|
One of the subjects I've always avoided as GM was traveling amongst the planes. Not that I didn't like it or want it, just when I started playing it wasn't a topic and I seem to remember people talking badly about the planes changing with later editions. The few times the planes have mattered, I just went along with things, my own ignorance being that of the character as well.
That said, I'm thinking about bringing my campaign into the planes. Soooo, rules aside, the planes of D&D 1-4 and Pathfinder, I'd like to know which versions of the planes do people think is best to model to use? Am I correct in thinking that 3rd Edition broke the planes of past? Basically I'd like a very thorough breakdown on the different editions and what a majority views as best.
Which books from which edition to look at would be most helpful.
Posting this on multiple forums for multiple opinions, feel free to contribute to any.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer Eberron 3e myself, with the orbiting planes.
http://eberron.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Planes_of_Eberron
I'm beginning to suspect Zhayne is actually Keith Baker, in disguise.
|
|
Excluding Eberron, the planes are not significantly different from edition to edition of D&D - at least before 4th edition.
Excluding eberron? I thought 3e Forgotten Realms used it's own model of the planes as well? I was under the impression that instead of having a unified Planes, 3e let the campaign settings have their own versions of the Planes.
My favorite planar structure is the one that has been most persistent, and is even the one used in Pathfinder - that of the "great wheel" with the inner and outer planes.
And what D&D editions used this?
I'm beginning to suspect Zhayne is actually Keith Baker, in disguise.
No, just a very large fan of his signature work, which I consider the greatest campaign setting of all time.
I'm beginning to suspect Zhayne is actually Keith Baker, in disguise.No, just a very large fan of his signature work, which I consider the greatest campaign setting of all time.
Clearly, by how often you cite it on the boards. Thus, my joke.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A clueless, eh? You've come to the right place, berk- err, basher! I have many maps and artifacts on the Great Road! No cross-trades, only authentic- Not a customer, I see... Beh, no matter. This group of barmy sages might better help you explore the wheel.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That said, I'm thinking about bringing my campaign into the planes. Soooo, rules aside, the planes of D&D 1-4 and Pathfinder, I'd like to know which versions of the planes do people think is best to model to use? Am I correct in thinking that 3rd Edition broke the planes of past? Basically I'd like a very thorough breakdown on the different editions and what a majority views as best.
1e/2e/3.x all used the Great Wheel as the assumed default. There were some relatively minor changes from 1e to 2e and from 2e to 3e, but they were pretty trifling. 1e's planes were not hugely detailed, but they set the general framework for 2e and 3e to use. 2e massively expanded on that and added tons of details, more outsider races, history in-setting, etc with the Planescape campaign setting (or rather meta-setting). 3e presented a somewhat more simplified version of the 2e Great Wheel. 4e is an entirely different beast altogether that reuses some names, sometimes for radically different things, and assumes no continuity with the 1e/2e/3e cosmology.
Now 3e did overtly state that campaign settings could have their own unique cosmologies, and Eberron was designed from the start to have a unique cosmological framework. 3e FR also had its own set of planes (after using the Great Wheel for 1e and 2e) which caused some continuity problems in-setting, but the changes looked bigger than they actually were. Largely it was just the divine domains of the FR gods being treated as full planes and arranged a little differently, but they were never fully expanded upon in a book covering that sorta-cosmology. You could pretty much run them as a unique cosmology or retain the Great Wheel without any problem.
4e shattered that all with not only a completely different default cosmology (the World Axis) but it randomly dropped several alignments such as CG and LE no longer existing, entire races of outsiders went away (guardinals vanished, archons went from being LG celestials to being evil elementals, yugoloths became demons, and the CE posterchild succubi became devils, etc). That cosmological default and the changes in outsiders it introduced were pushed into campaign settings with their own continuity and pre-existing history based on the Great Wheel like FR (which had yet another cosmology change as a result). It was awkward, and I'll leave it at that.
Pathfinder couldn't use the Great Wheel because of IP considerations, but the cosmology of the Great Beyond in PF was designed with the specific intent to allow for the same types of planar games to be played as in the Great Wheel in 1e, 2e Planescape, etc. And unlike the Great Wheel it started with a defined idea in place for most of its elements rather than evolving through dozens of hands over three decades of time. You could probably easily drop concepts from the Great Wheel into Pathfinder's Great Beyond with little problem.
I'm a gigantic 2e Planescape fanboy, but if push came to shove, I'd probably pick running a planescapey type campaign on the planes using Pathfinder's Great Beyond cosmology.
I'd like to know which versions of the planes do people think is best to model to use?
