4e Planescape Race updates.

Seeing how they did Genasi as a PC race in the FRPG, I plan on redoing Tieflings in much the same way, giving them different "manifestations" for different bloodlines.  I'll probably just use 3 differents manifestations, with the one in the PHB as the Baatezu bloodline.

Here's my early version of the revised 4e Tiefling:

Tieflings are another variety of vermin across the planes.  On every plane and every world, a number of their kind exists.  Most of them are the descendants of Humans, the Rats of the 'verse that have plagued the planes, who've adapted to some of the more hostile planes and possibly bred with some of the most depraved creatures the planes have ever spawned.  Stories also speak of ancient pacts and random mutations as other sources of Tieflings.

It matters not their origins, for Tieflings are there and here.  There is nothing that can be done anymore about them and the rest of their kin.  Many because of their backgrounds are the orphans struggling in many metropoli across the planes, but their numbers grow and soon these disparate creatures may one day rise in ascension across the planes.

Three major bloodlines of Tieflings exist: Infernal Blood a kind associated with the Baatezu and the planes of Baator, the more primal varieties of Tieflings the dreaded Abyssal Bloods can trace their origins to the Tanar'i and the Obyriths and other dreaded Demons of the Abyss, the third major bloodline are the insidious Gloom Bloods thought to have descended from Yugoloths, Gehreleths, Night Hags and other dreadful creatures.

Traits - Here's the common traits

Ability Scores: +2 int, +2 cha Size: M Speed: 6 Vision: Low-light Language: Common, and another Skill Bonuses: +2 bluff, +2 stealth

{Yeah, exactly like the 4e PHB}

Infernal Blood:

Bloodhunt, Fire Resistance and Infernal Wrath as the PHB tiefling

Abyssal Blood:

Blood Fury: You gain +2 to damage when you are bloodied

Lightning Resistance: 5 + 1/2 your level Lightning Resistance

Abyssal Dread (Tiefling Racial Power) You unleash a small portion of the infinite terror and dread of the Abyss. Encounter * Fear Standard Action Close Burst 1 Target: Each Enemy in Burst Attack: Charisma or Intelligence vs. Will Increase to +2 at 11th level Increase to +4 at 21st level Hit: Target is pushed 1 square and takes a -2 penalty to attacks until the end of your next turn. Special: When you first get this power make a choice between using intelligence or charisma, this choice remains through out your character's life.

Gloom Blood:

Exploit Weakness: Bloodied creatures get a -1 penalty to hit you.

Acid Resistance: 5 + 1/2 your level Acid Resistance

Corrupting Whispers (Tiefling Racial Power) Your whispers are an insidious poison, that can bring out the worst of thoughts like a weight on a soul. Encounter * Psychic Standard Action Ranged 5 Target: One creature

Attack: Charisma vs. Will or Charisma vs. Fortitude Increase to +2 at 11th level Increase to +4 at 21st level Hit: Target is slowed until the end of your next turn, and takes 1d6 + charisma modifier psychic damage.  At 11th level this becomes 2d6, and at 21st level this becomes 3d6. Special: When you first get this power make a choice between targetting Will or Fortitude, this choice remains through out your character's life. While you can affect creatures that can't understand you with this power, a creature must be capable of hearing you to be affected by this power.

DM Options: For any racial feats that use fire, you may substitute lightning or acid for Abyssal and Gloom Bloods respectively.

Yes, please, Clueless Round us up!

Personally, I don't like the idea of relegating tieflings to a strictly fiendish role, let alone using "bloodlines."  I suppose it is a better alternative for 4e than one strict power.  As some may recall, though, a tiefling is not strictly fiendish, he's simply a mutt.  I was disappointed by 3e's insistence that tieflings had to be specifically fiendish in origin and also had to typically be evil because they were fiendish.  That just does not ring well with me.

