NWN2 Interview @ RPGDot

[Gabrielle]

Planescape is the worst. Dull, boring and a weird world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You are insane. Planescape is one of the most interesting settings i ever played...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It should have went the way of the dinosaur when TSR was sold out.

 

I'm picky about my fantasy settings and that's just too odd to be a good fantasy setting.

[Volourn]

"Hell, even in the Realms sewer architecture is different from region to region. I don't think the cities of Thay would use the same style as the city of Waterdeep, you know."

 

True.

 

btw, Folks, arguing over which is setting is bets is silly espicially in regards to PS. FR, GH, et all are ALL about of the PS setting.

 

Hahahahahahhaha.

[Lyric Suite]

I'm picky about my fantasy settings and that's just too odd to be a good fantasy setting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Seems like a contradiction to me. Wouldn't something as fantastic as Planescape be the quintessential fantasy setting?

[Gabrielle]

I'm picky about my fantasy settings and that's just too odd to be a good fantasy setting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Seems like a contradiction to me. Wouldn't something as fantastic as Planescape be the quintessential fantasy setting?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutley not.

[Lyric Suite]

^ Then, under what standard do you define a good fantasy setting?

[Volourn]

One she likes... just like everybody else... "

[Kasoroth]

I don't personally think that the Forgotten Realms setting is all that interesting, but it does have the advantage that it's familiar to a lot of players. I've found that when I play or DM homebrew campaign settings it can be difficult for players to try to fit into the world because the amount of information available about the world doesn't compare to the vast quantity of FR sourcebooks available, and even if the DM could produce that much material the players would need an enormous amount of time to read it all. Many people are familiar with at least some aspects of FR through sourcebooks, novels, and CRPGs, so they already have a frame of reference.

 

I generally prefer relatively low magic, low level settings, where a 10th level character with a +2 weapon is pretty noteworthy and level 15 and above characters are legendary, so that's another reason why I'm not a huge Realms fan. I also like political intrigue involving characters/orgainizations that are not strictly good vs evil, where each side has some legitimate motivations and you could side with either one for "good" reasons, or with selfish motivations. Most groups in FR seem pretty black and white to me and aren't that interesting.

 

The only other published [A]D&D setting I've used significantly is Planescape, and I really liked that. It was entertaining to have conflicts between the factions, power struggles among the Baatezu, three way fights between githzerai, githyanki and illithids, and random accidental adventures through one way portals to various prime worlds, with the Blood War always in the background but rarely directly seen. Sigil provides a great home base where the players can get to know a lot of recurring NPCs who can become allies or enemies, but still travel to a vast variety of different locations without being gone too long.

 

The sad thing is that when the Planescape setting was first released, I had the impression that it was all about high level PCs fighting demons and devils, and was intended to be basically a smite-the-evil, hack-and-slash type of experience. I just ignored it at first. It wasn't until I started reading about the factions on the Torment website when Torment was in development that I started getting interested in it, and after playing Torment I searched all my local gaming stores, and on eBay to find the books and boxed sets (which were out of print by then).

 

I really liked the rules-light and content-heavy style of many of the planescape supplements, where they would provide lots of information about the personality of NPCs and just have a little sidebar for stats, and they would give lots of details of stores, taverns, temples and other places in Sigil, rather than the WotC style of loading every book down with tons of feats, prestige classes, and spells. Unfortunately the feats, prestige classes and spells seem to sell better, and it's frustrating as a DM because players seem to buy all the books (and Dragon Magazine too) looking for some great new feat or spell or PrC, and many don't seem to understand why a DM would not allow these into a campaign. People end up spending half their time flipping through books looking for a particular spell or feat because they can't remember exactly what it does, and it really bogs down play in many cases. Having a few feats, a few classes, a few races, a few spells, and a few monsters in each book makes it a pain to find anything.

 

My "Ideal Model" of how D&D should work (although I doubt this would be economically feasible unfortunately) would be

1) A few core rulebooks (PHB, DMG, MM). PrCs in the DMG should be considered examples for DMs of how to create PrCs for their worlds, not "standard" PrCs available in every world.

2) One (and only one) Campaign Setting Core Book for each campaign world, which would include all the feats, spells, and prestige classes that are common knowledge in the campaign world, as well as a basic overview of the world. This book has essentially all the campaign specific rules and world background that a player would need to know. If the book grows too big, split it into a separate rule book and world background book.

3) One or more campaign world specific Monster Manuals

4) A bunch of campaign world source books with lots of world detail, interesting NPCs, history, recent events, etc, and only the bare minimum of new rules necessary to support the material. NPC stats should be built primarily from the Core Rules and the setting's Core book, with more spells, feats and PrCs being added only if they are generally obscure, or known only in the limited region (or by the particular organization) covered in the sourcebook. If some game rule element is not specific to the topic covered by the sourcebook, they should have been included in the campaign setting's core book instead. Avoid putting new monsters in the sourcebooks, and instead plan your publishing schedule ahead so you can include them in a Campaign Setting Monster Manual first, and then have the sourcebook just reference which MM to look in when mentioning particular monsters. This way things are consolidated and easier to look up.