Planescape and the Great Wheel cosmology - absolutely no question whatsoever.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder, Eberron and Realms built what I'd call a more internally consistant cosmology.
The planescape / Great Wheel cosmology (which I use myself) is also a multiversal cosmology, and resutls ultimately in encountering various 'strange gods' and odd concepts.
Sort of like the old 2e Spelljammer.
Outer planes tend to be more survivable then inner, but thats not saying much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks Todd, that's exactly the kind of info I was looking for.
If I were to start with the 1e Manual of the Planes, do you think I could use the Planescape boxset and The Great Beyond to fill in the details and gaming mechanics?
Well for starters, what rule set are you going to use? Each potential source is going to be of more or lesser value depending on if you need them more for flavor and inspiration versus rules content and in how they overlap each others' content or not.
Personally I find that the 3e MotP largely covers the same ground as the 1e MotP, but it does so in more detail. When I ran my last two 3e Planescape campaigns I typically kept the 3e MotP at the table for quick reference and some of the tables and charts that it had. It's a nice balance of flavor and rules content.
(Right now I'm running a planar Pathfinder game, strictly using the Great Beyond, so only using the PF sources at the table - but what works for me isn't necessarily what will work for everyone, so judge as you will. Plus I've got most of the content memorized)
Obviously I'm biased as far as including The Great Beyond since I wrote it. It's almost entirely flavor and as a result you can drop its content into other cosmologies with relative ease. Really only the monsters in the back which are in 3.5 stats are the rules content (they're all reprinted in Pathfinder stats in Bestiary 2).
The Planescape box set is awesome, but the utility might be much higher depending on if you're planning on using Sigil itself. If you are, it's super awesome (supplemented by Faces of Sigil, In the Cage, and Factols Manifesto). Its advice on running planar campaigns and using the planes are beautiful regardless of edition and regardless of cosmology.
Sir Urza, it's a matter of taste. I like the Outer Planes of the Great Wheel cosmology, but prefer the Elemental Chaos of 4e to the distinct Inner Planes. If you can get the Planescape books, in physical or digital form, it's well worth the effort -- the artwork and the prose both blow all other contenders out of the water.
And I do suggest taking a look at Sigil, which is what makes Planescape the best D&D setting EVAR! Sorry, Zhayne, but Morgrave's got nothing on the Great Bazaar. ;)
And unlike the Great Wheel it started with a defined idea in place for most of its elements rather than evolving through dozens of hands over three decades of time...
...Obviously I'm biased as far as including The Great Beyond since I wrote it.
Whoa, I had no idea that PF had its own cosmology, or that you wrote it! I'll have to read up, as I'd prefer a more thought-out version of the Great Wheel, despite being a PS fanboy too. :)
Care to point me toward some of those defined ideas...?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whoa, I had no idea that PF had its own cosmology, or that you wrote it! I'll have to read up, as I'd prefer a more thought-out version of the Great Wheel, despite being a PS fanboy too. :)Care to point me toward some of those defined ideas...?
I wrote the cosmology section of the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting (3.5 version) and the Inner Sea World Guide (PF version), all of the cosmology splat book 'The Great Beyond: A Guide to the Multiverse' (nominally 3.5 but largely devoid of rules), and a bunch of other planar stuff like Book of the Damned 3 (but not just planar stuff).
That being said, while I wrote those books or portions thereof, a lot of other folks like Jacobs, Mona, etc were involved in the basic framework before I was assigned anything (Jacobs designed the onion/layered nature of the Inner Sphere planes, and there was a lot of back and forth in brainstorming the nature of certain planes, names of outsiders, etc). Collaborative creation is the name of this industry, and I feel blessed to have been along for the ride and able to contribute and collaborate with a ton of amazingly talented folks. :)
As far as defined ideas: things like the denizens of the planes being largely set down at the start rather than emerging over two decades of random creation (like how slaadi were the iconic CN outsider in the Great Wheel not because Limbo was designed with them from the start but because they happened to mostly be the first CN outsider created), a defined place for the NE fiends so they wouldn't seem like a third wheel compared to demons or devils (they represent Death, specifically oblivion of the mortal soul), the nature of gods versus planar lords like archdevils etc, the nature of undeath and how to reconcile that with the non-evil nature of negative energy, etc.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Forgotten Realms had abandoned the Great Wheel by the time it went to 3.0
Just a nitpick…
But, the Forgotten Realms abandoned the Great Wheel AT THE TIME it went to 3.0. Right up to the very last FR product released for 2nd edition, the Great Wheel was the assumed cosmology of the planes...
