D&D (2024) DMG Chapter Preview: James Wyatt Talks Cosmology

What is the practical difference between them being regions planes between the main elemental planes and them being their own planes between the elemental planes?
Nothing about the Inner Planes is "practical" per se. ;)

For my money, that they brought back the language of "para-elemental planes" is just an interesting indication of shifts in the politics of how WotC handled older editions material this go around: a lot less walking om eggshells, more inclusive of a wider expression of D&D history (including 4E-isms, like in the Feywild and Shadowfell), from the cartoon and the action figures right on down the line. A more confident presentation of the history of the game, less trying to appease opposing "factions" of fans.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't think "Eberron is a seperate cosmos" really holds weight in the DMG.

Both ideas are basically covered on the first page of the chapter, which states that the Great Wheel is just a theoretical model, which may or may not reflect anything "real" per se since the way people travel between Planes is through portals. The "spatial" relationship is philosophical.

As such. There is a section for "Other Configurations" that includes the 4E World Axis w/ Elemental Chaosand the Great Orrey scheme (though neither are called out by name):

"For your campaign, you can use a different model of the planes. Here are several examples:

  • "Planes situated among the roots and branches of a great cosmic tree (literally or figuratively)"
  • "Material Realms suspended between two other realities: the astral realms (the Astral Plane and the Outer Planes) above and the Elemental Realms (the Inner Planes) below"
  • "A cosmology with fewer planes: a Material Plane; the Transitive Planes; a single undifferentiated Elemental Plane, where all four elements churn in chaos; an Overheaven where good deities and Celestials dwell; and an Underworld, where evil deities and Fiends reside"
  • "Planes arranged in a complex system of orbits, with planes exerting greater influence on the Material Plane the closer they draw to it"
I like the idea that the various cosmological models are actual models in-universe, and the reality is unproven and possibly unprovable. I do wish the focus wasn’t so solidly on spatial relationships, since as noted, they aren’t typically reached by traveling from one place to another, but rather by portals or whatever planeshifting is.
 

Nothing about the Inner Planes is "practical" per se. ;)
What I mean is, how does this change manifest in play? What would a group of adventurers traveling the planes experience differently in this model vs. the 2014 model? Or is this a semantic distinction without meaningful gameplay difference?
 

What I mean is, how does this change manifest in play? What would a group of adventurers traveling the planes experience differently in this model vs. the 2014 model? Or is this a semantic distinction without meaningful gameplay difference?
From my reading, semantics. However, a culturally significant semantic element for the culture of D&D, since the term "para-elemental" has been off-limits as far as WotC is concerned since the 90s.
 

I like the idea that the various cosmological models are actual models in-universe, and the reality is unproven and possibly unprovable. I do wish the focus wasn’t so solidly on spatial relationships, since as noted, they aren’t typically reached by traveling from one place to another, but rather by portals or whatever planeshifting is.

In my campaign there are weak spots, particularly between the prime material (Midgard) and the Feywild (Alfheim) and the Shadowfell (Niflheim) where people can sometimes slip between realms. Not a good idea to fall asleep in that fairy circle! Deep underground there are week spots where you can cross into the underdark (Svartleheim). Then again, I also limit planeshift to opening a path on Yggdrasil that leads to the desired plane of existence, if you can get there. You can't get to Asgard without getting past Heimdall for example.

Does it work that way because people believe it works that way or is it an accurate depiction? 🤷‍♂️
 



Aesthetically, I think all of the paraelementals should be damage types.

I wouldnt worry about Positive or Negative, since any element or damage can be used positively or negatively. Negative is more about imbalance that endangers life, while positive promotes life and healing.

Something like:

AIR (radiant) FIRE (acid) EARTH (cold) WATER (lightning-thunder)
 

What is the practical difference between them being regions planes between the main elemental planes and them being their own planes between the elemental planes?
In my headcanon, there is only one "plane", the Elemental Chaos, and the other Elemental Planes are regions where an element prevails with some stability, and these regions move and drift and can overlap each other.

I was leaning and now decided, the elemental plane is "inside" the Material Plane, and reflects what is going on in the Material Plane.

Amazingly, the 2024 description has a kind of Border elemental and Deep elemental, where the Border does cohere with the material plane while the Deep is an immersion within the element.
 
Last edited:

In my campaign there are weak spots, particularly between the prime material (Midgard) and the Feywild (Alfheim) and the Shadowfell (Niflheim) where people can sometimes slip between realms. Not a good idea to fall asleep in that fairy circle! Deep underground there are week spots where you can cross into the underdark (Svartleheim). Then again, I also limit planeshift to opening a path on Yggdrasil that leads to the desired plane of existence, if you can get there. You can't get to Asgard without getting past Heimdall for example.

Does it work that way because people believe it works that way or is it an accurate depiction? 🤷‍♂️
What planes in D&D did you use to represent the remaining 5 worlds in your campaign setting?
 

Remove ads

Top