 

-Kasoroth

[Plano Skywalker]

FR, GH, et all are ALL about of the PS setting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

ahhh, but 3rd edition says that the "planes" is but one way to conceptualize how the universe works. basically, PS was "canon" in 2nd Edition. It has been demoted to theory.

 

which is ultimately good....PS was a neat idea--like eating Kiwi fruit is a neat idea from time to time....a mainstay it is not.

[CoM_Solaufein]

There is only one setting in my game world and that Forgotten Realms.

 

Home of great characters like Elminster, Liriel Banrae, Volo and many more!

[Nick_i_am]

I'm picky about my fantasy settings and that's just too odd to be a good fantasy setting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The only good fantasy is obviously completely generic!

 

Screw actual ingenuity in a setting, I want stuipd orcs and pretty elves and I want them now.

[CoM_Solaufein]

Pretty elves in a setting is a must have. Say no to ugly elves, we'll call them orcs.

[Ellester]

FR, GH, et all are ALL about of the PS setting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

ahhh, but 3rd edition says that the "planes" is but one way to conceptualize how the universe works. basically, PS was "canon" in 2nd Edition. It has been demoted to theory.

 

which is ultimately good....PS was a neat idea--like eating Kiwi fruit is a neat idea from time to time....a mainstay it is not.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed. 2nd Ed had planescape as its own separate world, just like Spelljammer. Sure both settings could be incorporated into The Realms and/or Greyhawk but it wasn

[Volourn]

"Agreed. 2nd Ed had planescape as its own separate world, just like Spelljammer."

 

Um. No. PS is not a world. It's a setting. It's a setting that includes FR, GH, et.c in it. Same with Spelljammer. Nice try though.

[Ellester]

"Agreed. 2nd Ed had planescape as its own separate world, just like Spelljammer."

 

Um. No. PS is not a world. It's a setting. It's a setting that includes FR, GH, et.c in it. Same with Spelljammer. Nice try though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Still seperate. world or setting it doesn't matter. It was only optional if you wanted to link the campaigns. Now in 3 rd Ed its cannon.

Edited January 12, 2006 by Ellester

[Darque]

"Agreed. 2nd Ed had planescape as its own separate world, just like Spelljammer."

 

Um. No. PS is not a world. It's a setting. It's a setting that includes FR, GH, et.c in it. Same with Spelljammer. Nice try though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Volourn]

"Still seperate. world or setting it doesn't matter. It was only optional if you wanted to link the campaigns. Now in 3 rd Ed its cannon."

 

Doesn't matter what you did in your campaign. Offcicially, that's how it worked in 2E. Deal with it.

[Monte Carlo]

Is it called Sewers & Dragons?

 

No. It's called Dungeons & Dragons.

 

I rest my case, Volourn. I win. You lose.

 

There was a game called Tunnels and Trolls, but it wasn't set in a subway system.

 

Cheers

MC

[Llyranor]

I like sewers because that's where I dragged bodies after I murdered them and.... nm

[Nick_i_am]

Nothing a bit of fire won't fix.

[Ellester]

"Still seperate. world or setting it doesn't matter. It was only optional if you wanted to link the campaigns."

 

Offcicially, that's how it worked in 2E

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

fixed

[alanschu]

No doubt.  Also the critters inthe sewers scared the living crap out of me.  I saw this big lumbering critter thinking it will be an eas ykill because it was so slow then a green glob of whatever that was flew at me.  I went WTF and ran away.

 

Thank god for the .50 cal gun.  Of course my vamp with celerity did better against it.  At celerity 5 I went all Neo on his arse.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You've decided to replay it?

[Volourn]

"No. It's called Dungeons & Dragons.

 

I rest my case, Volourn. I win. You lose."

 

Agreed. They shouldn't include magic, swamps, volcanos, trolls, ogres, dwarves, and a host of other things. Let's just have dunegons and dragons.

 

 

You lose as per usual.

 

R00fles!

[alanschu]

I think it's kind of splitting hairs. If I can make a sewer with the toolset without a specific sewers tileset, then I'm not so sure what the big deal is.

[Volourn]

You cna't make a sewer. Youc an make somehting sewer like. Subtle; but noteable difference. At least to me.

 

It won't completely ruin the game; but since Obsidian has no problem adding trash like that new class; I would have thought sewers which is a big part of D&D adventuring would have been higher on the priorty list...

[alanschu]

What is the difference? (serious question)

 

If the tools exist in the game to make something look like a sewer, though without a specific tileset, then wouldn't you still have a sewer? The biggest thing though would be that it would take more time to do so, since tilesets are there to speed things up. But if it looks like a sewer, acts like a sewer, talks like a sewer, smells like a sewer, then isn't it a sewer?