In fact, it was assumed that the first two FR adventure modules released for 3.0 ("Pool of Radiance: Attack on Myth Drannor", and "Into the Dragon's Lair") still used the Great Wheel planar cosmology, as these two adventures, while released as 3.0 products, were written (and released) prior to the "official launch" of the 3rd edition version of the Forgotten Realms with the (3.0) "Campaign Setting" book (these first two adventures even retained the look and feel of 2nd edition products).
Generally, the specifics are... sort of useless, once you start talking about a cosmology. It's almost by definition such a big place that you can piddle along in a tiny corner for a very long time and never need more. The Planescape Great Wheel certainly is an example of this.
It's more relevant to talk about the general strokes, the big picture. Put this in the sense of what you want to do with it. So, what do you want the campaign to deal with? What will the main antagonists and obstacles be? How will people travel, and how much of that will there be? What in this campaign will be different from a standard campaign setting because it's a planar one? How will low-level PCs survive the hazards of planar traveling? What abilities can people use due to being where they are? How much do they know from the start/can they find out through research? Add to this all the normal questions you struggle with when mapping out a campaign.
The classic Great Wheel name aims specifically at the Outer Planes, the afterlives, where the gods live, alignment based planes. These are connected to the Prime Material plane (normal campaign world) by the Astral plane. There is also the "sphere" of the Inner Planes, made up by the elemental planes and the two energy planes, and all these are connected to the Prime Material by the Ethereal plane. The Ethereal plane is partly overlaid over the Prime, thereby making etherealness possible and so on. Finally, you can also travel (from 3.0 MotP) from one Prime Material plane and cosmology to another PMP and attached cosmology through the Plane of Shadow, which could only be used for rapid travel in-world before that point. The Astral and Ethereal planes are interesting but pretty odd places. The Inner planes are generally so hostile to life that you need lots of magic to survive, with the prime exception being the Plane of Air. The Outer Planes, however, are generally not immediately dangerous as is, though the evil planes are populated by very dangerous things. Planescape added the city of Sigil to the mix, which had doors/portals going off everywhere the GM wanted the campaign to go, and the famous Philosophers with Clubs of the Factions.
I also prefer Planescape and the Great Wheel. A good resource is
If you click on "Campaign Setting" you'll find the 3.x writeup of the setting which is a good place to start.
Note that if you want simpler resources and in particular for Pathfinder, there's a nice overview of the Planes in The Game Mastery Guide, and I think the campaign setting has a book dedicated to Golarion's cosmology called something like "The Great Beyond."
As far as defined ideas: things like the denizens of the planes being largely set down at the start rather than emerging over two decades of random creation (like how slaadi were the iconic CN outsider in the Great Wheel not because Limbo was designed with them from the start but because they happened to mostly be the first CN outsider created), a defined place for the NE fiends so they wouldn't seem like a third wheel compared to demons or devils (they represent Death, specifically oblivion of the mortal soul)...
Yeah, the Great Wheel's alignment exemplars really highlight its faux-symmetry and the haphazard way that the cosmology sprang from the hands of dozens of authors.
I get the impression that the eladrin were thrown into PS near publication deadline, after everyone had become creatively exhausted.
Zeb: "So guys, we've got to come up with a race of CG dudes for Arborea...any ideas?"
*crickets*
Only guy not snoring into his tie: "Well, elves are CG, so, er, how about a race of extra-special-snowflake elves?"
Zeb: *sigh* "Yeah, okay, write it up so we can put this thing to bed."
The slaadi don't make much sense either. Like the eladrin, they're much more homogenous than a race of chaotic exemplars should be, and much more evil than a race of neutral exemplars should be. A clueless party encountering slaadi is likely to quite reasonably mistake them for demons, barring the knowledge checks and detect evil spells that might identify them as nominally CN.
"Whoa, these things just want to eat our faces! Clearly they escaped the Abyss, so let's send these demons back!" In fact I suspect that slaadi were originally created as one of those old school gotcha-monsters, to trick paladins into wasting their smitage.
Big Planescape fan here but have to say I like some of the concepts of the 4E cosmology. For one, I like the names of the Shadowfell (over Plane of Shadow) and Feywild (over Plane of Faerie, or whatever it was before). Those kind of incorporate the negative and positive energy plane concepts. As I recall 4E ditched the Ethereal Plane altogether but I would keep it myself. I do like the name and imagery of the Astral Sea over Astral Plane - kind of neat thinking of Githyanki sailors navigating amongst the outer planes. In 4E I would move the Abyss from the Elemental Chaos to instead be an outer plane in the Astral Sea. I would keep the Elemental Chaos as sort of a middle ground at the center of the elemental planes at the core of which is the Prime Material. As you head away depending on directing you find yourself heading towards one element in particular. Anyway, that's the concept that works for me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
NOTE: Huge post from hours ago, eaten by the "down temporarily" message, but retrieved by hitting the "back" button now, so if it seems out of place... it is. Last one I saw was DQ's post with a link.
