D&D 5E 4E Cosmology

[Mind of tempest]

Most people in D&D can't do this though. A powerful spellcaster can tell you that he spoke with the gods, but you personally have no way of verifying the truth of such statements, you have to take them on faith.

a powerful spellcaster can build a portal to it, it is like going to the nether in Minecraft not exactly difficult if some ones else can build the infrastructure

 

[occam]

It is, quite literally, a matter of empirical fact whether the Great Wheel is true or false. That's one of the biggest things I dislike about it. It isn't allegorical, metaphorical, or metaphysical. It isn't just one plausible theory amongst many with muddy evidence. It makes explicit, specific claims about the nature of the universe and those claims not only can be verified, they are explicitly so in any setting that has signed up for it. The Great Wheel is hegemonic; it excludes any planar cosmology that disagrees with it. That's why it had to absorb and implement the Feywild and convert the Plane of Shadow into the Shadowfell; it would deny the existence of those planes if they weren't incorporated into the structure.

Let me preface this by saying: I'm not trying to get anyone to like the Great Wheel or any other cosmological model that they don't already like. I have no interest in trying to "prove" that any model is somehow superior to any other.

And I believe I understand your objections to the Great Wheel quoted above. However... aren't the same objections true of any other defined D&D cosmology? Aren't various aspects of the World Axis, Eberron's planes, FR's World Tree (in the temporary conception that it wasn't actually another view of the Great Wheel), etc. also verifiable by D&D characters? Couldn't a D&D character with access to sufficient relevant data (i.e. the kind of data reasonably available to higher-level D&D PCs given standard class and spell availability) objectively discern which cosmology was correct for the universe/multiverse they inhabit?

(Note that I'm setting aside the case where no one has sufficient capability to learn about their multiverse's cosmic structure. A setting where "there might be a cosmological structure, but no one has the ability to learn anything significant and real about it so they have to come up with their own ideas and rely on faith" is fine, but beside the point of this post.)

I guess I'm wondering, based on your post, if you're opposed to use of the Great Wheel specifically for the reasons you cited, or to defined cosmologies in general.

 

[occam]

The thing that most Workd Axis fans like about it is that every plane is highly focused on being a gameable play space. The Shadowfell and the Feywild are mirrors of the material plane, so while you may face different obstacles there than you would on the material plane, their spaces are essentially just as navigable as the material plane. Instead of the elemental planes (which are typically depicted as composed primarily of their respective elements, making them almost completely impossible to navigate, not to mention pretty devoid of interesting interactable features), you have the elemental chaos. As originally conceived, the elemental chaos is a constantly changing place where all of the elements interact, combine, annihilate, and recombine. Adventures within the elemental chaos take place in short-lived pockets of relative stability, where the elements are locally and temporarily in a stable enough balance as to be essentially as navigable as the material plane. Instead of the outer planes, you have the astral sea, which can be “sailed” kind of spelljammer style, to reach “islands” that, once again, can be navigated and explored. Since these astral domains are not beholden to exemplifying particular alignments, there is no limit to their number, or to what adventures might be had there; they can be dynamic places where interesting conflicts happen, instead of static places of perfect goodness, order, evil, or disorder.

It should be noted that all of these elements exist in 5e's version of the Great Wheel as well.

Also, I don't want to keep harping on this, but I think a lot of folks are stuck on a proto-version of the Great Wheel concept as discussed in early 1e, when it was still in development. By the time of Planescape in 2e, it was absolutely clear that every plane could be a "gameable play space", and that the Elemental Planes were not "completely impossible to navigate" or "devoid of interesting interactable features".

 

[occam]

For all the crap that 4e got about "grid-filling," which was highly exaggerated, it's incredible how those same people not only turn a blind eye but also offer apologetics for the blatant grid-filling that TSR did for the Great Wheel cosmology.

As stated earlier, the structure of the Great Wheel cosmology is largely driven by underlying fundamental concepts. You know, a lot like the universe that we ourselves live in. You may be surprised by just how much progress has been made in the scientific understanding of our universe by engaging in "grid-filling":

 

[Chemo]

Am I just weird? I'm 57 in March and this summer will mark my 50th year in D&D. I've hated the Great Wheel ever since I can remember. The shift in Cosmology and the addition of the Feywild and Shadowfell in 4e I thought was brilliant. I was disappointed when 5e went back to the Great Wheel model. I've kept 4th edition Cosmology In all my stuff and refuse to let it go. A couple of my players say I'm being a "Boomer" about it

What are people's thoughts on the current Cosmology In 5e? Do you make use of it or ignore it? Do you run successful adventures in it? Inquiring minds want to know!

I play 4e so I use the world axis cosmology of course, it is tidely organized and everything that exists in it has a clearly defined purpose (though I don't like that they included Sigil in it, it feels like it was tacked on just because it existed in previous editions so they had to include it, I remove it in my games).

