D&D 5E D&D Lore Changes: Multiversal Focus & Fey Goblins of Prehistory

WotC's Jeremy Crawford revealed a couple of the lore changes in Monsters of the Multiverse.
  • The big shift is toward the multiverse as the game's main perspective rather than a specific setting. The game is shifting towards a multiversal focus, with a variety of worlds and settings.
  • Universe-spanning mythical story beats, such as deep lore on goblinoids going back to 1st Edition, and the gods they had before Maglubiyet. Prior to Magulbiyet unifying them, goblinoids were folk of the feywild in keeping with 'real-world' folklore.
  • Changelings aren't just Eberron, but they've been everywhere -- you just don't necessarily know it. Their origin is also in the realm of the fey.

 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Russ Morrissey

Russ Morrissey

Or it works more like what Paul Farquhar says. After all, there are multiple settings where the Feywild isn't a thing. It doesn't exist in Eberron, or Dragonlance, or Theros or Ravnica. So, either WoTC is doing something utterly terrible... or they are just presenting a single facet of the whole.

I guess I just don't understand why, when presented with two different equally plausible explanations, you and others insist on taking the version that is the least charitable and the most upsetting.

EDIT:




Ah, never mind, it seems we have reached an understanding.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////



And yet you refer to a universe as "milky way size" Yet the Milky way is only a mere 201,000 light years compared to the 93,000,000,000 light years of the actual observable universe (which of course, the actual universe could be larger than the observed universe)

So, you have already put forth a model that allows to a universe to be 462,686.56 times smaller than the actual universe. So, if your model allows for something to be over 450 THOUSAND times smaller, why can't it be another 201 thousand times smaller?

What makes 200,000 the magic number? What are you basing your claims on? Other than vague "I know science fiction better than you" claims?



You have already stated what to call a universe without stars, planets and galaxies? I haven't seen you make that statement, so would you mind repeating it?

Also point #4 is meaningless noise. I don't care that we don't know that the Heat Death model is accurate, it is an accepted model and the question is based on that model. Refusing to answer the question because other models exist is just avoiding the question.
Lately, WotC has had lot of ideas i don't like. It has unfortunately inclined me to treat them less charitably.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Rogerd1

Explorer
You have already stated what to call a universe without stars, planets and galaxies? I haven't seen you make that statement, so would you mind repeating it?

Also point #4 is meaningless noise. I don't care that we don't know that the Heat Death model is accurate, it is an accepted model and the question is based on that model. Refusing to answer the question because other models exist is just avoiding the question.
Yes I mentioned it in the post above actually, about dimensions and planes.

Not it isn't, as we lack any reference point or true understanding of what it would be like to base any real meaningful discussion upon it (edit I am referring to the big rip). This is like discussing the inside of a black hole, and whether it leads to some other dimension. Another example of this is why the galaxies are moving away from us at ever increasing velocities.

We simply do not know enough to form a cogent answer.

Edit: In fact the nearest we got to examining a universe full of dead stars was the Xeelee books. But unable to defeat the Photino Birds, they created Bolders Ring and fled into another multiverse.
 
Last edited:

Faolyn

(she/her)
Or it works more like what Paul Farquhar says. After all, there are multiple settings where the Feywild isn't a thing. It doesn't exist in Eberron, or Dragonlance, or Theros or Ravnica. So, either WoTC is doing something utterly terrible... or they are just presenting a single facet of the whole.
Eberron has Thelanis and Dragonlance apparently has something called Summerhome, and both seem to be the Feywild in all but name. And Magic: the Gathering has Eldraine, which just hasn't been converted to 5e in any way yet (that I know of).
 

Azzy

KMF DM
1 & 3. I did back up my claim.
What do you think concurrent universes are? What is your definition?

Flame bait.


Wrong.
Show me where it refers to pocket universe, bottle universe. False vacuum collapse. Calabi-Yaui space. Or even different multiverse models.
So you're clearly wrong about updating these terms as Max Tegmark's multi-level multiverse has been around for a while.