EDIT 3: not too many posts, so, cool.
Huge post is huge, so spoilers for easier reading.
Most people said most things I would think to, but I'll echo what's been said here: the planes (from my experience) mostly worked the same from 2nd to 3rd, and, while FR did have it's own "unique" planar structure, it wasn't so far off the Great Wheel that (even after reading the Campaign Setting Book) I actually realized it wasn't the Great Wheel with a different description: yeah, even when they explained it in the FRCS, I didn't get at first that the two were different. Later, once Faiths and Pantheons came out (and I acquired it), it became more clear (to me) that they were different, and not simply alternate coats of paint.
The 3.X FR cosmology was evoked as a a massive tree separating the "celestial" realms from the "fiendish" realms (more or less) with the (more or less) "neutral" realms in the middle. Still kind of arrayed in a circle, though. There were eight "fiendish" planes, nine "celestial" planes, and four "neutral" planes. It also added two other planes, Cynosure (the place of divine meetings) and Fugue (the place dead souls go to be judged). It was implied (though never expanded upon) that there were different astral planes or different astral-like planes that touched in different places of Faerun (so, for example, the spirit-worship of Rashemen had the "spirit plane" that the spirits came from, the Mazticans had their own thing, and the Kara-Tur gods their own place), but this was a "weak" implication, if I recall, instead of a strong rule. None of this necessarily "negated" (or "retconned") previous canon, though it certainly seemed to at the time, because the changes were small enough, and the planes big enough, that it could reasonably (at least in most cases, if you felt like taking it this way) be taken as extrapolations and variations of previous writings rather than actual full-on retroactive-continuity-alteration. (Although ret-conning works very well with my theories on the nature of FR divinity.)
In both of the above cases, there were six "inner" planes (air, earth, fire, water, negative, positive), two "transitive" planes (ethereal, shadow), and, of course, the material, in addition to these.
4E attempted to hammer all the setting's worlds into the same model: natural world in the middle, astral sea "above" (with floating "islands" that are gods' realms in it), elemental chaos (all the planes) "below" (with the Abyss at the bottom), feywild to the "right" (being "bright material") and shadowfell to the "left" (being "dark material"). This made things really, really weird with established settings. Todd elaborated better than I would, so I'll drop it.
Speaking of Todd...
The difference here is that the Maelstrom could be seen as an ocean. Islands rise up from that ocean - the outer planes. The sky above the ocean is the Astral.
()
The outer planes are not "arranged" in any sort of "logical" fashion as a result. They are also finite.
Additionally, the "inner planes" are an onion layer set-up... sort of.
"Inside" and "underneath" the material is the positive energy plane.
"Outside" the material are the four elemental planes (in order from closest to the material to farthest from the material: air, water, earth, fire) that acts as the "sun" to the multiverse. The negative energy plane is "inside" and "underneath" the shadow plane.
All that said, there are elements I prefer of the different cosmologies instead.
In general, despite the inferior nature of some of their individual descriptive books, I like ideas of the 4E Astral Sea structure and Divine Realms - their nature, how they function, and that sort of stuff. It's really interesting, and creates interesting dynamics. I'm not sold on all the 4E cosmology stuff, even still, but the basics are nifty. I like the "above/below/right-bright/left-dark" model, with the material world literally the composition of all of these things. I do miss my ethereal, spirit, dream, and far realms, though (though the dream is implied, and the far realm "exists"... sort of..., just... oddly.)
4E kind of did their thing, in that Syberis became the astral sea, Khyber became the elemental chaos (with the abyss at the bottom), and the realms were kind of sort of separated and blended with other things. The Shadowfell and the Feywild became some of the orbiting planes, so I'm really not seeing their reasoning for enforcing the "above/middle/below" three-fold division they had across the rest of the product (instead of saying, "they're all 'tiers' of the material plane") , but I obviously wasn't in charge of that. :)
Similarly, I didn't get into published campaign settings before 3rd, so I couldn't say about Darksun (I'm unsure if there was a Darksun supplement for 3rd, either). That said, I do like what Darksun did with the 4E set up. It's pretty interesting (and far more flavorful than the basic 4E set up).
Um, Ravenloft was always its own kind of "side plane" that both connected with - and didn't connect with - everything else.
Oh! I almost forgot! Ghostwalk had it's own interesting thing going on where ghosts were allowed to come back in one particular city. That was kind of interesting. I don't recall what the deal with that was.
