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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hardhead" data-source="post: 727009" data-attributes="member: 2844">Hardly!  I love 3e about a hojillion times more than 2e.  However, I also think that 3e should remain faithful to 2e (and 1e) in terms of flavor, just so long as the flavor of 2e isn't unbalancing when translated into 3e terms.  The Incantrix from FR is a prime example of bad 2e - 3e translation.However, I don't think a designer should change pre-existing flavor for no other reason than they want to.  Otherwise, we'll end up with comic-book style continuity, where Angel had organic wings, then a writer decided to give him metal wings and blue skin, then organic wings again, then loose the blue skin.  If each writer can rewrite flavor as much as he wants, then he will, and then another writer will come along and change it back, because he liked it that way better.  Or change it more.  All the while making previous continuity muddled.And if you do change the continuity from previous editons, you should have a reason!  Don't change it without explanation, please.Were they?  Crap!  I've just lost Planescape fanboy points.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Yes, that's true.  But they do that typically by impressing fellows in combat, stealing souls, or doing well in the Blood War.  Regular PCs can get XP from non-combat situations, but combat situations are still the norm.And either way, when you get that experiecne, no matter from what source, it increases your combat prowess in 3e.  I could see that, too.  Just not by backsliding all the way to ECL 1.They're true tanar'ri for a reason.  A lesser shouldn't be able to beat the crap out of them.No, not too hard at all.  Which is why it's kind of diappointing it wasn't done instead of what's in the book.Yup.Not really, actually.  I just like an explanation for the change and not "the old way was in 2e" used as some kind of blanket excuse for broad setting changes.  Think of it like the drow invasion in FR.  They didn't say the drow were attempting to take over the surface world, as if it'd always been that way.  They introduced it has a new occurance.  Similarly, if you're going to totally rewrite Outsider advancement, which has a huge effect on one of the D&D settings (even if it is no longer supported), I'd appreciate at least a short story/plot explanation as to why.I've heard bad things about Die, Vecna, Die, but never read it.  I understand it says that the Lady of Pain is a god, which was a theory I never liked, as it was so blah.  I always liked the idea that she was something else, probably less powerful than a god, in fact.  But that's just me.  As for Faction War, it was a nifty idea that was poorly implemented in several places.  Orri, who used to run Kytos's Hooks on Planewalker.com, posted a really good "remake" of it on the <a href="http://www.realmsofevil.net/cgi-bin/forums/YaBB.cgi?board=planescape" target="_blank">Realms Of Evil Planescape boards</a> that I plan to use eventually (I only lately actually got to start running PS again after a long hiatus).</blockquote>

Verification