Planescape tieflings, in my not-so-humble opinion, should not be automatically assumed fiendish by the mechanics.  Earlier 2e books say that people usually assume a tiefling is a child of fiends, but most people really don't know, and most tieflings have no clue, either.  To quote Planewalker's Handbook:

In other words, people in the setting make assumptions (assumptions that seem to be made fact in 3e, much to my chagrin) that all tieflings are lower-planar, but it's really not known in most cases.  Sure, many tieflings are lower-planar-born, but tieflings are all incredibly different from each other.

Thus, if 4e tieflings were to be remade in the spirit of Planescape, I would personally avoid using mechanics to pigeonhole them into being fiendbloods.  I would say change their infernal wrath to the old darkness ability they had in 2 and 3e (similar to the one the cloud of darkness drow have now in 4e) or look at the Planewalker's Handbook, find all the tiefling options (they're on p. 80 and 81), and select a few from the list that can be modified to be "Level 1 Tiefling Powers." Then let each tiefling character select one power at creation and go from there.  Potentially, you can open up feats for allowing tieflings to take another tiefling power, similar to genasi.

I wish they hadn't done genasi as "one genasi can do all elements" but that's for another time.

You know, I don't mind the idea of a larger percentage of tieflings being evil-aligned than, say, humans (who are sort of an archetypal neutral race in the PS setting). Nor do I mind the idea of more aasimar being good-aligned than humans. With that said, a substantial minority of good- and neutral-aligned tieflings (and evil aasimar!) exists.

 This is not entirely true, as the aasimar and the PC mechanics for it are also in the Planewalker's Handbook.  There, the aasimar are explicitly celestial-touched.  As I mentioned above, tieflings in the Planewalker's Handbook are not explicitly fiendish, but of unknown origin.  Incidentally, this book also introduced the mechanics for genasi characters. 

 It has been a very long time since I've read Faces of Evil or Hellbound, so I'd have to go poring over those books again to see what they said about tieflings and fiendish heritage.  Nevertheless, the Planewalker's Handbook description of tieflings paints a different picture than the fiendish, evil-inclined race that 3rd edition really wanted to make them, and it is the picture of tieflings that I personally prefer.

I agree with the ridiculousness of 4e's tieflings And as a World of Warcraft player, I can't help but note a very striking visual similarity between 4e tieflings and a certain race in WoW.  Though 4e does insist on forcing a fiendish heritage on tieflings.  I suppose, though, if that's how the majority wishes to run the race, that is how they are to be.  However, I still do not agree with the three bloodlines idea for tieflings, rule-of-threes or no.

Now, this is my own opinion, so take it for what you believe it's worth.  Thematically, however, I feel like the "three bloodlines" are not ambiguous at all.  The player selects up front what kind of fiend his tiefling is descended from.  To me, there's not much ambiguity there.  You're either a tanar'ri-touched or you're not.  You're either a 'loth-touched or you're not.  See what I mean?  I do not feel tieflings are meant to be so cut and dry.  Part of the racial concept includes a reasonable amount of mystique.  Most tieflings simply do not know what sort of fiend (or other creature) they are descended from and most don't really care, either.  An aasimar will typically be proud to say how he is descended from this celestial on that plane who serves this other power, so a bloodline sort of customization would make more sense for them.  Tieflings are not like that.  I feel attributing a decisive definition like which kind of fiend he's descended from at character creation removes the mystique and ambiguity of tieflings' heritage and detracts overall from the intent of the race. 

Furthermore, I'm not so sure the extra bloodline choices are necessary.  I realize the tiefling racial power says "infernal wrath," but it can easily be renamed for Planescape purposes to "fiendish wrath" and take out any perceived baatezu influence on the character's heritage.  It works for genasi because each element is so drastically different from each other element that the manifestations are very noticeable.  However, fiends and celestials not so much.  Remember that Planescape (and even 3e) tieflings are not half-fiends.  Their fiendish blood is very diluted by their mortal heritage, and so most fiend-specific traits won't show up -- that is, on most tieflings it's virtually impossible to tell if they're descended from baatezu, tanar'ri, or yugoloths.  So at the very least, I think calling the choices "bloodlines" is not a good way to portray tiefling customization. 