Most of this is from memory, which may be a little bit spotty, but I hope my ramblings helped!
EDIT: tags, my bane
EDIT 2: the Great Wheel cosmology on google
EDIT 3: Wikipedia's take on it.
Big Planescape fan here but have to say I like some of the concepts of the 4E cosmology. For one, I like the names of the Shadowfell (over Plane of Shadow) and Feywild (over Plane of Faerie, or whatever it was before).
I'm not in love with the names, but conceptually I love these two planes too! The Feywild is perfect for the high elves (aka 'eladrin' in 4e), and the Shadowfell is perfect for the drow. That's my own take the drow, because I'm a fan of racial-planar symmetry.
The coolest part of the 4th edition cosmology is that you have the World, with its underground, the Underdark. As a parallel to the World, you have the Feywild... and naturally, you also have a dark mirror to that, the Feydark, the underground of the ancient fairy tales, with great cities held in thrall to wicked fomorian giants. That was brilliant. I think they also had a similar setup for the Shadowfell and the Shadowdark.
Now, the common thread through all this is that the exact nitty-gritty details of a cosmology don't matter. The plane of Good and Rest will be the same no matter where in the cosmological tapestry it sits. And to be honest... the Great Wheel is a pretty ancient construct by now. As an example, both the Ethereal plane and the chaos plane of Limbo fill the same niche of a pseudoreal soup that can be shaped by those who know how. The 4e restructuring had its points.
Planescape is by far my favourite version of the cosmology.
The reasons that make me enjoy it so much are as follows:
-Overarching Theme: A big focus of Planescape is the concept of belief, and how it can literally change the world. This makes ideals a continous source of conflict that goes far beyond the traditional good vs evil. You have many conflicting worldviews in Planescape, ranging from oblivious solipsists who believe everything is inside their head to ruthless social darwinist that see power, personal drive, and capacity as the only ways to measure one's worth.
-Planar Personality: Even though the planes borrow a lot from real-world sources (as Planescape is built on the cosmology originally developed by Gary Gygax), there is a lot of care put into making each plane have its own character. Since these are infinite worlds that would be essentially impossible to fully describe, the books instead worry about making sure you understand what each plane is about, giving out a handful of locations as examples and then delving into what it feels, smells, and means to be in, say, Limbo.
-Weirdness and Mystery: Planescape is not a setting you can go out and expect to fully explore or understand; it is meant to be complicated and filled with perils so far beyond your reach that there is no chance you'll ever topple them. The gods are specifically said to be unkillable, for instance. While there is still a huge, huge number of adventures to be had, the setting wants you to know there is a bigger world than you and that no matter how powerful you get, there are things you are simply not meant to see. It gives a sense of wonder and immensity that I really enjoy.
-Consistent: Despite all its oddities, Planescape presents a very consistent cosmology. Although it can be a bit strange at first, things do click when you understand that, for example, the Outer Planes cannot be properly described in physical terms, because they are not exactly physical in nature, or how the Astral plane really is infinitesimal rather than infinite. Why do creatures fight over land and resources in an endless plane? Because it's not the land or resources that really matter, but what they mean.
Planescape is a divisive setting, and several of the things I mention are precisely the reasons why other people dislike it. To some, it feels like there are too many plot devises that you are not meant to mess with (like the Lady of Pain), or too many dangerous places that are too difficult to weave into an adventure. To others, the big focus on philosophy and belief feels too distant to the more heroic nature of D&D, or too dense to be something you'd like to put into a gaming session. These are all valid and quite understandable complaints. However, one thing that cannot be said about Planescape is that it doesn't put attention to what makes it unique, and if you like those sorts of things, you are in for a treat.
The coolest part of the 4th edition cosmology is that you have the World, with its underground, the Underdark. As a parallel to the World, you have the Feywild... and naturally, you also have a dark mirror to that, the Feydark, the underground of the ancient fairy tales, with great cities held in thrall to wicked fomorian giants. That was brilliant. I think they also had a similar setup for the Shadowfell and the Shadowdark.
Now, the common thread through all this is that the exact nitty-gritty details of a cosmology don't matter. The plane of Good and Rest will be the same no matter where in the cosmological tapestry it sits. And to be honest... the Great Wheel is a pretty ancient construct by now. As an example, both the Ethereal plane and the chaos plane of Limbo fill the same niche of a pseudoreal soup that can be shaped by those who know how. The 4e restructuring had its points.
The 4E Underdark book is one of my favorites. I like the Fey and Shadow mirrors of the natural world's Underdark.
|
|
Ravenloft was defined as being a demiplane in the ethereal. Ravenloft ironically, seems to be a contention point as I look back wit hgame and cynical adult eyes on my teenaged past time.
