D&D 5E 4E Cosmology

[Yaarel]

It's a work of fiction, written around 20 years ago for some purpose then.

The conversation of this thread, as I understand it, is about making sense of some further things written about 10 years ago for the 5e D&D game. That more recent stuff tells us (again, as I understand it) that these different cosmological structures are "ways of perceiving/interpreting" the planes.

So the notion that plane shift cannot be used to travel directly from one Outer Plane to another is something that is - according to the more recent work - a "way of perceiving/interpreting" the planes. And how might it be such? I've offered one answer - because a plane traveller's beliefs/preconceptions affect how their spells, their Astral travel, etc function.

When later products mention the Tree cosmology it becomes necessary to sort thru what earlier editions of D&D say about the Tree.


However, I just noticed, the 2024 Dungeon Masters Guide no longer refers to the Tree cosmology (page 173). The Wheel is default, and all other "configurations" are unofficial.

"The Great Wheel. The default D&D cosmology ... visualizes [the planes] as a group of concentric wheels."

Still, because the method of traveling is thru "portals", the actual "distances" and "locations" is only a model of convenience. For the Wheel, placing Positivity and Good "up", and Negativity and Evil "down", are obviously nonliteral. That "Law" is on the left side, and "Chaos" on the right side, is likewise nonliteral. It is just a convenient way to depict the planes and signify how Law and Chaos, Good and Evil, are in opposite directions sotospeak.

"Since the primary way of traveling from plane to plane is through magical portals, the spatial relationship between different planes is largely theoretical."

So, there are legitimate alternative models to map out the multiverse.


Despite other models to map out the multiverse are possible for the default cosmology, the 2024 DMs Guide avoids mentioning the Forgotten Realms Tree as one of them.

What the 2024 DMs Guide carefully says is the following:

"Other Configurations. 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)." Etcetera.

Here the configuration is for any kind of tree, whether Norse Yggdrasill, Rabbinic Ets Khaim, or Forgotten Realms Tree. The DMs Guide actually avoids mentioning the Forgotten Realms Tree.

A DM can use other kinds of multiverses, such as Magic The Gathering or one where most of the default planes simply dont exist. But these are not the "default" and are only "for your campaign".

Notably, the Forgotten Realms Tree and the Eberron Orrery and the 4e Axis are no longer an official part of the D&D multiverse.


Nevertheless, the default Wheel itself is officially only a "theoretical" model. One can still use a different model for the default cosmology, in a way that doesnt deny the rest of the default Wheel.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

There is no binary. The assumption of a binary is incorrect.

The Tree makes "difficult" what what is easy and unrestricted in Wheel and Axis.

...

Either it is difficult, or it is not. Is that acceptable?

Because either the restriction is there, or it isn't. I don't understand how that is such a difficult thing.

Nevertheless, the default Wheel itself is officially only a "theoretical" model. One can still use a different model for the default cosmology, in a way that doesnt deny the rest of the default Wheel.

"Doesn't deny the rest" still means it denies part, which has been my point this entire time. You can't just say that the whole kit and caboodle is equally as valid as any other--because it makes claims that either are true, or aren't.

Notably, the Forgotten Realms Tree and the Eberron Orrery and the 4e Axis are no longer an official part of the D&D multiverse.

Then that's all I've been asking for an admission of, this entire time. The admission that, officially, no other model--not the World Tree, not the World Axis, not the Eberron Orrery--can be said to correctly describe the D&D cosmology. Only the Great Wheel actually works for that cosmology, and the Great Wheel makes claims that directly contradict all three of those other models.

Whether or not perception is central, whether or not it is possible for someone to phrase some claims reflexively, whether or not there's been retcons or active modification of the cosmology, or whatever else: the only way for all of these cosmologies to be actually equal in truth content is for there to not actually BE any "truth" at all, just whatever beliefs or perceptions a being projects onto reality, which isn't an epistemological/metaphysical framework I find even remotely interesting or productive, since (as noted) that makes change or communication functionally impossible. If you believe someone said "Your mom!" when they believe they said "Thank you!", both of you are somehow right.

