WotC WotC needs an Elon Musk

[AnotherGuy]

I still prefer 4E's cosmos, and use it whenever the topic comes up in my games. The relentless subdividing of planes in earlier editions just feels like pointless categorization to me. You can still have whatever adventures you want in "the ice plane" in the Elemental Chaos, you're just exploring an area with a particularly large affinity to ice.

I may be an outlier but I enjoy all the various cosmological lore from each of the editions (2e-5e). I would gladly pick up a book which covered them all. I'm like Astinus/Gilean, everything should be recorded and preserved.

 

[BrokenTwin]

I may be an outlier but I enjoy all the various cosmological lore from each of the editions (2e-5e). I would gladly pick up a book which covered them all. I'm like Astinus/Gilean, everything should be recorded and preserved.

Having a big book of alternate planar setups would be fantastic! Would be a great GM tool for building adventures or creating your own setting.

Ultimately, I'm of the preference of different settings having their own planar makeup that works best for that individual setting. Canon-welding them all into using the same planar system is great as a option for those that want to do setting-hopping adventures, but making it the default homogenizes the settings together in ways that really doesn't work for the default assumptions/lore/themes of some settings.

 

[Maxperson]

What do you mean they "explain the undead" or they "explain radiant damage"? You know that many, many, many things could possibly explain the Undead, right? In fact, there are even undead that don't connect to negative energy at all.

And the Shadowfell can be the origin of Undead, in fact, it is. You don't need an entire plane of existence to be full of the energy that undead use. And radiant damage is caused by being hit by divine energy, or light energy. There isn't a plane of Thunderous energy to explain thunder damage, or a plane of slashing energy to explain slashing damage, why do we need a plane of positive energy to explain radiant damage?

As an aside, there used to be a plane for thunder. The quasielemental plane of lightning. Anyway, on to the answer.

The inner planes are the building blocks for all of the other planes. Shadowfell could not exist without the negative plane providing a lot of what builds it. Positive and negative energy provide the basis for a lot of what goes into the upper and lower planes, as well as planes like Shadowfell. Taking out the positive and negative planes takes a chunk out of the foundations of all the rest of the multiverse.

So, when I strike flint and steel I'm opening a portal to a new plane of existence? When lightning (an element of Air) strikes wood, does THAT open a portal between dimensions to the plane of fire? Why does wood (an earth element combined with a water element) being struck by lightning (an air element) create fire, but fire doesn't create any elements of stone or water?

Do you know what potential means? The ability to create fire(the potential of fire) was part of what the plane of fire contributed to the plane. I used the word potential for a reason.

 

[Incenjucar]

It isn't difficult to grasp, it just is difficult to CARE.

Let's just compare for a second. The 4e model had seven major parts to their cosmology. The Prime, The Ethereal, The Astral Sea, The Elemental Chaos, The Abyss, The Feywild, The Shadowfell. There were 19 major Divine Realms in the Astral Sea, including the Nine Hells (as one) and 11 major Elemental holds. These were all defined as being the realm of a specific being. This realms belongs to this god, this hold belongs to this titan, and on down the line. This would mean there are at max, 37 locations, with the Infinite Abyss being a problem child.



2e/3e cosmology? Well, I could say that it has ONLY 25 major parts... but even that isn't fully accurate. You have the prime, the etheral, the astral, Then the Four elemental planes... except there are six elemental planes, because Positive and Negative, and then you have the four Para-elemental planes (Magma, Smoke, Ice, Ooze) and then eight Quasi-Elemental PLanes (Lightning, Radiance, Mineral, Steam, Vaccuum, Ash, Dust, Salt). Then you have the Outlands and sigil, and the 16 outer planes.... except those 16 planes are divided into 53! different sections.

So, where maxing the 4e model gives you 37 locations, maxing the 2e/3e version gives you 76. It is double. And it isn't like it is difficult to understand, because it is box filling. Six elemental planes, then the four borders between the main four planes, then the eight edges that touch the positive and negative. It is easy to understand the boxes. It is far more difficult to try and make Earth, Earth and Water, Earth and Fire, Earth and Positive, Earth and Negative actually interesting to adventure in. And then do the same for Air, and then do the same for Fire, and... Seriously, it is just excessive. Same with the outer planes, You have good, then good and a little law, the law and good, then law and a little good, then good and a little chaos then good and chaos, the chaos and a little good. And sure, I can draw the model and explain how each subdivision fills the checklist, but it doesn't make for good adventures.