Ravenloft keeps getting bunked back and forth between something enormous, or that podunk craphole we don't talk about. Krynn and the Lord Soth thing in particular. whoo boy.
The issue with the ring when it came to given campaign settings was that the planes were too numerous and a lot of the dark planes sort of well...blended.
Gehenna, The Grey Waste, Carceri and Acheron are damn interesting places, but they lack the easy to explain nature of the nine hells or the abyss.
Similarly, the upper planes were a collection of stuff that was well..hard to show real deviance. Like say what makes Bytopia really different from Arcadia and so on.
And I remember irritating some DMs by asking why it was so bad if I just spent the rest of my life on Elysium. ("You won't adventure anymore, and you'll be stuck there." "I'll be stuck in what's essentialyl heaven and won't get 500gp from some fugly dude in Sigil? Oh no!")
Some guys who were thematic for planes (the orc and goblin deities in Acheron for example) didn't mesh with the alignment requirements (CE Orc Pantheon in LNE "just following orders" Plane).
Still, I found the overall set up made a little more sense then 3e's system.
The idea of astral links to outer and represents ideas and ethereal links to inner and is linked to physical matter meshed better. Ghosts on the the ethereal just seems..weird since even in 3e its not the pathway to the outer planes, so why would spirits get hung up there?
2e in general though could do what I'd call a more 'philosophical' approach because it didn't care about rendering your character totally useless, or bolloxing your spells, or just having weird 'rules' on the planes like Acheron's headcount limit (the population of Acheron was static, if someone new comes in, someone else has to 'go out.') Basically, crazy 2e shennigans.
3e and Pathfinder prefer the planar system to be more fun, and not inflict stuff like 'well you're in hell, and far away from your deity so you cast as a first level character' on clerics. Nor stuff like 'all your spells operate differently' on the spellcasters. WoTC did this through the planar trait system that Pathfinder seems to have inherited, the problem is the planes resultingly don't feel as different.
I can cast an enervation spell on the positive material plane. I can heal on the negative. Neither should really work, but it feels more balanced, and less like I'm living at the DM's whim.
I'm babbling though.
The idea
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I explained my players the planes in the following manner:
-Celestia: Obsessed about virtue
-Arcadia: Obsessed about the common good
-Mechanus: Obsessed about rules
-Acheron: Obsessed about comformity
-Baator: Obsessed about cruelty
-Gehenna: Obsessed about evil
-Hades: Obsessed about not caring
-Carceri: Obsessed about hatred
-The Abyss: Obsessed about destruction
-Pandemonium: Obsessed about madness
-Limbo: Obsessed about change
-Ysgard: Obsessed about glory
-Arborea: Obsessed about passion
-Beastlands: Obsessed about nature
-Elysium: Obsessed about goodness
-Bytopia: Obsessed about achievement
While somewhat simplistic (ie, Baator is as much about cruelty as it is about corruption and competition, but also about structure and personal gain), it helped them when it came to telling one plane from the other, as well as emphatizing on the point that, be them good or be them bad, everyone can go a bit too far on their thing when it comes to the Outer Planes. On a quick look several planes might seem hard to differentiate, but in truth they all have very distinct character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just still stoked that Todd Stewart favorited my post.
Heh. I love the idea of "obsessed about not caring." Accurate, though it may be, the oxymoron is hilarious.
I love the breakdown of the planes, though. Well thought-out and well-explained. I am kind of surprised that Gehenna got the "obsessed with evil" moreso than other planes, though. I'd have put Carceri more, "obsessed with imprisonment", and Gehenna "obsessed with harshness".
... if I'd have thought to put it in those terms, which I didn't.
Well done, sir. Well done.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just still stoked that Todd Stewart favorited my post.
Not that impressive when you got in there "Todd does some absolutely amazing work. I'm always impressed when I read his stuff."
/joking :D
I had a copy of 3E's "Manual of the Planes" years ago that I enjoyed reading. Might help you.
I'm just still stoked that Todd Stewart favorited my post.Not that impressive when you got in there "Todd does some absolutely amazing work. I'm always impressed when I read his stuff."
/joking :D
... I know! And it's TODD STEWART! :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Boss boss! The Planes the Planes!"
|
|
Gehenna, because nothing says 'obsession with evil' like giant floating volcanoes.
...I was trying to be mildly sarcastic, but that does kind of work. O_O
You forgot one though. Concordant Opposition. Obsession about Balance! Realm of the unstoppable Neutrals.
I admit that I'm always torn over whether I like the Aeons or Rilmani more.
