D&D canon backstory - where is it? (and a cosmological inquiry)

[Mercurius]

This thread has two parts, feel free to discuss one or both:

I - A Question of Canon
D&D has a default, canonical back-story--mentions of the Dawn War, the split between elves, eladrin, and drow, the sundering of the Gith, etc. Is it scattered all over the place or am I missing something? Is the back-story outlined in one place? If not, what are the main places to look? And has anyone collated everything into a website?

(I am talking specifically about 4E, thus the forum; it could apply to any edition, but I am primarily interested in 4E canon).

II - A Question of Cosmology
My anal-retentive need for verisimilitude has me irked at one small problem, even paradox, in the D&D cosmology. You have infinite possible campaign worlds, right? All connected to one Astral Sea. There is only one Arvandor, one Asmodeus, one Bahamut, and also one Tu'narath, right? If that is the case, how could, for instance, the githyanki be a threat at all to any world because of their relatively limited numbers? In other words, how does D&D canon deal with the "One Planar Structure, Many Worlds Paradox"?

I mean, it is easy for me to accept that Bahamut is worshipped in many worlds and can appear as an aspect or avatar in each of them, while retaining his true existence in the planes. One could even describe an ontology whereby the worship of an extra-planar being creates the necessary energy to manifest an incarnated avatar; the greater the worship, the more powerful the avatar (although not necessarily correlating with the power of the "true being" that exists in the planes). But what about the githyanki and other non-divinities of the Astral Sea?

Off the top of my head, I can think of a few ways out of this:

1. One Worldism: Your own campaign setting is the only world, or one of a few. This has a certain amount of sense to it but creates a sense of removal of your own setting with all D&D worlds; there is something nice about the idea that we're all playing in the same D&D mega-verse, that my group's characters could theoretically enter your campaign world.
2. Infinite Avatars: Any beings of the Astral Sea can "split off" incarnations once they enter a specific world; even githyanki in a given campaign world would only be the physical version, an avatar if you will, rather than the real thing. This view begs an explanation for what happens to the "real" githyanki (or whatever). The gods are easier to rationalize, but the non-divine beings are a bit tricker (as I mentioned above).
3. Astral Multitudes: A final option would be that the residents of the Astral Sea and its planes are enormously vast in number; the problem, of course, is that it would either require a limit to the number of campaign worlds--even if a very large number--and/or immense numbers of Astral denizens, or at least a solid ratio between the two.

 

[OnlineDM]

I. I've wondered the same thing myself. As best I can figure, it's spread all over the place. It does seem like the kind of thing that some fan would put into a wiki or some other web site - such a thing might be out there already, but I don't know of it.

II. I personally lean toward One Worldism. Your group's characters can certainly enter into my world, but they likely wouldn't share any common experiences or even common knowledge of geography, etc. The experiences of my party are so different from yours that they're effectively separate worlds even if they started from the same canon.

Now, if you want to have two different campaigns set in the same world, same geography, same gods, you certainly can do so, but that requires coordination. By default, the DM creates the world as the campaign goes along. If I want there to be a massive land mass floating in the sky just above the main continent, poof, it's there! The fact that your characters have never heard of such a thing is pretty strange if they live on that same continent. Hence, they're different worlds.

 

[the Jester]

I - A Question of Canon
D&D has a default, canonical back-story--mentions of the Dawn War, the split between elves, eladrin, and drow, the sundering of the Gith, etc. Is it scattered all over the place or am I missing something? Is the back-story outlined in one place? If not, what are the main places to look? And has anyone collated everything into a website?

It's all over the place, different elements described in different books. Sometimes they are even described from different perspectives in different write-ups.

MM talks about the Abyss (under the demon entry); MotP has a lot of backstory; Plane Above has some; Divine Power has some; PH has some; really, it's all over. One thing about 4e is that they try really hard to put each game element into a niche in the world.

II - A Question of Cosmology
My anal-retentive need for verisimilitude has me irked at one small problem, even paradox, in the D&D cosmology. You have infinite possible campaign worlds, right? All connected to one Astral Sea. There is only one Arvandor, one Asmodeus, one Bahamut, and also one Tu'narath, right? If that is the case, how could, for instance, the githyanki be a threat at all to any world because of their relatively limited numbers? In other words, how does D&D canon deal with the "One Planar Structure, Many Worlds Paradox"?

