WotC WotC needs an Elon Musk

[Chaosmancer]

Nah, for the purposes of planescape they should pick lane and then do the lip service thing for the "other cosmologies". They're making a setting, it's better to have some sort of consistency rather than wasting page space on "well that was one cosmology, here's another, we're also going to devote a bunch more page space to a 3rd option..."

People can still make their own cosmologies and tie in planescape, but the actual setting books should have some sort of consistency.

Funny, I was looking at this book called The Dungeon Masters Guide, not The Planescape Setting Book. Why do you think the DMG should be set in Planescape and nowhere else?

 

[Chaosmancer]

So the Great Wheel is the official cosmology for 5e.

So what?

So I'd actually like them to provide different models as options for the default. That's it. That's my end goal. More options to accommodate more people.

Instead, I am being barraged by how the other models are totally supported, because they just call the same places different names, while ignoring how that fundamentally does not work.

Of course not. They've made the decision as to what the official cosmology is. Anything else is unofficial, even if it was at one time official in a different edition.

Thank you. Seems hard to get Maxperson to acknowledge that.

Between forty-ish and fifteen-ish years ago I did the work to create my own cosmology for my various campaigns, loosely based on but not the same as the Great Wheel. It's just a homebrew, and I've no reason whatsoever to expect WotC to adopt it into the official game nor do I have sound footing to complain about inequality of ideas.

That's the same boat you're in now. The World Axis, though called out here and there in 5e as an alternate example of a cosmology, now carries just as much official weight as my homebrew.

Yes, and I'd like to have more options for the default. That is my entire point, which then involved multiple pages of me being told that the World Axis is treated 100% equally compared to the Great Wheel, because you just change the names and pretend it works.

If we are going to claim that all Cosmologies are equally valid and equally supported, then I'd like to see at least one other cosmology detailed and supported in the DMG. Right now, there is one cosmology that is treated as true, and a few names thrown out to make it seem like the others actually exist.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So I'd actually like them to provide different models as options for the default. That's it. That's my end goal. More options to accommodate more people.

Instead, I am being barraged by how the other models are totally supported, because they just call the same places different names, while ignoring how that fundamentally does not work.



Thank you. Seems hard to get Maxperson to acknowledge that.



Yes, and I'd like to have more options for the default. That is my entire point, which then involved multiple pages of me being told that the World Axis is treated 100% equally compared to the Great Wheel, because you just change the names and pretend it works.

If we are going to claim that all Cosmologies are equally valid and equally supported, then I'd like to see at least one other cosmology detailed and supported in the DMG. Right now, there is one cosmology that is treated as true, and a few names thrown out to make it seem like the others actually exist.

What you appear to be asking for is for there not to be a default, just several equally weighted options. That's a nice goal, but it seems unrealistic to me in light of WotC's, "the setting is the Multiverse" take. Can't really do that unless you define what the Multiverse is, which means you have to have a default.

But who knows? Maybe they'll go back to the World Axis as the default. The designers do seem rather fond of it.

 

[Alzrius]

Right, but we can acknowledge that sexual assault or sadistic torture are on a different level

And how would you articulate the difference in those levels with regard to why one thing that makes some people extremely upset warrants being excluded from the published material, and another doesn't?

 

[Micah Sweet]

And how would you articulate the difference in those levels with regard to why one thing that makes some people extremely upset warrants being excluded from the published material, and another doesn't?

Volume I would say. There are far more people disturbed by SA than by the presence of spiders.

 

[Alzrius]

Volume I would say. There are far more people disturbed by SA than by the presence of spiders.

So it's just a matter of how many people are upset by something? In that case, how many people have to be upset by it to warrant its exclusion? For that matter, how do you tell someone "sorry, not enough people are bothered by this to warrant us taking your pain into consideration"?

 

[Umbran]

Which I imagine works just fine, without anyone wanting spiders and spider-themed monsters removed from the game altogether.

Spiders are a thing that one might include in a game, until you find out that you have someone seriously impacted by them at the table. Arachnophobia isn't all that common, after all.

Sexual assault, and the threat thereof, is an issue for every woman in the country, and a surprising number of men. That means that it is an element that you probably exclude from the game until you find out that you have nobody at the table for whom it is a problem.

That means it isn't something that should appear in the core materials, and probably ought to be labeled with a warning if it cannot be excised from adventure products. You want to include it in your game, that's fine, but given the numbers, the publishers not using it seems wise.

 

[Alzrius]

Sexual assault, and the threat thereof, is an issue for every woman in the country, and a surprising number of men.

I think you meant "in the world" rather than "in the country."

 

[Umbran]

I think you meant "in the world" rather than "in the country."

I know I could easily find reliable statistics for the USA, if challenged, and those are sufficient for the point. I believe it is also bad elsewhere, but didn't want to presume to engage in the argument about nations other than my own.

Also, WotC is an American publisher, and I don't want to suggest that other markets are nearly as influential on WotC's choices.

If we agree on it being a huge problem, then how Spiders and SA are not equivalent should be obvious to all of us, yes?

 

[Alzrius]

I know I could easily find reliable statistics for the USA, if challenged, and those are sufficient for the point. I believe it is also bad elsewhere, but didn't want to presume to engage in the argument about nations other than my own.

Also, WotC is an American publisher, and I don't want to suggest that other markets are nearly as influential on WotC's choices.

Well, I'm fairly confident that you could have posited that sexual assault was a problem in other countries, and it would also have been sufficient for your point, even if you don't live in those other nations.

If we agree on it being a huge problem, then how Spiders and SA are not equivalent should be obvious to all of us, yes?

Just because something's obvious doesn't mean it's not worthy of closer examination, let alone more discussion, as to its why's and how's. Just ask any physicist.