The aeons have a good concept, interesting mechanics and are a suitably alien outsider species.
The Rilmani are like the planar version of the UN. Neutral, but constantly interfering, causing problems and generally getting in the way.
I wish Modrons were OGL as well. Axiomites just don't have the same...feel they did.
Gehenna, because nothing says 'obsession with evil' like giant floating volcanoes.
...I was trying to be mildly sarcastic, but that does kind of work. O_O
Yeah, the volcanoes are kind of hard to connect to the central concept. My personal interpretation is that the progressively more hostile volcanoes (which are also suggested as having their own purposeful intent) represent the "being evil for evil's sake", becoming more and more punishing in an effort to get just a bit further into being a bastard on everyone around.
But I agree that it is a much tougher sell than, say, the concept of cruelty and evil organization suggested by Baator's structured and "neatly organized" planar layers.
You forgot one though. Concordant Opposition. Obsession about Balance! Realm of the unstoppable Neutrals.
Oh, you are right!
I admit that I'm always torn over whether I like the Aeons or Rilmani more.
The aeons have a good concept, interesting mechanics and are a suitably alien outsider species.
The Rilmani are like the planar version of the UN. Neutral, but constantly interfering, causing problems and generally getting in the way.
Haha, that's a great way of putting it.
I wish Modrons were OGL as well. Axiomites just don't have the same...feel they did.
Aye, I agree.
I wrote the cosmology section of the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting (3.5 version) and the Inner Sea World Guide (PF version), all of the cosmology splat book 'The Great Beyond: A Guide to the Multiverse' (nominally 3.5 but largely devoid of rules), and a bunch of other planar stuff like Book of the Damned 3 (but not just planar stuff).
Wow, you do some great work. I really liked what you did with those books.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree. I had a lot of fun reading The Great Beyond (and, well, the Shemeska story hours, now that you mention it).
I'm just still stoked that Todd Stewart favorited my post.
And I find it totally bizarre that anyone makes a big deal over me or my work for any reasons whatsoever. I'm flattered, very much so, and somewhat bewildered! :D
But thank you, I really appreciate the compliments before. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree. I had a lot of fun reading The Great Beyond (and, well, the Shemeska story hours, now that you mention it).
I just updated the latter a week ago. Should be another update the week after Thanksgiving.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish Modrons were OGL as well. Axiomites just don't have the same...feel they did.
We need Tony DiTerlizzi to illustrate an arbiter inevitable being repaired by an axiomite. :D
Modrons are indeed awesome, and it's a shame that they aren't OGL. Some of the planar stuff being OGL versus other bits not was a bit of a double edged sword. Yes you were able to use lots of classic outsiders, but if Pathfinder had been able to use slaadi for instance, we wouldn't have gotten proteans. Benefits and drawbacks in both OGL versus non-OGL availability of some classic elements, but I'm rather happy with how it turned out.
I do however think that the more that the axiomites (and Axis as a whole) is expanded upon in the years to come, that they'll grow on folks. I'd love to take a shot at it, but if I don't have the opportunity, there are quite a lot of super creative folks that would do a spectacular job as well. :)
|
|
I wish Modrons were OGL as well. Axiomites just don't have the same...feel they did.We need Tony DiTerlizzi to illustrate an arbiter inevitable being repaired by an axiomite. :D
Modrons are indeed awesome, and it's a shame that they aren't OGL. Some of the planar stuff being OGL versus other bits not was a bit of a double edged sword. Yes you were able to use lots of classic outsiders, but if Pathfinder had been able to use slaadi for instance, we wouldn't have gotten proteans. Benefits and drawbacks in both OGL versus non-OGL availability of some classic elements, but I'm rather happy with how it turned out.
I do however think that the more that the axiomites (and Axis as a whole) is expanded upon in the years to come, that they'll grow on folks. I'd love to take a shot at it, but if I don't have the opportunity, there are quite a lot of super creative folks that would do a spectacular job as well. :)
I do think a reason people like Planescape is the work of Mr. DiTerlizzi really helped to define the setting.
Axiomites could be interesting, the problem is they come across more as space vulcans then as some ineffable entity of law. Their inevitables actually sort of come across better.
Makes me wonder if the moingos are OGL. I'd love to see Axiomites utilizing horriific math powers to oppose the randomness of the proteans. Literally defining laws of reality and then striking down their chaotic foes with forged hard objective constraining concepts.
"The ineffable laws of reality reach but one inescapable conclusion! The necessity of your annihilation!"
