D&D General DnD cosmology - Which Edition do you prefer?

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I'll defend 5E cosmology for just a moment... IMO, this edition does a pretty good job of taking the best/most iconic elements of previous editions cosmology, and trying to organize these into something cohesive.

So it takes the Great Wheel from the older editions, takes things like the Feywild/Shadowfel from 4E, and adds things like Spelljammer/Planescape elements into something where everything works and can slip into each other where necessary.

I'm sure some folks don't like this, so I'm willing to defend it if challenged (respectfully).

D&D 5e is my first edition, and the longer that I play D&D, the less and less I like 5e's Great Wheel Cosmology. However, I can't help but appreciate the idea of having the Inner Planes be material in nature (Elemental Planes, reflections of the Material Plane) and the Outer Planes being spiritual. Making the Shadowfell and Feywild be Inner Planes like the Elemental Planes was a good idea, IMO.

I don't love the Great Wheel (I actually kind of hate it), but I like the concept of the Inner Planes vs Outer Planes. And how they worked this into the lore of Dragons in Fizban's.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Because he is no longer LAWFUL evil, with all that it entails. Even Primus is no longer Lawful Neutral, since that alignment does not exist. You can't have the Blood War existing for existential reasons between Demons and Devils, with all the other shades of evils in between. For me, it was a reducing of the possibilities of the Great Wheel, although I happily say that I was very pleased by the introducing of the Feywild and the Shadowfell.

I don't see how him not acting because of his alignment and instead acting on his own volition makes him more two-dimensional.

 

[Lyxen]

I don't see how him not acting because of his alignment and instead acting on his own volition makes him more two-dimensional.

Once more, you are confusing the individual gods with their cosmological alignment and conflicts. Any of the cosmology's gods can have a nice history, foes, etc. this is not specific to 4e and not better done there than anywhere else, not more poorly either, it's really a matter of taste. But by removing one axis from the great wheel to obtain a single axis, my take is that the cosmology has been made effectively poorer, since your allegiance is not recorded on one axis instead of two (and actually it was more than this as there are two axis in the spiritual plane plus the negative to positive going through the inner planes. So you have fewer opportunities for cosmic conflict between pantheons / deities / aligned forces, that's all.

 

[Jer]

I don't love the Great Wheel (I actually kind of hate it), but I like the concept of the Inner Planes vs Outer Planes. And how they worked this into the lore of Dragons in Fizban's.

The Great Wheel is a fun concept if you take some of the hints scattered around the Planescsape source material (and reinforced in the 5e DMG a bit) that it isn't actually something that exists on its own, but rather is a forced together construct held in place by the beliefs of the people living in the Outer Planes - that they created the Wheel by deciding the Wheel existed and so now it exists because they all think it should.

It not only makes the setting deeper in the sense that now you can talk about the setting without assuming that alignment exists as a real thing, but also you can assume that there are plenty of other planes floating out in the Astral that are just getting ignored by the folks who dwell on the Great Wheel because believing in planes that aren't on the Great Wheel is actually an existential threat to them.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Once more, you are confusing the individual gods with their cosmological alignment and conflicts. Any of the cosmology's gods can have a nice history, foes, etc. this is not specific to 4e and not better done there than anywhere else, not more poorly either, it's really a matter of taste. But by removing one axis from the great wheel to obtain a single axis, my take is that the cosmology has been made effectively poorer, since your allegiance is not recorded on one axis instead of two (and actually it was more than this as there are two axis in the spiritual plane plus the negative to positive going through the inner planes. So you have fewer opportunities for cosmic conflict between pantheons / deities / aligned forces, that's all.

But all these guys can still get into conflict without some random labels.

And because they now have to have actual motives, I feel like that's more dimension, not less.

 

[glass]

What I'm saying is that the advantage of at least a "grid" cosmology compared to an "axis" is that it is, basically and geometrically, two dimensional compared to just one. By the way, Erathis is unaligned, not lawful even though she is the goddess of Law, because 4e destroyed the Law-Chaos axis of the great wheel and the corresponding alignements, and for me it's a cardinal sin, leaving only the good/evil axis and aligning Law with good and Chaos with Evil.

You could claim that how the 4e core rules handle alignment is a bit wonky, and I would agree with you, but that doesn't really have anything to do with the World Axis cosmology. World Axis may have debuted in 4e, but it is perfectly possible to use it with a different edition, or use the Great Wheel or some other cosmology entirely with 4e.

_
glass.

 

[Jer]

What I'm saying is that the advantage of at least a "grid" cosmology compared to an "axis" is that it is, basically and geometrically, two dimensional compared to just one. By the way, Erathis is unaligned, not lawful even though she is the goddess of Law, because 4e destroyed the Law-Chaos axis of the great wheel and the corresponding alignements, and for me it's a cardinal sin, leaving only the good/evil axis and aligning Law with good and Chaos with Evil.

I think the mistake you're making here is in thinking that alignment in 4e is meaningful in any metaphysical sense other than "this is the team that I'm on".

It really isn't. It's a much more Moorcockian take on alignment, which is unfortunately cluttered up by putting "good" and "evil" into it for sacred cow reasons. (4e alignment is IMO best played by removing the words "Good" and "Evil" from it entirely and just having the Law/Unaligned/Chaos axis. Leaving Good and Evil to be personal morality rather than metaphysical reality. That fits with how the setting is described much more - both in the outer planes and even in the Mortal World - but of course they had to leave the Good/Evil axis in for reasons.)

 

[Undrave]

What does worship has to do with anything ? It was an example of a cosmology character even more lawful than Erathis and other gods.

Because Gods are only interesting through their potential relationship with the PCs.

What I'm saying is that the advantage of at least a "grid" cosmology compared to an "axis" is that it is, basically and geometrically, two dimensional compared to just one. By the way, Erathis is unaligned, not lawful even though she is the goddess of Law, because 4e destroyed the Law-Chaos axis of the great wheel and the corresponding alignements, and for me it's a cardinal sin, leaving only the good/evil axis and aligning Law with good and Chaos with Evil.



Because he is no longer LAWFUL evil, with all that it entails. Even Primus is no longer Lawful Neutral, since that alignment does not exist. You can't have the Blood War existing for existential reasons between Demons and Devils, with all the other shades of evils in between. For me, it was a reducing of the possibilities of the Great Wheel, although I happily say that I was very pleased by the introducing of the Feywild and the Shadowfell.

Eh, feels like an issue with labeling. I think it's more multidimensional if each Gods has their own sets of goals and that, depending on the situation, they might class or ally with another God depending on circumstances than I care about their alignments. I think the relationship (opposite or complimentary) between their domains is more interesting.

 

[Lyxen]

But all these guys can still get into conflict without some random labels.

Just like in any cosmology, but the labels are not random. The labels represent principles at war with each other, like in most well-written books of the gemre.

And because they now have to have actual motives, I feel like that's more dimension, not less.

Nope, in all cases they can have actual motives and stories, but ON TOP OF THAT, there can be deeper cosmological meaning, multi-dimensional, so there is more depth to it.

 

[Lyxen]

You could claim that how the 4e core rules handle alignment is a bit wonky, and I would agree with you, but that doesn't really have anything to do with the World Axis cosmology. World Axis may have debuted in 4e, but it is perfectly possible to use it with a different edition, or use the Great Wheel or some other cosmology entirely with 4e.

Actually no, you can't use the great wheel with 4e, since you are lacking some alignments.