Officially, D&D's reality is the Great Wheel. If you decide to do differently, awesome, they can't stop you. But they also won't lift a finger to help you, all while stuffing the game full of resources and adventures and monsters etc., etc. that presuppose the Great Wheel and only the Great Wheel.

It just flat isn't the case that all cosmologies are officially on equal footing. The Great Wheel is clearly the "correct" cosmology as far as the books are concerned; everything else is merely a in-varying-degrees-mistaken alternative. Nobody can force any DM to stick to the official, "correct" cosmology, but any work they produce will make your life harder, not easier, if you don't use the Great Wheel.

Edit: For example, consider this bit you said above.

The Tree doesnt reasonably reflect observable reality of the multiverse.

The Tree only reflects the passageways that are permitted to and from Toril.

The rest of the multiverse is censored from the observers of Toril.

The Tree cosmology acknowledges the existence of places beyond the Tree, except it is difficult to bypass the restrictions that prevent casters from arriving there.

This would mean Toril is functionally cut off from the rest of the multiverse, yes? They're two different, disconnected patches.

Meaning it isn't correct to say that the World Tree is comparably true to the Great Wheel or whatever else. The World Tree is only true of Toril's space, and the Great Wheel is true of some other space (perhaps even all other space!), and the two are cut off from each other. Meaning, in places inaccessible to the World Tree, the World Tree's model is false, and in places accessible to the World Tree, the Great Wheel is false. They can't both be true of the same thing (the same "space" within the multiverse), in the same sense, at the same time.

The World Tree would be correct, and exclude other models, for someone talking about Toril and its cosmological space. Some other theory would be true (possibly the Great Wheel, possibly something else) in a region that isn't Toril and its cosmological space.

 

[Yaarel]

...

Either it is difficult, or it is not. Is that acceptable?

Because either the restriction is there, or it isn't. I don't understand how that is such a difficult thing.

The restriction is always there, but it isnt absolute. There is leakage. The Tree prevents access to the rest of the multiverse, but not absolutely. One can find ways to get from Toril to the rest of the Wheel, but it is "difficult".

"Doesn't deny the rest" still means it denies part, which has been my point this entire time. You can't just say that the whole kit and caboodle is equally as valid as any other--because it makes claims that either are true, or aren't.

There is a blurriness in between yes and no. Because the rest of the multiverse does exist but is "difficult" to get to.

Note, the author of the Forgotten Realms Tree cosmology is aware of the 1e-2e Wheel (Rectangle) cosmology by Gygax, but he chooses to effectively screen much of it out.

Then that's all I've been asking for an admission of, this entire time. The admission that, officially, no other model--not the World Tree, not the World Axis, not the Eberron Orrery--can be said to correctly describe the D&D cosmology. Only the Great Wheel actually works for that cosmology, and the Great Wheel makes claims that directly contradict all three of those other models.

That does appear to be the official D&D as of 2024. The Wheel is officially default cosmology. Anything else is unofficial.

This position seems wise, because it means it no longer necessary to reconcile conflictive configurations and no longer requires mental gymnastics (such as we are doing).

Whether or not perception is central, whether or not it is possible for someone to phrase some claims reflexively, whether or not there's been retcons or active modification of the cosmology, or whatever else: the only way for all of these cosmologies to be actually equal in truth content is for there to not actually BE any "truth" at all, just whatever beliefs or perceptions a being projects onto reality, which isn't an epistemological/metaphysical framework I find even remotely interesting or productive, since (as noted) that makes change or communication functionally impossible. If you believe someone said "Your mom!" when they believe they said "Thank you!", both of you are somehow right.

Officially, D&D's reality is the Great Wheel. If you decide to do differently, awesome, they can't stop you. But they also won't lift a finger to help you, all while stuffing the game full of resources and adventures and monsters etc., etc. that presuppose the Great Wheel and only the Great Wheel.

It just flat isn't the case that all cosmologies are officially on equal footing. The Great Wheel is clearly the "correct" cosmology as far as the books are concerned; everything else is merely a in-varying-degrees-mistaken alternative. Nobody can force any DM to stick to the official, "correct" cosmology, but any work they produce will make your life harder, not easier, if you don't use the Great Wheel.

Yeah. In 2024, the Wheel is it.