It isn't the instinct to make a good location for storytelling, it is the instinct to categorize and break down in compulsive detail every possible mixture of things.

It's fine that you don't care for it. I find the quasi-elemental planes inspiring, which is why I have an an OGL thing I'm dabbling with that specifically incorporates them, based on an idea that I had multiple editions ago. I'm not going to claim that grid-filling is always the best design, but you can find some amazing things if you do fill out the grid. Back in 4E I built 4 unique and flavorful elemental classes based on filling the role grid.

If you cannot make good adventures using a larger multi-verse, use a smaller one. You can certainly advocate for a smaller one, too. But whatever you find difficult about it is hardly universal. It makes for good adventures for other people.

 

[FrozenNorth]

If you cannot make good adventures using a larger multi-verse, use a smaller one. You can certainly advocate for a smaller one, too. But whatever you find difficult about it is hardly universal. It makes for good adventures for other people.

Since you and a couple of other people are arguing for the addition of quasi-elemental planes to 5e, doesn’t that argument work for virtually everything?

I want the addition of food-based subclasses! Where’s the Order of the Custard Oath for paladins?

I want to bring back monster level adjustments. Where’s my gorgon PC WotC?

At some level, WotC needs to make some calls about what is likely to sell enough books to recoup costs, and I don’t think an update to the Manual of the planes will do so.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Since you and a couple of other people are arguing for the addition of quasi-elemental planes to 5e, doesn’t that argument work for virtually everything?

I want the addition of food-based subclasses! Where’s the Order of the Custard Oath for paladins?

I want to bring back monster level adjustments. Where’s my gorgon PC WotC?

At some level, WotC needs to make some calls about what is likely to sell enough books to recoup costs, and I don’t think an update to the Manual of the planes will do so.

Absolutely. We just disagree on where that call should be made.

 

[Faolyn]

At some level, WotC needs to make some calls about what is likely to sell enough books to recoup costs, and I don’t think an update to the Manual of the planes will do so.

An updated MotP doesn't have to be just the Great Wheel, though. It could easily be a description of several different types of cosmos.

 

[Micah Sweet]

An updated MotP doesn't have to be just the Great Wheel, though. It could easily be a description of several different types of cosmos.

The 3e version definitely had some alternative cosmological ideas in it. More ideas equals more sources of inspiration.

 

[Incenjucar]

Since you and a couple of other people are arguing for the addition of quasi-elemental planes to 5e, doesn’t that argument work for virtually everything?

I want the addition of food-based subclasses! Where’s the Order of the Custard Oath for paladins?

I want to bring back monster level adjustments. Where’s my gorgon PC WotC?

At some level, WotC needs to make some calls about what is likely to sell enough books to recoup costs, and I don’t think an update to the Manual of the planes will do so.

I've never run a game that involved Yggdrasil, Mystra, or flying carpets, so you can remove those too.

That said I did actually make a half-medusa species in 2E when I was a youngster, and I'm sure there have been food-based PC options in Dragon Magazine. Did you know there was a whole bunch of candy golems? Molten nougat attacks!

I don't think either the inclusion or exclusion of the quasi-elemental planes will have any impact on sales or profits. It might add thirty minutes of extra effort for an artist maybe.

 

[Remathilis]

The feywild is interesting, but isn't even close to being what the positive plane is and the plane of Shadow(shadowfell) isn't even close to what the negative plane is. The positive and negative planes serve a function, even if no one ever goes there.

Oh, I don't think the feywild or shadowfell should replace the Pep or Nep. I just don't think the pep and nep warrant more than a paragraph explaining they exist as a source of positive and negative energy. From a metaphysical perspective, they serve a role. From a game-play perspective, they are useless to detail. I find the feywild and shadowfell more interesting to detail and adventure in.