Talk:Outer Plane

Disambiguation
Only use Planename (plane) if there is already another article called Planename. ··gracefool |&#9786; 11:37, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Mechanus had this problem. I'm also going to finish off the Outer Planes pages so that we can maybe make one of those cool boxes like in History of the United States. &mdash; Shoecream 06:35, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Template proposal
What do you think? I suggest we put one of these into every article about the outer planes and one to the main article. IMO it is more organized than the table with descriptions... Anthough the descriptions are useful, too. --Koveras 21:18, 10 February 2006 (UTC)


 * font size a bit small; fixed -shoecream 05:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Looks great; however it needs to use wikisyntax instead of HTML. Add it to the bottom of all outer planes articles (keep the current table in this article). ··gracefool |&#9786; 02:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure. The only reason I used HTML syntax was that it was easier for me this way. --Koveras [[Image:Flag of Russia.svg|25px]] 12:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

This article only talks about the outer planes of the standard d&d cosmology not the FR cosmology or any others, so you can only really use that template for articles on outer planes from the standard cosmology. Not for example in the Barrens of Doom and Despair article. The problem is that this article details only the outer planes of the standard 'great wheel' cosmology. Other cosmologies with outer planes exist. Maybe this article should be renamed to 'standard dnd cosmology' or 'great wheel' or something. The article titled 'outer plane' should be a more general description of what an outer plane is. -Lewis 23:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I changed the font-size attribute from pt (which is a big no-no for accessibility reasons) to %. ··gracefool |&#9786; 01:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Focus of this artcile
Following on from what I was saying above, I think we should make this article more about outer planes in general than the specific ones of the standard cosmology. It would be useful to retain whats here already under a section, then add sections detailing the outer planes of other cosmologies (Forgotten realms, eberron etc.)

Additionally, I'm not so sure that the huge table of planes is necessary, since the information is contained within the separate articles themselves (or should be).

What are peoples feelings on this? If there are no objections I will start to make some of the described changes. --Lewis 13:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


 * hold it, that table of plains is not "huge", it takes up barely 1/3 of the screen width, and since it goes at the bottom of articles anyway I don't see how that's an issue. Also, I think this page should stay as the standard cosmology since I don't think anyone else really uses anything else. Feel free to start a page at Non-standard cosmologies in the Planescape campaign setting or words to that effect. -shoecream 21:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


 * sorry dude, i wasnt talking about the template, which i think is pretty good, but the table with plane/names/inhabitants that dominates most of the article. Also the statement that you dont think anyone else uses other cosmologies is just opinion, and i think for completeness it is worth mentioning the outer planes from other cosmologies. I dont think a separate article as you suggest would be appropriate; the kind of thing i was thinking of doing is drafted on my talk page, if you'd like to have a quick look, your opinion would be appreciated. -- Lewis 22:01, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I think the concept of left and right as it pertains to the relativity of the two planes law and chaos, is extraditious and wp:synth. While many depictions may chose to place law on the left side of the page, the intent was never shown to claim it's subjective positioning. clearly extra planar realms were never considered to be tethered by relative positions to corporeal planes such as eberron. unless someone can find a verifiable citation to support the specific claim made in the section "standard d&d cosmology" reading "The Lawful planes (or Planes of Law) sit to the left, and the Chaotic planes (or Planes of Chaos) to the right." the statement should be amended to say "depictions usually display" before the rest of the quoted passage. as it stands, the quote could cause some confusion that was never intended. 107.77.207.96 (talk) 22:07, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

4th edition
due to the changes in cosmology with 4th eidtion does something need to be done to this article to update it to include the new cosmology as well the old? shadzar-talk 15:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Xoriat, the Realm of Madness
dont quote me on this but I'm fairly ceertain I read somewhere that Xoriat, the Realm of Madness cannot be Coterminous as a group of druids locked it (or something). I know its mentioned in the City of Towers, but it isnt told in any great detail —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.177.189.225 (talk) 13:05, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Real-World Information
As I noted in my change to the page, I deleted the section entitled "Alternative theories", as it seemed to detail real-life theories on other planes of existence, which has no relevance to the topic of a fictional cosmology. If there was some relevance to that section that I somehow missed, feel free to restore it. -- Dracomortis (talk) 03:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's actually poorly phrased in-universe information which was presented with insufficient context. It refers to fictionalized versions of real-world cultures within D&D, such as the cultures of Kara-Tur, Mulhorand, Unther and numerous prime worlds mentioned but not detailed in the Planescape setting. I've re-added the section and rewritten it for clarity, however I don't have access to any citeable sources. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 08:56, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Secondary source
As this article is lacking in secondary sources: has quite a bit to say about the Outer Planes. Daranios (talk) 18:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

This page was slated for deletion, but the existence of these sources prevented it:


 * Dread Trident: Tabletop Role-Playing Games and the Modern Fantastic (covers the Outer Planes and the history of its conception quite extensively, and even supplied a needed citation in the Planes article)
 * Game Magic: A Designer's Guide to Magic Systems in Theory and Practice
 * Celtic Cosmology: Perspectives from Ireland and Scotland
 * Dangerous Games: What the Moral Panic over Role-Playing Games Says about Play, Religion, and Imagined Worlds
 * Jason Salavon: Brainstem Still Life (artist's work interpreted as a reaction explicitly to dnd cosmology)
 * 30 Years of Adventure: A Celebration of Dungeons & Dragons

Perhaps a 'progressive enhancement' of this article so to speak, over time, can use these sources.

Rendall (talk) 21:12, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Baator
"Baator" points to a new article, which turns out to be a redirect to this same "Outer Plane" article. 213.93.223.201 (talk) 17:51, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out. I merged some of the content from here just to give context to readers, but merging too much of it seemed like a bad idea. 8.37.179.254 (talk) 00:38, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

"Primus (Dungeons & Dragons)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Primus (Dungeons &. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 11 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)