My thanks beforehand.
The other thing you'd want to do is buy the "Planescape Campaign Setting" either on eBay or from RPGNow.com or SVGames.com (both of which sell .pdfs for 5 bucks a file). You can browse through that material for a while- there's a lot of files on there. There are plenty of other good to have suppliments. I particularly recommend the "Planes of _____" files, the Factol's Manifesto, Faction War and Hellbound.
Note however, that that's all 2ed stuff. A good deal of the actually stated things requires conversion, though Planewalker's done a good job with the stuff they've gotten to so far.
I will be most surprised if I'm not beaten to the post by someone who's actually knowledgable on the subject.
[edit] Woah! No one beat me. I think that's a first. [/edit]
In the cage: a guide to sigil; it is great for setting a starting campaign, Factol´s manifesto is good for factions and faces of evil it is a must for including fiends which role in the game it is other that charge against the pjs.
Sure, you can use all the old material and just convert the rules info, but for me, that's just . . . well . . . pointless! 2nd edition was fine except for one or two things that any DM worth his salt could fix with one or two house rules.
If you want to experience planescape, forget about the new rules edition and stick with 2nd. It's the only way to experience the planes.
www.mimir.net is also a good source of fan material, and everything that has been said so far is pretty true (except the edition thing, which I think is just a matter of personal preference).
Yeah, it is a matter of prefference, but one I think that a number of people share. Monte Cook to be sure IIRC.
I've little against the new rules system except that, as a matter of aesthetics, they've managed to take everything that made D&D unique in the gaming world and erased it. It's become too much like a video game IMO. (please note the "IMO" in that last sentence). This is mostly fine for some worlds (notably the Forgettable Realms and GreyHawk) but for Planescape, it really gutted the essence of the setting. I mean, now it's more like a standard campaign using the planar rules out of the player's handbook rather than the incredibly rich and complex almost literary style of the original 2nd edition.
I don't know quite how to describe it beyond . . . well . . . simple prefference.
I know I'll never make a convert here, but damnit, I'll mourn the loss of Planescape 2nd ed forever!
(and see, I didn't even mention how I felt about Wizard's of the Coast)
I mean, now it's more like a standard campaign using the planar rules out of the player's handbook rather than the incredibly rich and complex almost literary style of the original 2nd edition.
It doesn't have to be, though, especially if you're using 2e material as a source for your campaigns. Just because you are playing with the 3.x rules doesn't mean you can't play Planescape. It just takes some effort to actually play a Planescape campaign rather than "d20 Planar."
Your ruleset shouldn't significantly affect the content of your campaign, IMO. I could run Planescape with the Shadowrun system if I wanted to, but it would be much more effort than it was worth to convert all of that stuff to rules completely alien to what it is written in.
I've little against the new rules system except that, as a matter of aesthetics, they've managed to take everything that made D&D unique in the gaming world and erased it. It's become too much like a video game IMO. (please note the "IMO" in that last sentence). This is mostly fine for some worlds (notably the Forgettable Realms and GreyHawk) but for Planescape, it really gutted the essence of the setting. I mean, now it's more like a standard campaign using the planar rules out of the player's handbook rather than the incredibly rich and complex almost literary style of the original 2nd edition.
Planescape was pretty well written. It was innovative. However... maybe its because I didn't start playing until 2000, but I don't like 2ed rules. They were absurdly complex and largely counter-intuitive. The rules themselves added nothing to Planescape. There were some things- DR for example- that I think 3.5 changed for the worse. But for the most part, from what I can tell, 2ed was a mess. From what I can tell you miss the way the books were written in 2ed, which I know very little about outside of Planescape.
They no longer support Planescape, which means that books like the Planar Handbook and the Manual of the Planes aren't trying to equal Planescape. I understand missing that- but why miss the ridiculous system it was tied to?
2e didn't just need "one or two houserules" to fix it. Looking back, it's amazing that we couldn't see a better way. But live and learn. 3e is a much more advanced system, in my opinion, and plays better in just about every way. Still, it's heart-wrenching what happened to Planescape. But that's been said.
I would say, to pick up on the flavor of Planescape, to use the Boxed Set, or the Planewalker's Handbook, which was my only source of information for about 3 years of quality Planescape gaming. The rest was just houseruled by a very good DM.
Factol's Manifesto: everything you could need to run the factions. One of those great Planescape books that has about 2% game rules (stats of faction high-ups).
Faces of Evil- The Fiends: Another great book. This one may be my favorite Planescape book. It's one of those books you can just idly read through. It has zero game information, just lots of stuff about ecology, psychology, mythology, physiology, and all those other "ologies" pertaining to fiends. And, best of all, it's all written in-character by various authors! Including Xanxost!