I'm assuming that you mean to ask how the githyanki (for instance) could be a threat to all worlds, right? (If you mean to say that githyanki are not numerous to take on a single world, I would disagree; they have spread across the Astral Sea in great multitudes.)

I'd answer that the githyanki don't have to threaten all the worlds out there in order to threaten multiple campaign worlds. Besides, in most campaigns, the githyanki probably don't serve as a "primary threat", and even if they do, they aren't too likely to be conquering/destroying material planar worlds. So to me it seems like there are enough githyanki to threaten a handful of worlds. And I don't have any trouble buying that, personally.

 

[Camelot]

In other words, how does D&D canon deal with the "One Planar Structure, Many Worlds Paradox"?

The canon you'll find in all the printed 4e D&D books describes the "Points of Light" setting. It's purposefully vague so that you can add in your own stories, but you can piece together a general timeline.

As for the "many worlds paradox," as you call it, I would like to point you to the city of Sigil (described in the 4e books Manual of the Plane and The Plane Above: Secrets of the Astral Sea). This colossal city has portals connecting to almost anywhere in the universe, and some that go to other universes. So, while the githyanki may be a threat to everything in the Points of Light universe, they aren't a threat to the Dark Sun universe, but through Sigil, characters from one universe could get to the other.

Some universes may have gods who are exactly the same. Points of Light and Forgotten Realms both have Corellon, but it's not the same exact person doing things in two universes at once. It's like a parallel dimension sort of thing. There are two Corellons, each behaving in their respective universe. Maybe one Corellon could travel through Sigil to the other universe and meet himself. Maybe your characters could do that too.

This way, you can create your own universe, your own campaign setting, with whatever canon you want, but still have it connected to the "canon" settings.

 

[talarei07]

The Githyanki while themselves may not be that numerous when they invade a specific world, but you have to consider that a decent size force is sufficient to take over a small nation and within that nation they are likely to find groups or individuals who share their desire to control the rest of the populations around them. On any given world they are going to end up with allies either willing or unwilling. by the description of the githyanki they are not a stupid race and would in all likely hood use whatever assets they could get including slaves and/or willing allies on the world they are conquering.

 

[Mirtek]

(I am talking specifically about 4E, thus the forum; it could apply to any edition, but I am primarily interested in 4E canon).

Thing is that 4e basically threw away the entire D&D history and rewrote it from scratch. They used familiar names from the discarded D&D history, but in new context

II - A Question of Cosmology
My anal-retentive need for verisimilitude has me irked at one small problem, even paradox, in the D&D cosmology. You have infinite possible campaign worlds, right? All connected

Actually no, at least it's simply not considered by the official lore you'll get. The all campaign worlds being part of the same multi-verse thing was used in D&D editions prior to 3rd edition, which proceeded to make each campaign setting self-contained (they later once again opened up a small connection, but it was a beattrack compared to their prior super-highway connection.

how could, for instance, the githyanki be a threat at all to any world because of their relatively limited numbers?

They couldn't. If they really mustered all their forces they might threaten a kingdom or some really small backwater world (which they once did in 2e), but to a real big world as a whole (like Toril or Oerth) they never were a global threat.

In other words, how does D&D canon deal with the "One Planar Structure, Many Worlds Paradox"?

Up to 2e they accepted and fostered it, in 3e they all but abandoned it and in 4e I think they did indeed abandon it.

 

[Riastlin]

I. Has been covered already above. Its spread out all over the place. I too think this is something that some gamer has likely put into one place somewhere, but I have no idea where.

II. I kind of look at it the same way that nations are able to deal with orcs, kobolds, goblins, etc. The sheer numbers of the goblins and orcs should be enough to overrun the good nations of the world. The problem of course is that the numerous tribes of goblins, etc. do not work together. The same is true for the assorted material worlds in D&D. Eberron doesn't work with Athas or Oerth or Faerun, etc. So yes, if the different worlds banded together to fight the Githyanki, the githyanki would likely get overrun quickly. But, individually, the worlds are at risk from the githyanki.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This thread has two parts, feel free to discuss one or both:

I - A Question of Canon
D&D has a default, canonical back-story--mentions of the Dawn War, the split between elves, eladrin, and drow, the sundering of the Gith, etc. Is it scattered all over the place or am I missing something? Is the back-story outlined in one place? If not, what are the main places to look? And has anyone collated everything into a website?

