D&D's Obelisk Plotline Was Supposed to Be Resolved in Vecna: Eve of Ruin

The plotline was dropped when Chris Perkins' job responsibilities shifted away from game design.
1770654703782.png

Chris Perkins has revealed that the obelisks scattered throughout various 5E adventures published by Wizards of the Coast was originally supposed to play a central role in the Vecna: Eve of Ruin adventure capping off Fifth Edition. Many Dungeons & Dragons adventures published for Fifth Edition featured mysterious black obelisks. These obelisks were revealed to be capable of time-travel and were tied to a mysterious group called the Weavers as well as the Netherese Empire. In Rime of the Frostmaiden, it was revealed that Vecna had obtained one of these obelisks and it was hinted that Vecna would use the obelisks in his plot to rewrite all of reality.

Vecna's possession of an obelisk was never followed up on, but it was apparently supposed to be a plot point in Vecna: Eve of Ruin. In a recent interview with Polygon, Perkins provided his vision for Vecna: Eve of Ruin. "The original plan, in my mind, was that we would actually culminate the story by going back in time to fight the Netherese Empire,” Perkins said. “It was always on our radar to bring Netheril back in some way. And this was the way I envisioned it happening, because the only way you could really fight Netheril again is to travel back in time."

“I was excited about the idea of a time travel adventure,” Perkins said later in the interview, “simply because it would feel very different from the other campaigns we had done up to that point. And I thought given time and attention, we could do some really fun things with Netheril and explore a style of magic that felt different from contemporary magic. Expedition to the Barrier Peaks would be sort of like the vibe I'd go for, where the magic is so weird it almost feels technological.”

Unfortunately, plans changed when Perkins' role at Wizards of the Coast shifted in his latter years with the company. “The reason it was dropped was that different people were in charge of the adventure design,” Perkins said. “I had rolled off a lot of my hands-on product work to help out with other parts of the business. And so, when I creatively walked away from the day-to-day adventure creation, we sort of lost the plot.”

Polygon has been periodically publishing interviews with Perkins, including an introspective on Rime of the Frostmaiden, and some insight on 5E's adventure design.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer

This article is very interesting. I had always suspected that 5e’s big-honking-adventure books were backdoor setting guides. Tyranny of Dragons and Princes of the Apocalypse don’t really fit the pattern, but they were the first two such adventure books for 5e. Starting with Out of the Abyss, which was pretty transparently built like “everything you need to know to run adventures in the Underdark” with the plot mostly being an excuse to tour the PCs around the major Underdark cities. Curse of Strahd was the Ravenloft (though limited to Barovia) source book; Tomb of Annihilation was the Chult sourcebook; Dragon Heist and Mad Mage were Waterdeep sourcebooks; Descent into Avernus was both a Baldur’s Gate and Nine Hells sourcebook… Storm King’s Thunder and Witchlight don’t fit the mold quite as cleanly, but the intent is clearly there with a lot of them.

This also explains why those campaign books all feel like they have paper thin plots to me. As Chris says here, they focused on the locations first and then came up with reasons for the players to need to go there after. That results in them all being “and then” stories, instead of “but/therefore” stories. The motivations feel weak because they’re just excuses to get the party to the next location the designers had already decided they were going to go. Needless to say, I do not share Polygon’s apparent adoration for this approach to adventure design. Seeing that they have taken a different approach with Adventures in the Forgotten Realms gives me hope that maybe they’ve moved on from this experiment and will try writing future adventures with the primary goal of being good adventures instead of that being secondary to the goal of being secret setting guides.
PotA, SKT, and Witchlight fit in well with that lto, I think. PotA covers a very "core D&D" near wilderness the size of the United Kingdom, while SKT recreated a lot of FR4: The Savage Frontier from back in the day, and Witchlight is a sort of whimsical counterpoint to Strahd.

This does show why the big Campaign books after Witch light have kind gotten whicky-whacky: like or dislike them, they were Perkins own style for the most part.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



mixed feelings.

Would like to have seen what Chris Perkins would have done, but now I can do anything I want with them.

(I already have a semi similar plot with obelisks that i can mash together now)
 

I think I may have mentioned this in another thread, but my players are convinced they need them to PROTECT phandalin.....which, I guess if they had them, that would sort of work out for them....
 



Remove ads

Remove ads

Top