That being said, I think the alternative powers suggested are solid racial abilities.  I think that if they are portrayed as something other than separate bloodline options, they would make an excellent way to customize a tiefling character in the spirit of the original tiefling.  However, I would personally seriously reconsider the fluff behind the mechanics on these options.

 Again, this is all my personal opinion, so take it for whatever you believe it's worth

Obviously, you did not read correctly :)  I repeat:

Usually assumed to be lower-planar.  That is not the same thing as "saying lower planar in a polite way."

As far as the rest goes, I don't read Dungeon or Dragon, never have -- they used to cost too much.  I have no idea what all is in those books.  As far as I am concerned, those magazines are hardly canon codified law.  To me, they're more supplemental options that can be used if a person wants, but shouldn't be taken as gospel.  You want to use it?  Great!  However, I don't think that means tieflings should be changed so much when what's there works fine.  I'd wager the majority of gamers don't have access to these magazines.  I've played in several gaming groups throughout my life and I think I've only encountered one DM who even subscribed, let alone used the supplements therein.

Also, given that they list rilmani as an aasimar bloodline, but don't list archons, I find it very hard to take anything that article might say seriously.

Dunamin wrote:

Clueless wrote:

I think there is a group of folks here who are interested in the 4th ruleset (though probably not so much the PoL setting for obvious reason). So I wouldn't assume you were alone here. I need to round up all of you guys and get started on the work of getting PS in 4th going

Count me in if you want to put together a semi-official 4E Planescape project.

Ok - a little bit closer to back on topic - here's what I was thinking of using as the basis for a Conversion for Planescape to 4th Edition (and vice versa) release:

Introduction

How to apply the Planescape Twist to the PoL Cosmology
(no rules changes - new cosmology, old flavor)
1) Planescape concepts to uphold inthe 4th Edition design
2) GM advice to Flavour for the PoL planes
3) How to place Sigil in the PoL cosmology
4) Translation of Faction Beliefs to PoL archetypes
5) Translation of the Blood War to the PoL Lower Planes
6) Translation of the Shadowplane
7) Translation of the Inner Planes
Translation of the Outer Planes
9) Translation of the Transitive Planes

How to apply the 4th edition rules to the Planescape Setting
(all rules changes - old cosmology, old flavor)
1) Sticking points in the 4th Edition design to account for
2) Planar Affects
* Affects by Plane
* The Styx
* Madness Rules
3) Missing Races
4) Missing Classes and Prestige Class Conversions
5) Faction Classes and Feats
6) Belief Systems, alternate Belief Systems
7) Missing Spells and Psionic Effects
Missing Equipment
9) Missing Monsters (non-standard PC races)

Thoughts? I will be starting up a new thread on this shortly - so start rounding up the folks what need to know about this on your end if you can, please? And I'll snag the ones I know about on mine.

Just going to go through here and mention each part I have commentary on.  Also, I know I should know this, but what does "PoL" stand for?  I have not looked too deeply at the official 4e cosmology.  I assume it's a term that references 4e's new layout?  Or is it that Paizo cosmology that's coming out?  Gonna gloss over the PoL stuff until I know for sure what it refers to.

 That being said, if you're referring to the new 4e cosmology, Wizards has already accounted for Sigil in the sidebar, listing it as a place that exists somewhere between the planes

How to apply the 4th edition rules to the Planescape Setting

(all rules changes - old cosmology, old flavor)

1) Sticking points in the 4th Edition design to account for

 - The Eladrin is probably one of the biggest sticking points.  I currently run an off-site PS4E game using old cosmology with new rules and I mandated the aasimar player use the "eladrin" for his race and hand-wave the name.  However, this aasimar was elf-blooded during his brief 3e run, so the natural teleport ability and the affinity for magic makes the 4e eladrin race far less of a stretch for him than it will be for most aasimar. 