(I am talking specifically about 4E, thus the forum; it could apply to any edition, but I am primarily interested in 4E canon).

There is no single coherent canon. You can look on the DnD community Wiki and find some pages that have been set up to try to pull some of it together (like a timeline) etc. but there are lots of areas where multiple stories exist in different books that are mutually inconsistent. It would be wrong to think that there IS a canon. There is a heap of MOSTLY consistent individual bits of fluff. You can fit them together however you want. It is like "Modular Canon". I'm suspecting WotC is not going to try to pull it together. Half the fun is mixing it up and making each world a bit different.

II - A Question of Cosmology
My anal-retentive need for verisimilitude has me irked at one small problem, even paradox, in the D&D cosmology. You have infinite possible campaign worlds, right? All connected to one Astral Sea. There is only one Arvandor, one Asmodeus, one Bahamut, and also one Tu'narath, right? If that is the case, how could, for instance, the githyanki be a threat at all to any world because of their relatively limited numbers? In other words, how does D&D canon deal with the "One Planar Structure, Many Worlds Paradox"?
[/QUOTE]

There is no paradox, that's all. In YOUR game there is exactly one "Prime Material", the one your world exists in and no other worlds exist. Or maybe they do exist, but that's up to you. In my game there is just one world. At least until I decide I need more, then I'll think about it.

The easy out here is "somewhere far across the Far Realm is another Multiverse where..."

 

[Shemeska]

This thread has two parts, feel free to discuss one or both:

I - A Question of Canon
D&D has a default, canonical back-story--mentions of the Dawn War, the split between elves, eladrin, and drow, the sundering of the Gith, etc. Is it scattered all over the place or am I missing something? Is the back-story outlined in one place?

It's all over the place, IMO as a result of the 4e default quasi-setting being just that - never a formal setting. Add in lots of people working on it, plus often relying on the use of 1e/2e/3e canon elements that carry their own canonical assumptions now within a cosmology that doesn't support them, and it gets awkward quickly.

There's also some contradictory material across various books that makes me think that there isn't one person with the editorial job to keep material self-consistent across various books - and it may have really never been a big concern since PoL has been treated like a sandbox wherein canon (or traditional setting production values if you will) isn't a priority.

And that could hamstring them to an extent if they make PoL into a more formalized setting (to say nothing about the issues raised with PoL default material being inserted haphazardly piecemeal into the other settings, some of which like FR or Ebberon already had their own established canon that got replaced).

Anyone having worked for WotC: was there ever any sort of PoL setting bible, or was it handled much less formally?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

It's all over the place, IMO as a result of the 4e default quasi-setting being just that - never a formal setting. Add in lots of people working on it, plus often relying on the use of 1e/2e/3e canon elements that carry their own canonical assumptions now within a cosmology that doesn't support them, and it gets awkward quickly.

There's also some contradictory material across various books that makes me think that there isn't one person with the editorial job to keep material self-consistent across various books - and it may have really never been a big concern since PoL has been treated like a sandbox wherein canon (or traditional setting production values if you will) isn't a priority.

And that could hamstring them to an extent if they make PoL into a more formalized setting (to say nothing about the issues raised with PoL default material being inserted haphazardly piecemeal into the other settings, some of which like FR or Ebberon already had their own established canon that got replaced).

Anyone having worked for WotC: was there ever any sort of PoL setting bible, or was it handled much less formally?

I think you're expecting something from PoL that it was never intended to provide. PoL is NOT really a setting in the same sense that FR is. PoL is a toolbox. It doesn't NEED a consistent backstory because it doesn't present a detailed world. There is no single canonical history etc. There can be 12 different possible stories about how Bane became the god of war. Any one of them, or none, could be accurate and which one of them is the truth in any given DM's incarnation of PoL is up to the players. What locations exist, where they are, what their history is etc. is all open.

If you want a buttoned down setting with exactly defined canon then you can play in one of the detailed settings. If you want to brew up stuff yourself and want to save time and energy with some canned stuff you can reuse, then PoL works. If you want to just do a whole setting yourself, then you can do that too. PoL is sort of a middle ground between a setting and homebrew.