The great wheel model is a giant mess that tries too hard to sound impressive but ends up being disappointing IMO.

Mod Edited for language.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

A lot of people tend to overlook the significant impact that 4e made not just by redefining the structure of the planes themselves, but grounding everything that makes D&D into its own defined universe. Monsters of every imaginable kind could be traced to an origin that not only made sense, but helped to further define the monster as it is most often presented in the game. Relationships between various aspects of the world, both physical and ideological, were made far more interesting and elaborate than where they sat on the symmetric table like some cosmic pizza. And conflicts incited beyond the mortal realms had greater influence in the themes played out in the real world through trials and tribulations we call "adventures".

For a different perspective, take a look at this writeup about The Manual of the Planes (4e) on DriveThru. The history of this product was researched and written by Shannon Appelcline, the editor-in-chief of RPGnet and the author of Designers & Dragons - a history of the roleplaying industry told one company at a time.

What a Difference an Edition Makes: World Views. D&D 4e massively changed D&D's worldview, and part of that was a revamped cosmology. The new World Axis had actually originated with the Forgotten Realms, which was planning a view of the heavens as early as 2005 or 2006. It was then co-opted by the SCRAMJET world design team for D&D 4e.

A new cosmology meant that D&D's classic Great Wheel was being thrown out. The main complaint? "Needless symmetry". The Great Wheel required planes for every alignment and every element… whether they were useful in games or not. The World Axis was instead built for "maximum playability", where there was "no 'dead' space". As the designers explained, the Great Wheel had contained good-aligned planes that were never used and elemental planes that were too deadly. Now there was the opportunity for adventure everywhere.

The World Axis also moved D&D's cosmology toward the "points of light" model that was at the heart of the new game. This was particularly obvious in Astral Sea, where goodly home bases were now points of light in a rugged, ruined environment… but the same model could be found in all the new planes of the D&D multiverse.

Also worth reading are the pair of Wizards Presents booklets that were released as previews before 4th Edition arrived. These were designer notes and perspectives from the individuals who were part of the team that created and developed 4th Edition, giving a lot of behind the scenes insights and perspectives of what they were doing and why they did it. Regarding the Planes:

To determine the physical and magical laws of the D&D world, we needed to take a step back and imagine the entire cosmology. Where does magic come from? What about the other sources of power that we wanted to clarify in the game? These discussions led to a re-imagining of the D&D cosmology...

The End of the Great Wheel
The cosmology that has defined the planes of the D&D multiverse for thirty years is a good example of symmetry that ultimately creates more problems than it solves. Not only is there a plane for every alignment, there's a plane between each alignment--seventeen Outer Planes that are supposed to reflect the characteristics of fine shades of alignment. There's not only a plane for each of the four classic elements, there's a Positive Energy Plane, a Negative Energy Plane, and a plane where each other plane meets--an unfortunate circumstance that has resulted in creatures such as ooze mephits.

The planes were there, so we had to invent creatures to fill them. Worse than the needless symmetry of it all, though, is the fact that many of those planes are virtually impossible to adventure in. Traversing a plane that's supposed to be an infinite three-dimensional space completely filled with elemental fire takes a lot of magical protection and fundamentally just doesn't sound fun. How do you reconcile that with the idea of the City of Brass, legendary home of the efreet? Why is there air in that city?

So our goals in defining a new cosmology were pretty straightforward.

• Don't bow to needless symmetry!
• Make the planes fun for adventure!

 

[Aldarc]

As stated earlier, the structure of the Great Wheel cosmology is largely driven by underlying fundamental concepts. You know, a lot like the universe that we ourselves live in. You may be surprised by just how much progress has been made in the scientific understanding of our universe by engaging in "grid-filling":

This is a weak argument. The underlying fundamental concept was simply grid-filling planes based on alignment and not trying to derive scientific understanding of our world. You are conflating a creative decision to grid-fill with a real world scientific endeavor for the sake of defending the Great Wheel.

 

[occam]

This is a weak argument. The underlying fundamental concept was simply grid-filling planes based on alignment and not trying to derive scientific understanding of our world. You are conflating a creative decision to grid-fill with a real world scientific endeavor for the sake of defending the Great Wheel.

I'm pointing out that if the real, actual Universe's structure is built on underlying symmetries, why is it offensive that a model of a fantasy multiverse might also be built that way?

 

[Aldarc]

I'm pointing out that if the real, actual Universe's structure is built on underlying symmetries, why is it offensive that a model of a fantasy multiverse might also be built that way?

I don't think that they are alike in comparison.

 

[dave2008]

Monsters of every imaginable kind could be traced to an origin that not only made sense, but helped to further define the monster as it is most often presented in the game.

I'm going to push back on this. While the 4e lore is some of my favorite D&D lore, and they tried to do what you said (generally), they did not always succeed.