Oh, look relying on a wikia which are written by the fans, for the fans.
Not only is it terrible, and the terminology wrong. Now a good wikia is the Doctor Who which is superlative.

Except the evidence shows that I am not.

Let's make things simple for you - you lot can keep patting each other on the back how right you are all you like, it does not change anything.


1. Correct, a galaxy would not be a universe.
2. Right and?
3. I have already stated this.
4. You are postulating one possible end, but no one knows what is going to happen as there are so many things we do not understand about the universe.
You have not shown evidence in support of your weird, limited definition and have rejected actual definitions.
 

Rogerd1

Explorer
This is very sad and very funny at the same time. You have not shown evidence in support of your weird definition and have rejected actual definitions.
I have explained this in the posts above, furthermore you have quoted me showing the dictionary is inaccurate.

This is also a flame bait post.

Not the least of which, you have literally scrolled through my posts, and will have seen this post.


Where I discuss it, mention the distinction between science fiction and fantasy.
 

Not only is it terrible, and the terminology wrong. Now a good wikia is the Doctor Who which is superlative.
A Doctor Who wiki is pointless and irrelevant when discussing Planes in a Magic the Gathering concept. My own issues with Wikia as a company aside, the article gets across the concept of planes as a MtG aspect

Also the gold-standard for fan-run wikis is, and continues to be, the Transformers Wiki
 

Oofta

Legend
I think having a common multiverses issues are a mountain in a molehill. It only affects my campaign if I decide it should. I will never have a plane of fire because elemental planes don't fit into my world. I describe two of my realms as shadowfell and feywild because they are close enough but beyond that? Why would I care?

It gives people an excuse to take a PC from Forgotten Realms to Eberron if they want. The WOTC police aren't going to break down your door to tell you you're playing it wrong.
 

Rogerd1

Explorer
A Doctor Who wiki is pointless and irrelevant when discussing Planes in a Magic the Gathering concept. My own issues with Wikia as a company aside, the article gets across the concept of planes as a MtG aspect

Also the gold-standard for fan-run wikis is, and continues to be, the Transformers Wiki
I dont agree, but my reason is that Doctor Who, particularly EU is science fiction and science fantasy. And what I like is the variance of universes (51 billion dimensions to the left or something) which is where the Word Lords live.

Thing is with Who there are references to pocket universes, bottle universes (literally), and some rather unique science fiction concepts, memevores, antitime (it used this before Trek). But is is pocket universes, and dimensions (some are quite small), that provide a useful correlation.

But yeah, Transformers wiki comes a close second, but I can understand why you would place it first. Transformers is very unique like Who, in that it has crossed over with a lot of other franchises.
 

UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
Or it works more like what Paul Farquhar says. After all, there are multiple settings where the Feywild isn't a thing. It doesn't exist in Eberron, or Dragonlance, or Theros or Ravnica. So, either WoTC is doing something utterly terrible... or they are just presenting a single facet of the whole.

I guess I just don't understand why, when presented with two different equally plausible explanations, you and others insist on taking the version that is the least charitable and the most upsetting.

EDIT:




Ah, never mind, it seems we have reached an understanding.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////



And yet you refer to a universe as "milky way size" Yet the Milky way is only a mere 201,000 light years compared to the 93,000,000,000 light years of the actual observable universe (which of course, the actual universe could be larger than the observed universe)

So, you have already put forth a model that allows to a universe to be 462,686.56 times smaller than the actual universe. So, if your model allows for something to be over 450 THOUSAND times smaller, why can't it be another 201 thousand times smaller?

What makes 200,000 the magic number? What are you basing your claims on? Other than vague "I know science fiction better than you" claims?



You have already stated what to call a universe without stars, planets and galaxies? I haven't seen you make that statement, so would you mind repeating it?