- The other issue is the 4e eladrin PC race is really more fey- and elf-oriented and far less celestial-focused like Planescape eladrin.  The Court of Stars is not directly related to the Seelie Court.  They might have some ties on the basis of vaguely similar beliefs, but they are very different entities.  Among other things, Seelie are not good-aligned by definition, they're just typically a lot better for mortals to deal with than the Unseelie.  The very different backgrounds, in my opinion, mean that 4e eladrin would be better off divorced from traditional Planescape eladrin.  This could be as simple as renaming the race for PS4E purposes (though confusion would abound).  However, while the Court of Stars and the Seelie Court can probably coexist, they are not interchangeable, and that is a point that really needs to be addressed with the 4e eladrin race in Planescape. 

2) Planar Affects

* Affects by Plane -- I am sure I saw a table for planar effects somewhere, but I can't find it now.  Maybe I'm confusing this with something I read in an earlier edition.  Very possible, since I recently re-read the PS supplement on the Ethereal.

* The Styx -- I see the Styx as a level 30+ hazard.  Chant is that most of 4e D&D (at the very least, the encounter generator and monster creator on the Insider page) accommodates monsters of up to 40th level, so a level 40 hazard would not be unwarranted.  It's one of the most primal parts of the Lower Planes, so it should be one of the highest levels possible.  It would probably make an attack vs. Will and its damage would be removal of memories.  Countermeasures would simply be to get around it somehow, since really, you can't break the Styx.

* Madness Rules -- Should be easy.  Make them attacks vs. Will based on how barmy the sight really is.  Chant is that bashers on the Demiplane of Dread in 3e use their Will saves for all Madness, Fear, and Horror checks.  Unless a DM's got a reason to have the madness affect a sod based on his physical resolve or agility, seems like an attack on Will's the best bet.  Just don't tell Will I said so or the sod'll come after me with scribes.

3) Missing Races -- It would be most useful first to establish which races are to be transferred from 3E and which ones in the MM/PHB are going to be kept "as is" (see my comments on Eladrin, above).  For example, will all the planetouched (zenythri, et al.) get 4e cameos or will the races list be trimmed down somewhat?  My initial inclination is to include it if it's in the PS3E pdfs, this idea'll change from one body to the next.  On the plus side, mechanics-building in 4e is a lot easier to balance.

4) Missing Classes and Prestige Class Conversions -- Not sure which base classes qualify as "missing."  Also, most base classes from 3E that missed the PHB are going to be re-released for 4E relatively soon when PHB2 comes out.

Prestige classes are another, easier dark.  All the factions should get their own Paragon Path, and where possible, it should be one that is easily accessible to most bashers, regardless of class.  It might be good to see major sects get Paragon Paths (like the Merkhants and Ragers).  Personally, I think it'd be peachy to see some old, dead sects like the Incantifiers get a bit of mention this time around.

5) Faction Classes and Feats -- Faction classes, again, should be addressed with Paragon Paths.  One Paragon Path per faction should be sufficient, but if a certain case warrants a second Paragon Path, then why not? 

- It would be possible to make Factions into "multiclass-only classes" like the Spellscarred from FRPG, but that would take far more work than faction Paragon Paths.  Thirty levels' worth of powers vs. three inherent abilities and three powers spread across 10 levels.  To draw another comparison from FR to suggest why this may not be the best idea: Spellscarred is the sole "multiclass class" presented in FRPG, while anything specifically related to a faith or a god (both similar concepts to Factions) is a Paragon Path.  There's such a thing as giving a body too many options, and 4e already offers a sodding large number on its own.

- To draw something from multiclassing that might be usable, perhaps faction feats are required to enter a faction-specific Paragon Path.  Instead of 4 feats total, perhaps cut the number by half since you're not getting an access to a class's full range of abilities, but rather a very specific selection.  Plus, you can use the feats to denote ranks. 

