Psion said:
I mean you as the DM probably drew the map, and put the nations there. That's still you controlling the directions they can go. And you are further limited by (usually) 2 dimension. A nearby huge influential empire limits what else you could put in that direction and it's enimies.
This is what a friend of mine would call, "Picking the fly[expletive] out of the pepper."
On one hand I have a portal - it goes to one place, regardless of where the players want to go. On the other hand I have a harbor full of ships - they go anywhere the players want to take them. Are you really suggesting that from the perspective of the players there is no difference? Are you really suggesting that?
Psion said:
While I would not deny the fact that portals gives you more control is a matter of great appeal to me, there is also a great deal of room to give the players more latitude. That said, as a practical matter, it seems to me that the GM realistically needs to restrain or cajole the players motion anyways.
There are many different way influence players choices that can be accomplished with a lighter hand - what you're describing does not appeal to me.
Psion said:
I'm just saying... portals can be either more or less flexible than a standard fantasy world on the issue. Which is the good thing. Flexibility
As I stated in an earlier post, there are as many creative ways to approach planar travel as there are GMs. That doesn't make them any more desireable to a GM, like myself, who doesn't view the planes as just another world for adventures.
Psion said:
And if that's your preference, there is really not that much I can say about it. If you don't like portals, you don't like portals.
Thank you for recognizing that my preferences are my preferences. However, you go on to oversimplify what I already said - I do use portals in a few places in my game-world, but it's somewhat irrelevant as the planes in my cosmology offer nothing resembling the 'standard' or Planescape cosmologies in terms of who lives there, what they are like, and what kinds of adventures are likely to occur.
Psion said:
However, I would hasten emphasize that it need not be that simple. Even in PS it wasn't -- you needed portal keys. Phil's planar gate PDFs also provide some great examples of intriguing gates with great flavor and story potential. Getting through a portal can be an excercise for the party to pursue their goals. (Not only can it, I would go so far as to say occasionally, it should be, to keep portals from becoming, well, pedestrian.)
Psion said:
If you don't want planar flavor specialists in your game, that's fine. But that doesn't make his point any less valid. Players need not be any more constrained by portal travel than you make them. If distaste for implementing the required professionals in your world, fine. It's an obstacle, but its one based on your personal preferences. It says nothing about how portal can or cannot de facto be used to facilitate PC travel.
I started playing D&D twenty-seven years ago - I've homebrewed three game-worlds from the ground up, including different cosmologies, and I've run adventures on other planes several times. I understand that there is more than one way to approach the planes and planar travel, and your pedantic insistence on 'correcting' everyone's approach to the multiverse is growing tiresome.
I'm done here before I say something I'll regret.