But yeah, I prefer proteans. They're so much better at portraying chaos than technicolor infectious space frogs out of nowhere.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Makes me wonder if the moingos are OGL. I'd love to see Axiomites utilizing horriific math powers to oppose the randomness of the proteans. Literally defining laws of reality and then striking down their chaotic foes with forged hard objective constraining concepts."The ineffable laws of reality reach but one inescapable conclusion! The necessity of your annihilation!"
But yeah, I prefer proteans. They're so much better at portraying chaos than technicolor infectious space frogs out of nowhere.
The moignos (and Tony D's illustration of them) were one of the primary influences behind the axiomites actually. :)
And axiomites utilizing horrific math powers isn't that far off from my own thoughts (see the writeup of 'The Ghost of Departed Quantities'/'The Eye of the Godmind' in Classic Treasures Revisited, an axiomite created artificial sphere of annihilation intended for use against the proteans and protean lords).
I revisit the idea a bit (and the protean's opposite side of that) in a non-canon story of mine that will show up in a fan project by Robert Brooks (in layout now).
|
|
Makes me wonder if the moingos are OGL. I'd love to see Axiomites utilizing horriific math powers to oppose the randomness of the proteans. Literally defining laws of reality and then striking down their chaotic foes with forged hard objective constraining concepts."The ineffable laws of reality reach but one inescapable conclusion! The necessity of your annihilation!"
But yeah, I prefer proteans. They're so much better at portraying chaos than technicolor infectious space frogs out of nowhere.
The moignos (and Tony D's illustration of them) were one of the primary influences behind the axiomites actually. :)
And axiomites utilizing horrific math powers isn't that far off from my own thoughts (see the writeup of 'The Ghost of Departed Quantities'/'The Eye of the Godmind' in Classic Treasures Revisited, an axiomite created artificial sphere of annihilation intended for use against the proteans and protean lords).
I revisit the idea a bit (and the protean's opposite side of that) in a non-canon story of mine that will show up in a fan project by Robert Brooks (in layout now).
Oh neat! I should've caught it with the 'sandy mist of equations' thing.
I haven't gotten in touch with Classic Treasures unfortunately.
I do have to say, I appreciate that you put some teeth in the Chaos vs Law axis the same way we used to have it in the Good vs Evil, and the Lawful Evil vs Chaotic Evil ones.
The axiomites making plans, items, setting things into motion, creating an entire race to bedevil their opponents (and everyone else), and so on. While the Protean's response is basically chaotic, disorganized, but surprisingly effective at opposing their opposite numbers on the lawful side.
I always envision the axiomites having a plan set into motion like three hundred years in planning, set in stone down to the last iota, and then the protean its meant to capture comes along, and say turns left instead of right, or decides that day he wants to dress in floral print underwear or surround himself with a marching band of dyspeptic old men, and the plan falls apart. The axiomite raves, and the protean ambulates away with a coy smile.
With similar things happening when the proteans try to assassinate the axiomites and having their plans destroyed by the axiomites routine, structure and planning or just be ineffective based on the interchangibility of the axiomites.
I do admit I'd love to see more varieties of axiomites. I'd love to see more on their gestalt over-mind.
The old 1e illustrations of Primus always cemented the badass nature of the modrons despite their goofy appearances. With the guy standing, arms out stretched between the positive and negative energy planes.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sir Urza, it's a matter of taste.
While it's technically true that the ALL CONSUMING GREATNESS that is the development of The Great Wheel is a matter of taste, it's the only taste that counts. It's the only taste that's really good. All other flavors for cosmology suck in comparison.
Use the planescape to get started.
We need Tony DiTerlizzi to illustrate....Corrected:
"We need Tony DiTerlizzi to illustrate "
We've had enough string-bean bodied & armed creatures.
You have an excellent example of a taste that sucks, W E.
|
|
You have an excellent example of a taste that sucks, W E.We need Tony DiTerlizzi to illustrate....Corrected:
"We need Tony DiTerlizzi to illustrate "
We've had enough string-bean bodied & armed creatures.
Man's entitled to his opinion. I could be a total lunatic and say I'd find it awesome if you could get a planes book with art by Phil Foglio, Adam Warren and Tony DiTerlizzi, just so you could listen to the hue and cry from people complaining that their favorite dark entity of the other planes looks silly, or like a billboard, or whatever.
I'd love to see each of them draw protean. They'd all look spectacularly different.
We have far too much Magic the Gathering style ultra-badass art these days. I miss silliness like the old 2e MM's Invisible Stalker, or Kobold. Heck, I miss the old 1e art. Like I said earlier, the 1e Modron art was amazing for guys like Primus, less so for the legion-of-shapes modrons.
And even DiTerlizzi fans have to admit, his glabrezu art was kind of..uh, puppy dog.