- For example, Joe Leatherhead takes the Guvner Namer feat to get a foothold in the faction and gain a special ability and possibly a trained skill bonus (see Planewalker's Handbook for examples of special abilities namers got just for being namers).  At level 4 or 6, he becomes eligible to take the Guvner Factotum feat and gains another benefit relevant to the faction.  Finally, at level 11, he can become a Guvner Factor by entering that faction's Paragon Path.

- Perhaps introduce Factol (or similar idea) as an epic destiny.  I think that someone who embraces a factions ideal so thoroughly as to become that ideal deserves to be given an epic destiny.

7) Missing Spells and Psionic Effects -- Spells are easy enough to work out as rituals (for most utility functions) or powers (for most combat-related and some short-term utility functions).  I would hold out on psionic effects until Wizards makes a stance on what they're going to do with psionics as a player class option.

Missing Equipment  -- Also easy enough to address.  The toughest part will really be drawing up the list of what needs to be included from past editions.

9) Missing Monsters (non-standard PC races) -- Missing monsters are also relatively easy to handle, although a "completed" monster entry in 4e seems to include several varieties of the creature that span a certain level range.  The monster generator on the Insider page makes creating monsters a snap, though.

Other Thoughts (not specifically for things on this list)

The 4e new alignment system is really ridiculous.  First off is the implication that law is inherently good-aligned and chaos is inherently evil-aligned.  People can't be chaotic and good anymore?  A body can't be so focused on law that good and evil are not relevant so long as the law is followed and order established? That's screed, friends, and any berk who's met a Guvner or a Modron'll tell you that.  Obviously, this alignment system just doesn't work in a Planescape context where people and places are varying shades of good, evil, lawful, and chaotic.

Should we bring alignment back as a fundamental aspect of a character?  In my opinion, this all depends more on powers (that's the 4e term, not the Ivories, berk) available and planar traits to be used.  In previous editions, alignment was very important because there were spells to ward against, buff, protect, attack, and destroy creatures based solely on their alignment.  In 4e, virtually none of those things exist.  If PS4E isn't going to re-introduce these kinds of effects to the game, I say don't bother much about it.  List a sidebar that touches on planar alignments and go from there.

If PS4E does re-introduce that to the game, then it's best to keep the four poles.  Even the barmiest barmy knows that good and evil have just as profound effects on the planes as law and chaos.  We don't have archons and eladrin at war with each other, but we do have celestials and fiends getting into spats.

Here's a thought.

What if we included a sidebar or small segment that discussed Sigil with the PoL system and included it in the overall Sigil chapter, probably near the beginning?  It seems from my perspective the nature of Sigil is that it will be Sigil whether it is linked to the Great Wheel or to the Astral Sea.  So, I don't think a portion discussing how to make Sigil work int he context of 4e planar cosmology would require very much discourse.

Does that address what you're trying to say or am I unwittingly talking past you?

Re: Alignments, if we include chant on mechanics at all, I think we should limit it strictly to planar effects.  As mentioned, none of the classes have significant (or any, to my immediate memory) abilities that hinge on alignment.  We could add them, but that seems like it's more work than is actually necessary.  I agree the alignment system needs to be addressed at least for flavor since the whole sodding Great Wheel is built on it.  And it makes sense that berks from one plane will suffer adverse effects when they're on a plane contrary to their alignment.  But that makes a good line to draw, I think.

Sounds like a plan to me!

As far as I understand it in canon there is a variable effect of the waters, sometimes by location depending on how much non-Styx water is mixed in (think Elemental Water), and sometimes by the amount of water you get splashed on you. There's s difference between a spray and full emmersion all the way back through 2nd ed. So the amount you get hit with matters.

Including a variable effect will also allow us to have the rules on hand for players just crazy enough to mix Styx water into drinks to take care of 'problems'.... *ahem* not that I would ever have done that to a fellow PC...

I think we generally can connect them with the various elemental lords of the Inner Planes. Thus, Imix and Yan-C-Bin would be considered primordials, for instance. However, offhand I see no reason why we need to give them as much focus as 4E generally gives.