Edit: For example, consider this bit you said above.

This would mean Toril is functionally cut off from the rest of the multiverse, yes? They're two different, disconnected patches.

Meaning it isn't correct to say that the World Tree is comparably true to the Great Wheel or whatever else. The World Tree is only true of Toril's space, and the Great Wheel is true of some other space (perhaps even all other space!), and the two are cut off from each other. Meaning, in places inaccessible to the World Tree, the World Tree's model is false, and in places accessible to the World Tree, the Great Wheel is false. They can't both be true of the same thing (the same "space" within the multiverse), in the same sense, at the same time.

The World Tree would be correct, and exclude other models, for someone talking about Toril and its cosmological space. Some other theory would be true (possibly the Great Wheel, possibly something else) in a region that isn't Toril and its cosmological space.

The Tree is "cut off" from the rest of the Wheel. But not absolutely. There is some leakage. The plane traveler from Toril can find ways to access the Wheel, but it is "difficult".

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Noether’s Theorem merely shows that the maths works for the maths. It doesn’t prove that the maths tells us anything about reality. That is simply a matter of faith. The clue is in the word “theorem”. None of the practicing scientists I have worked with it have professed that faith, although I have heard it from high school level science teachers.

And the point is there is no way to prove that Physical laws are not derived by pure luck - “luck” meaning something we don’t understand and haven’t thought of.

But even if you treat Noether's Theorem as a proof, it is possible that aliens on a distant planet might derive mathematics that is equivalent to our own, but looks very different, in the same way that the World Tree looks different to the Great Wheel.

The human brain was not designed to comprehend the universe, it is pure hubris to suppose it is capable of doing so, any more than the brain of any other animal is. That’s why so many scientists have said variants on:

“The Universe Is Not Only Queerer Than We Suppose, But Queerer Than We Can Suppose”​

Yeah, I do hold a degree in Math... Also reasonably educated on modern physics. Without entering into a vast digression, Noether's has been used as a tool to DISCOVER symmetries/conservation laws, not to explain them. We then went out to the real world, with physical instruments and observed that the predicted relations actually held.

Math doesn't explain why things are, nothing does that. It simply shows us structure, relations which hold, and gives us proven tools which actually work. Sure, some alien, or the mathematician down the street, can invent some other model. That's irrelevant, all these models, the successful ones, invariably turn out to be restatements of each other. Just like the Hamiltonian Mechanics is exactly equivalent to Newtonian Mechanics, though it can be more tractable in many cases.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Nothing wrong with philosophy, but it’s not for telling you what reality is (and science can’t do that either) nor is it based on observation (it becomes sociology if you examine human behaviour by observation).

Actually this is wrong. While many areas of philosophy might deal with fairly abstract or subjective areas of human experience, much of our physics, which has incredible proven predictive power, is utterly dependent on specific philosophical propositions. I point out the law of probability distribution, the principle of the identity of indistinguishables (QM is built on this, explicitly), and Noether's Theorem. These are placing fundamental constraints on reality and form a proof of sorts that ANY logically consistent reality whatsoever must comply with them.

Again, you can assert that logic is nonsense, but then you have no explanation for why science actually works! At this point we arrive at basic rules of the road for any reasoning to function, such as the Law of Parsimony. Failure to apply that destroys any possible value in having a discussion at all.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Why is that a problem?

Utility! Describe to me the gameplay which happens when a party of characters arrives at a place where half of them believe X and half of them believe not-X. No coherent fiction can proceed from this! All philosophical considerations aside, it just doesn't work!

I'm fine with the idea that various characters have different ideas about the cosmos, and none of them may be entirely correct, but every specific instance of play needs a fiction.

 

[Hexmage-EN]

Random thought I just had: Where is Abeir in the cosmology?

 

[TwoSix]

Random thought I just had: Where is Abeir in the cosmology?

We don't talk about Abeir, oh no no no...

We don't talk about Abeir.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Random thought I just had: Where is Abeir in the cosmology?

prime material plane same solar system as toril just counter earth like

 

[SkidAce]

I can see if Abeir was in another dimension and it "came back".

But how would being its own planet in a separate orbit make coming back possible?