, and all that, sure.

To which I again ask for some qualification. Is this based on comments from Andy Collins, Bruce Cordell or some of the other designers, or just an opinion?

 

[Gez]

It's based on the trend one can see by looking at what WotC publishes. Do you remember Sean K. Reynold's "fluffy vs. crunchy" satire?

Or, to take another example, Oriental Adventures. It contained the rough bare bones of a setting, but was otherwise purely a toolbox, full of creatures, classes, spells, etc. There were lots of fans who wanted the return of Kara-Tur, but they were told: "If you're fan of Kara-Tur, you have the background material in your old box, and the updated rules in the OA 3e".

Planescape, I see it as the same. If you want to play Planescape, you have all the 2e background. What WotC will propose is updated rules that could be used for PS or other stuff. But not a reprint of controversial background info in a generic product.

It was already the reason the Modrons weren't in the MotP, but in its web enhancement. They knew that some people loved them, but that other hated them. So, no modrons in the MotP, but a little compromise.

The cant is another part of Planescape that is liked or hated.

Besides, a glossary would take place. Writing an entire book this way would antagonize people -- 3e books are made to be read by the players, not by the characters, if you see what I mean. PS was full of "in character" stuff. I havn't seen that in 3e books.

I don't remember having seen Realmslore in printed format, by the way. Stuff like "common sayings and words in Faerûn", in the FRCS? Nope.

 

[WizarDru]

Or, to take another example, Oriental Adventures. It contained the rough bare bones of a setting, but was otherwise purely a toolbox, full of creatures, classes, spells, etc. There were lots of fans who wanted the return of Kara-Tur, but they were told: "If you're fan of Kara-Tur, you have the background material in your old box, and the updated rules in the OA 3e".

Except that Kara-Tur never enjoyed as much widespread acceptance in sales or popularity as Planescape, so I don't think that it's an apples-to-apples comparison. Oriental Adventures spawned 8 releases from 1e to 2e (half of which could be considered FR), while Planescape was responsible for at least 11 releases. And 3E OA gave way to a Rokugan setting, which was also much more popular than Kara-Tur, and featured plenty of such material.

Planescape, I see it as the same. If you want to play Planescape, you have all the 2e background. What WotC will propose is updated rules that could be used for PS or other stuff. But not a reprint of controversial background info in a generic product.

Well, now you're limiting yourself to just the Planar Handbook, then I'd agree, it's not very likely. But 10 years is a very long time. Unless WotC decides to milk 3.5e very quickly, I would expect a single Sigil or Planescape hardback in the next two to three years. Not a full-on assualt of box-sets, but a single book, with a two page glossary of Cant.

I don't remember having seen Realmslore in printed format, by the way. Stuff like "common sayings and words in Faerûn", in the FRCS? Nope.

Are there such things? I honestly had no idea. I would suggest, thought, that the Cant of Planescape is a lot more integral or important to the setting than some typical utterances heard in Waterdeep. I would expect that most of the common realmsspeak would be just typical fantasy idioms "By Bane's Wroth is he angry!", as opposed to "That berk wouldn't stop rattling his bonebox so I had to put him in the dead-book." And I could see plenty of uses for the Cant outside of Planescape, if you drop all the factol references.
And when consider how much of the Planescape material has been adopted to 3E/3.5es official cosmology, it seems much more likely that well see a more detailed treatment of Sigil with the next ten years.

 

[Silveras]

Love/Hate

I love the idea of the planes, but I hate much of Planescape's implementation. I despise the cant, Tony DiTerlizzi's artistic style irritates me, and the factions were very hit-or-miss (useful or useless, with few in between) for me.

That being said, I would *love* to see Feats and PrCs that are able to draw on philosophies and beliefs for additional effects. Feats that work best on planes "aligned" with one philosophy, and are less effective on others; PrCs that can bring a touch of their beliefs into hostile territory and change the nature of the plane they visit in some way, over a limited area.

But, no cant, please. Sigil could be Ok, but no factions, please.

However, as has been mentioned, this book is already written and mostly edited. By the time it gets to being announced, it is already mostly done.