Planes of ____: These are all good boxed sets. They give mountains of information on planes. And not just terrain and features. Really cool, mind-bending, Planescapey locations for all of the planes and layers. And cool NPCs. And monster writeups (in 2e, of course) and even some adventures.
But hey, I liked 2e and I just don't like 3.5. And it's not because I don't like change. I learned on 1e rules and changed over to 2e so I can learn to change. It's just that, when it comes to Planescape, I don't comprimise. Planescape, and Dark Sun were just too good as they were to start changing all the mechanics.
Plus, I'm not as good a DM, or one with as much time as would be required to do all that adaptation. I love 2e Planescape and I'm sticking with it.
:DPlus, I'm not as good a DM, or one with as much time as would be required to do all that adaptation. I love 2e Planescape and I'm sticking with it.
Oh, I didn't want to disparage your abilities (I recently ran an Al-Qadim campaign in 2e because I didn't want to deal with converting all of those kits to 3.x). I can understand your reasoning, but I feel compelled to put my opinion out there because I'm kind of a loudmouth.
Planescape Campaign Setting TSR2600ESD (duh)
The Factol's Manifesto TSR2611ESD
Faces of Evil - The Fiends TSR2630ESD
Planes of Chaos TSR2603ESD
Planes of Conflict TSR2615ESD
Planes of Law TSR2607ESD
The Inner Planes TSR2634ESD
If you're going Sigil-centric, Uncaged - Faces of Sigil TSR2624ESD has got great NPCs which could provide campaign/adventure hooks, or at the least, flavour.
If you want to follow TSR's Planescape metaplot (unlikely if you're just starting out in the Planes), Faction War TSR2629ESD is a must-have for changes to the campaign world post-FW.
All the 2e stuff mentioned above are available from svgames.com as pdfs for about $5 ea.
For 3e stuff, probably about the only official thing I'd recommend is Manual of the Planes, although the 3.5 DMG has a bit to say about planar mechanics, and if you already have all the campaign information from the 2e source material, you might be able to live without the Outer Planes descriptions in MotP.
Planewalker.com has done a great job on their 3e conversion of Planescape, althoug it still helps to have some of the 2e material to convey the "feel" of the Planes via DiTerlizzi's awesome art, the cant, etc.
The
Bone-box Rattler is a fantastic indie forum on Planescape stuff, and there are some awesome posts out there, such as Mechalich's treatises on Ethergaunts , Inevitables and the Tsnng (Ethergaunts are found in 3E Fiend Folio, Inevitables in 3.0MoTP/3.5 MM and 3EFiend Folio, and Tsnng in 2E Planescape Monstrous Compendium III).
I hope you enjoy roaming the Planes, and even more the new vistas of thought opened up by them.
Cheers,
V.
Oh, I didn't want to disparage your abilities (I recently ran an Al-Qadim campaign in 2e because I didn't want to deal with converting all of those kits to 3.x). I can understand your reasoning, but I feel compelled to put my opinion out there because I'm kind of a loudmouth.
And my mouth is just as loud.:D
DiTerlizzi's awesome art
Which is, I think, the most egregious loss in the conversion to the new edition. The new artwork . . . well . . . it's pretty bad IMO. Was reading through a couple old Dungeon magazines last night and found some of DiTerlizzi's old work for TSR before Planescape (I think) and was just struck with a wave of nostalgia. Why did Wizards feel the need to move away from the fabulous art of 2nd ed?
And my mouth is just as loud.:D
Which is, I think, the most egregious loss in the conversion to the new edition. The new artwork . . . well . . . it's pretty bad IMO. Was reading through a couple old Dungeon magazines last night and found some of DiTerlizzi's old work for TSR before Planescape (I think) and was just struck with a wave of nostalgia. Why did Wizards feel the need to move away from the fabulous art of 2nd ed?
Mind you, not all of Tony's art was universally egregious. Much as I respect his adherence to the PS aesthetic, there are characters in PS who aren't Fensirs, but look like Fensirs :D
And it took me a while to get used to DT's "frumpy" Lady of Pain again after the surpassingly beautiful, elegant and mysterious LoP as shown in Planescape:Torment. (Though the worst LoP ever was the ever so hilarious cover for "In the Cage" by Knutsen
)Still, I get a wave of nostalgia whenever I visit Tony's site, although my favourite illustration on the site is actually a guest piece from Nodwick creator Aaron Williams ^_^.
Cheers,
V.