Also point #4 is meaningless noise. I don't care that we don't know that the Heat Death model is accurate, it is an accepted model and the question is based on that model. Refusing to answer the question because other models exist is just avoiding the question.
It should be noted that if Inflation of the early universe (and Dark Energy) is a thing then the Universe is definitely much larger then the observable universe.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
You will actually find this multiverse example in the DnD core or DMG actually, and also in DC comics.

The best way to think of it are bubbles in the bath, or when you wash dishes, and they clump together.

Then there is the multi-level multiverse by Tegmark, and Bruan Greene's nine different multiverse types.

Like I said from a science fiction standpoint they could be pocket universe, but they tend to connected to something, usually the main universe like you get in Doctor Who EU.

That said, because they are all separated, and not connected to one another, they are more dimensions in their own right. But fantasy tends to refer to them as planes.
As I’m not willing to be any nicer than I have been to some behaving the way you are, and I respect the mods here, I’m going to end this interaction.
 

glass

(he, him)
Hmmm. I think it's going to be a partial Spelljamer with the gonzo coming more from 'jammers being planar-style craft (planeships? planejammers? Spellplanes?) than brining back crystal spheres and all that.
I really hope they do not do that. Ships sailing the planes are all well and fine (and have plenty of precedent in D&D over the years), but calling them spelljammers is just false advertising.

Cosmology is by definition universal.
A setting can have its own local cosmology, and still be connected to a larger cosmology shared with other setting. I know it is possible because I do exactly this with my homebrew setting.

_
glass.
 
Last edited:


Chaosmancer

Legend
Yes I mentioned it in the post above actually, about dimensions and planes.

If you refer to the post about the soap bubbles (your last post before this one) that has nothing to do with the question I asked, unless you are trying to say that a universe without stars, galaxies and planets is a pocket universe. Which would seem to be strange, since in the time immediately after the Big Bang would then be defined as a pocket universe, which became a universe and then theoritically descends back into a pocket universe. This sort of model doesn't make much sense, considering that the content of the "space" has not and will not change, only the arrangement. It would be like saying an empty balloon isn't a balloon.

The post above that one simply links back to an older post, where you say that a universe requires planets, stars and galaxies to be a universe, which doesn't offer an alternative name for what you would call a post heat-death "universe".

So... yet again, can you repeat your answer since I cannot seem to find it and "the post above" doesn't give me anything accurate that makes sense.

Not it isn't, as we lack any reference point or true understanding of what it would be like to base any real meaningful discussion upon it (edit I am referring to the big rip). This is like discussing the inside of a black hole, and whether it leads to some other dimension. Another example of this is why the galaxies are moving away from us at ever increasing velocities.

We simply do not know enough to form a cogent answer.

Edit: In fact the nearest we got to examining a universe full of dead stars was the Xeelee books. But unable to defeat the Photino Birds, they created Bolders Ring and fled into another multiverse.

So... according to this part of your post, we don't even understand the universe well enough to define it. Yet, you confidently assert that the definitions provided, which we cannot have a meaningful discussion about because we lack a true understanding, MUST be wrong.

Also, I don't see any reason to believe that the Xeelee books by Stephen Baxter are any more relevant to what to call a universe without stars (funny, you just said it was a universe) than anything else. In fact, it seems like just a smokescreen that has nothing to do with the point.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


Eberron has Thelanis and Dragonlance apparently has something called Summerhome, and both seem to be the Feywild in all but name. And Magic: the Gathering has Eldraine, which just hasn't been converted to 5e in any way yet (that I know of).
I don't believe Thelanis is really anything like the Feywild. But I don't see much point in diving down that rabbit hole at this time.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Claiming the dictionary is innacurate is laughable at best.

But you do have to admit, some science fiction author somewhere may have coined a new term that isn't in the Dictionary.

I mean, I make up new terms to describe new ideas I've had all the time.
 



Visit Our Sponsor

Latest threads

Dungeon Delver's Guide

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top