My disagreement is ditch the Spiker and just use Bladeling because all I ever saw out of Spikers were a low ECL version of Bladelings.

They've already done that with Doppelgangers and Changelings, made them all into one race, I feel that the same should happen with Bladelings and Spikers.

Why set alignment restrictions on these races? A good khaasta may not be typical, but I don't see why it should be disallowed - we're not talking exemplars here (who basically are their alignments).

I agree with you about the spiker.
We could put down a complete list of planar races we support and the others could be supported in an ipotetic mostrous manual conversion.
About Zenithri, Chaond, cansin, thuladara, mechanatrix, I had thoughts about an unique race in the 4e genasi style.
My proposal name is Outsider seeing it doesn't the name of all the planar exemplars in 4e.
Another my proposal about a unique race in the same genasi style are the Animal Folks. Obviously I would work for the Catfolk feats .

I agree with all except for I don't think dwarves are the only race with poison resistence in the planes.

About Khasta if we give him a +2 Int we must give another fortification.

About Bladelings they could have 2 racial powers: razor storm and the wounderer defense, my first proposal for spiker, and made them all into one race.

Of sure we should convert aasimar, bariaur, modron, githyanki (feats), githzerai (feats). I don't know if we want convert the others minor folks.

My proposal is for a unique race for Chaond, Zenithry etc..

Actually, most of the droids races your looking for are over here, Cat.

Remember, though, Dunamin, they do have to survive and being toughing it out isn't a strong suit for the Shad (at least according to the PSCS).

This is my proposal List of 12 races:
Animal Folk
- Catfolk
- Hawkfolk
etc....
Aasimar
- Deva (PH2)
- of the Blessed Fields
- Arborean
Bariaur
Bladelings
Genasi (FRPG)
- Fire
- Earth
- air
- water
+ para e quasi
Githyanki (MM)
Githzerai (MM)
Rouge Modron
Nathri
Planetouched or Outsider
- Chaond
- Zenithri
- Thuladara
etc...
Shad
Tiefling
- Infernal(PHB)
- Gloomy (kobold avenger)
- Abyssal (kobold avenger)

Thoughts?
Another question about Modrons. Do you think we should use the living construct type?

BLADELING

Racial Traits

Ability Scores: +2
Dexterity, +2 Constitution

Size: Medium

Speed: 6 squares

Vision: Low-light

Languages: Common,
Supernal

Skill Bonuses: +2
Athletics, +2 Intimidate

Resist Acid: 5 + 1/2 level

Body
Blade:  adjacent enemies who attack you with a push, pull or charge attack take 2 damage, enemies who grab you also take 2 damage.

RAZOR STORM Bladeling Racial Power

Your skin feels starts to
feel painful, your spines feeling loose. Within a second, those same spines
explode out of your body and pierce your enemies skin but you reduce your cover.

Encounter ✦

Standard Action                                Close blast 3

Effect: You
take a -2 penalty to your AC until the end of your next turn.

Targets: All creatures within blast

Attack: Dex +2 or Con +2 vs. Reflex

Hit: 1d8 + Dexterity
damage Increase to +4 bonus and 2d8 + Dexterity
modifier damage, at 11th level, and to +6 bonus and 3d8 + Dexterity modifier
damage at 21st level.

update

Most of them look good to me, but isn't aasimars and tieflings technically grouped with the other planetouched?

I'm not much for animal people, but if they were implemented I'd suggest it be as aasimars of guardinal heritage - that's one of the most established "animal folk niches" in Planescape.

For the Beastlands, I'd put the Shifters orginally from the Eberron Campaign Setting there, as it's my preference over the idea of 3e's Planar Handbooks Wildren.

As for a completely different idea with the so-called beast-touched, well if it was a standard 4e PoL campaign I'd make them Guardinals, but it would end up as something strange like the whole Eladrin situation.  But I feel that beast-touched have to be distinguished from the very beast-like therianthromorphs like Gnolls and Minotaurs, and from Shifters.