Mind you, not all of Tony's art was universally egregious. Much as I respect his adherence to the PS aesthetic, there are characters in PS who aren't Fensirs, but look like Fensirs :D
And it took me a while to get used to DT's "frumpy" Lady of Pain again after the surpassingly beautiful, elegant and mysterious LoP as shown in Planescape:Torment. (Though the worst LoP ever was the ever so hilarious cover for "In the Cage" by Knutsen
Still, I get a wave of nostalgia whenever I visit Tony's site, although my favourite illustration on the site is actually a guest piece from Nodwick creator Aaron Williams ^_^.
Cheers,
V.
Allright, not ALL the art of 3.5 is terrible, but a great deal of it is. The quality is greatly diminished in my view. Kind of like . . . I don't know how to describe it again. Kind of like there's no real "art" involved, just drawings.
Allright, not ALL the art of 3.5 is terrible, but a great deal of it is. The quality is greatly diminished in my view. Kind of like . . . I don't know how to describe it again. Kind of like there's no real "art" involved, just drawings.
I agree - there is a certain lack of continuity in 3.xE art. In contrast, 2E Dragonlance had Elmore, DarkSun had Brom, and Planescape had DT -all of which provided a thematic basis and mood for other artists.
The closest thing 3E has is Lockwood and his work with Dragons, although I must say I don't quite like his Gold and Silver dragons.
This may partly have to do with WoTC's release schedule - there *are* a lot oof books being churned out (and "churned" sometimes being the most appropriate verb, although one may argue "curdled" with respect to some publications :P )
Or maybe Wizards just aren't feeling brave enough to strike out with a new artist and a new artistic direction.
Then again, we old-timers don't make it easy for them, either (just trying to see both sides of the coin here).
Cheers,
V.
I agree - there is a certain lack of continuity in 3.xE art. In contrast, 2E Dragonlance had Elmore, DarkSun had Brom, and Planescape had DT -all of which provided a thematic basis and mood for other artists.
The closest thing 3E has is Lockwood and his work with Dragons, although I must say I don't quite like his Gold and Silver dragons.
This may partly have to do with WoTC's release schedule - there *are* a lot oof books being churned out (and "churned" sometimes being the most appropriate verb, although one may argue "curdled" with respect to some publications :P )
Or maybe Wizards just aren't feeling brave enough to strike out with a new artist and a new artistic direction.
Then again, we old-timers don't make it easy for them, either (just trying to see both sides of the coin here).
Cheers,
V.
Yes, we are a needy, whiney bunch aren't we?
Well, unless they do some major revamping, I'm going to stick to 2e for Planescape and Dark sun and 3.5 for other campaigns (which would be a great deal of fun with the new rules). If only for the art.
I now am the proud owner of almost every Planescape produce, almost all of them in the original instead of .pdf (still having trouble laying hands on Modron March and Dead Gods and Faction War in the original).i guess wotc could make a (more adult?) new edition of planescape, but it would have to be art and spirit similar to the original setting.
i guess wotc could make a (more adult?) new edition of planescape, but it would have to be art and spirit similar to the original setting.
As CaoSlayer said, that was the great thing about the 2E books: lots of background, description and atmosphere rather than more reasons to roll your dice. And sure, you could just use the 2E setting with the 3.5E rules, but it would be nice to see some official support for what IMO was a very decent setting.
Apparantly, they are under the impression that the new art is "of the best quality and that that is the general consensus"
and that (thankfully in a way) the Planar Handbook was in no way an attempt to rewrite the Planescape setting and that there were no plans to revive the dead setting.Kind of a shame really. But, really, who needs plot, character, and depth when you have DICE!!!!
Apparantly, they are under the impression that the new art is "of the best quality and that that is the general consensus"
That's not false. Personally, I'd like to have more DiTerlizzi, Swekel, Wood, Lockwood... and less Reynolds, Crabapple, Kaluta, Baxa, Rams... But the art and the layout of the 3rd ed book is indeed overall very good.
and that (thankfully in a way) the Planar Handbook was in no way an attempt to rewrite the Planescape setting and that there were no plans to revive the dead setting.
Kind of a shame really. But, really, who needs plot, character, and depth when you have DICE!!!!
Shrug. I'd like to see a nicely done Planescape CS 3e, but honestly, all I ask from WotC is rules. Plots, characters, flavours, depth... All that I prefer to do it myself.
Shrug. I'd like to see a nicely done Planescape CS 3e, but honestly, all I ask from WotC is rules. Plots, characters, flavours, depth... All that I prefer to do it myself.
You can have that. It's called Planewalker.com. It has semi-official (being the official fan site) game rules for races, feats, factions, etc, and is reviving its old material with flavor stuff. And best of all, if your own fluff is good, you can submit it for everyone to enjoy.