D&D 5E D&D Lore Changes: Multiversal Focus & Fey Goblins of Prehistory

WotC's Jeremy Crawford revealed a couple of the lore changes in Monsters of the Multiverse.

• The big shift is toward the multiverse as the game's main perspective rather than a specific setting. The game is shifting towards a multiversal focus, with a variety of worlds and settings.
• Universe-spanning mythical story beats, such as deep lore on goblinoids going back to 1st Edition, and the gods they had before Maglubiyet. Prior to Magulbiyet unifying them, goblinoids were folk of the feywild in keeping with 'real-world' folklore.
• Changelings aren't just Eberron, but they've been everywhere -- you just don't necessarily know it. Their origin is also in the realm of the fey.

D&D 5E - A Compilation of all the Race Changes in Monsters of the Multiverse

Over on Reddit, user KingJackel went through the video leak which came out a few days ago and manually compiled a list of all the changes to races in the book. The changes are quite extensive, with only the fairy and harengon remaining unchanged. The book contains 33 races in total, compiled and...

www.enworld.org

 

[Reynard]

WotC producing content you don't personally like or lore changes you don't agree with is exclusionary...

In that it creates a speace that excludes those that choose not to use WotC lore. I don't mean it in a way that implies gatekeeping based on any particular cohort.

DMs don't need WotC's permission to be creative.

This line of defense for WotC is always very frustrating for me. It is dismissive and more than a little selfish. Of course a DM "doesn't need permission." But many, many of us really benefited from the DM support built into previous editions and I for one think it is missing the point on WotC's part not providing that to new DMs. DMs make the game. You can't have it without them. helping them learn the art and craft should be at least as important to WotC as providing players with piles upon piles of character options. There's a thread of the main page now celebrating the contribution of Jannelle Jaquas and among her most beloved works is The Campaign Sourcebook and Catacomb Guide. That book is beloved for a reason.

People who have been playing the game for decades (like me) should not just dismiss new GMs and assume they'll "pick it up."

 

[Neonchameleon]

People who have been playing the game for decades (like me) should not just dismiss new GMs and assume they'll "pick it up."

I don't - but this is the internet age. Everyone has access to far better worldbuilding and historical research material than either WotC or TSR ever put out. I have issues round the ways 5e treats DMs and makes things far harder than it should - but "how do you design a world?" not being produced isn't one of them.

 

[overgeeked]

In that it creates a speace that excludes those that choose not to use WotC lore. I don't mean it in a way that implies gatekeeping based on any particular cohort.

This line of defense for WotC is always very frustrating for me. It is dismissive and more than a little selfish. Of course a DM "doesn't need permission." But many, many of us really benefited from the DM support built into previous editions and I for one think it is missing the point on WotC's part not providing that to new DMs. DMs make the game. You can't have it without them. helping them learn the art and craft should be at least as important to WotC as providing players with piles upon piles of character options. There's a thread of the main page now celebrating the contribution of Jannelle Jaquas and among her most beloved works is The Campaign Sourcebook and Catacomb Guide. That book is beloved for a reason.

People who have been playing the game for decades (like me) should not just dismiss new GMs and assume they'll "pick it up."

In what way, exactly, are the world-building tools provided by prior editions of the game no longer relevant? Or other fantasy games, for that matter. You have the 5E MM to pull monsters from. Along with various monsters from various books. I’m not talking about stats and hit points. But world-building. So in what way is, say, the Campaign Sourcebook & Catacomb Guide or the Creative Campaigning book no longer useful resources?

 

[Parmandur]

Disagree. The less WotC taints D&D with MtG the better. They should be completely separate and hermetically sealed off from each other.

Genie is already out of the bottle, and I doubt it will ever go back now that they know it makes money.

 

[Malmuria]

Probably the best thing that wotc did along these lines is the open gaming license (along with making material from older editions available). You can buy level up, 3rd party monster and treasure books, and use online world building tools, all without buying a single thing from wotc. I guess when it comes to either lore or mechanics people like "official" content, though.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Of course mars and earth are different than earth and mirror earth....but if I can travel there, and interact, there is no practical difference at all.

Of course there is a practical difference, not that “practical” is the only valid kind of difference. The actual laws of nature are different between settings. The spells that work based on being on the same plane of existence work differently. You cannot physically traverse space to get to Eberron in 3.5 or 4e, but you can in 5e. These are enormous differences.

One makes it so you can get there with a teleport spell, the other requires a good deal more of you, potentially requiring the DM to even allow it at all even if you become gods, but at least requires planeshift, which in turn requires an object from there.

But beyond the mundane travel considerations, it matters what the nature of the universe is. I could not have run my last session the way I did if I accepted this new canon for my Eberron game, because the session relied heavily on the basic nature of the cosmic orrery of the planes.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Of course there is a practical difference, not that “practical” is the only valid kind of difference. The actual laws of nature are different between settings. The spells that work based on being on the same plane of existence work differently. You cannot physically traverse space to get to Eberron in 3.5 or 4e, but you can in 5e. These are enormous differences.

One makes it so you can get there with a teleport spell, the other requires a good deal more of you, potentially requiring the DM to even allow it at all even if you become gods, but at least requires planeshift, which in turn requires an object from there.

Both Teleport and Plane Shift are 7th level spells - and you need to know something about where you're teleporting to. I don't see this as a meaningful difference in difficulty.

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

Both Teleport and Plane Shift are 7th level spells - and you need to know something about where you're teleporting to. I don't see this as a meaningful difference in difficulty.

Teleport from Toril to Oerth (assuming it's possible - don't know the rules for moving between crystal spheres) and you can be reasonably sure that the baseline rules of reality are more or less consistent between both worlds.

Plane Shift from Toril to the Plane of Air and gravity pulls you in whichever direction you think is down.

 

[Zaukrie]

Of course there is a practical difference, not that “practical” is the only valid kind of difference. The actual laws of nature are different between settings. The spells that work based on being on the same plane of existence work differently. You cannot physically traverse space to get to Eberron in 3.5 or 4e, but you can in 5e. These are enormous differences.

One makes it so you can get there with a teleport spell, the other requires a good deal more of you, potentially requiring the DM to even allow it at all even if you become gods, but at least requires planeshift, which in turn requires an object from there.

But beyond the mundane travel considerations, it matters what the nature of the universe is. I could not have run my last session the way I did if I accepted this new canon for my Eberron game, because the session relied heavily on the basic nature of the cosmic orrery of the planes.

My last comment on this, as clearly we won't agree....but I can go to lots of planes and places with differences in gods, how magic works, etc. in any edition of the game, regardless of how the multiverse is set up.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Genie is already out of the bottle, and I doubt it will ever go back now that they know it makes money.

And it’s not like it’s a weird thing to do.

Mtg planes are trek style multiverse universes, more or less. Great Wherl is just one more, in that model.