Dragon 370 - Design & Development: Cosmology

[Drkfathr1]

Changing the way these planes are set up in 4E opens up MORE choices for a DM to set adventures. Including the choice you seem to prefer of just saying "You can't go to this plane" or "You can only go to the City of Brass on this plane".

In fact, I find it funny that you're basically arguing for limits. The Inner Planes of previous editions did not present as many options for a DM or players to explore as the current setup, which is the point.

It's easier to start with a model more open to setting adventures and let the DM exclude the options he'd rather not have than start limited and have nothing to support the DM's that want to open it up with more options.

The MotP is going to have info on setting up your own cosmologies as well. So options for your own setup will still be there. No DM will be straitjacketed with the World Axis if he doesn't want to be for his own campaign. It's just that WotC's published material has a baseline the cosmology so that the PHB, DMG and MM material will work with as presented in all settings. And, as was mentioned in the interview, it's still flexible enough to allow something like Eberron's shifting planes to be utilized within it as well, so it'll have a unique cosmology built on the framework of the World Axis.

You're still not getting what I'm saying. I'm not arguing for one or the other, I'm saying you can have both. Someone said that you shouldn't have a seperate plane where the PC's can't go without serious magic or face instant death. I say you can have both.

How is having 1+1=2, instead of just 1 arguing for limits? I'm arguing for more choices.

 

[Imban]

Everything that used to work still does, and now it's a heck of a lot simpler explain a bunch of things; it's win-win! Where's the problem?

At least for me, it removes the utility of "Go to Hell"-type spells, something D&D sadly did to Hell itself years ago, but now finally expanded to every plane.

I mean, here's the thing: if you're throwing someone at random into the Elemental Plane of Fire, or the Negative Energy Plane, or the Positive Energy Plane, it's quite clear you wish them grievous harm and the cause of their grievous harm is apparent both intuitively (burnt to a crisp in an ocean of fire / drained of all life in a dark void / exploded into rainbows and sparkles by life energy) and borne out by what the rules and setting say about these places.

If you throw someone at random into Hell, it's quite clear that you wish them grievous harm (unless they're a devil, I guess) and the cause of their grievous harm is probably intuitively apparent (torn apart by a monstrosity in Hell, cast into the lake of fire, whatever) but not borne out by what the rules and setting say about Hell, which is that it's a bad place to be due to all the devils, but it's a place that's generally survivable and which high-level heroes can and should go to in order to kick ass and take names.

"But," you cry, "surely there are oceans of fire in both Hell and the Elemental Chaos!", and you'd be right. The thing is that once you've made these places adventuring locales instead of The Bad Place, you lose the immediate and intuitive resonance of being sent there = bad, and have to further specify that your spell is putting them in a place that causes them immediate grievous harm.

And at this point, it doesn't have any more resonance with me than a spell which teleports you into the crater of the nearest volcano for a round or two.

(tl;dr: It's cool to be able to say "Go to Hell" and mean it, but it only works if Hell is unequivocally bad.)

Who had a problem with infinite planes: me

Basically everything this man says in this post, I agree with. I always just read the "infinite" planes as being finite but usually immense in order to avoid nonsense with infinity. Especially with some, like the Outlands with its finitely-spaced-out (!) border towns, you had to do far too much logical twisting in order to maintain the plane's infinity, whereas declaring it to be finite was far easier.

The only one of these that didn't bug me was Sigil, because it being on top of an infinitely high mountain was just a cute little "you can't get there from here" paradox. (I mean, as long as you assumed a finite amount of Rilmani lived in a finite amount of spots along a finite lower region of the mountain.)

Er, who said 666 is cool? It's a "dumb and meaningless" number kids love to write like they were evil incarnate

Oh yeah, 4e totally doesn't cater to kids who love acting like they're evil incarnate and 666 layers wouldn't have any resonance among the kind of people who're the target market for 4e's Tieflings and such.

 

[Scribble]

At least for me, it removes the utility of "Go to Hell"-type spells, something D&D sadly did to Hell itself years ago, but now finally expanded to every plane.

Shrug.

I'd trade more info I might actually use in my game for your ability to turn a teleport spell into an instant death spell anyday.

I'm selfish like that.

 

[Imban]

I'd trade more info I might actually use in my game for your ability to turn a teleport spell into an instant death spell anyday.

Those kind of spells already exist in 4e. (c.f. Warlock's Hurl Through Hell.) I just don't think they're as cool as they used to be, especially Hurl Through Hell, which you get at a level where you may well be going to Hell personally to punch people out.

 

[WhatGravitas]

Mysteries...

If you don't find mysteries in the modern world, you're not looking hard enough. Seriously.

On finite/infinite: I think the real main thrust of the change is encouraging creativity.

With infinite planes you, as a DM, have freedom to put more stuff into it as you like, but ultimately, it has to fit the general idea of the plane - the plane is sort of a category.

With finite planes, but infinite place for completely new planes, you are instead encouraged to create an entirely new plane for something you have thought of instead of shoehorning it into an existing infinite plane.

This has also the side-effect of making the cosmology more modular and I think it's a win-win situation:

WotC can produce entirely new planes where authors can run rampant with their ideas instead of having to adhere to the theme of a plane. And as DM, I can do the same, encouraging me to think up completely new stuff instead of building on the own - but the "finite but still freaking big" still gives one the room to put themed and fitting material into these planes.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Lacyon]

Those kind of spells already exist in 4e. (c.f. Warlock's Hurl Through Hell.) I just don't think they're as cool as they used to be, especially Hurl Through Hell, which you get at a level where you may well be going to Hell personally to punch people out.

When I play a warlock, that's exactly how I'm going to flavor Hurl Through Hell when I get it. Thanks

 

[Ktulu]

There's a difference between using a cosmology for a world that otherwise didn't have one already fully fleshed out, especially when those worlds had very little to no interaction with the planes at large. The cosmology wasn't intrusive there, and each world retained its unique features, even such things as Athas's Gray and Black.

WotC is happily retconning settings into their shiny new cosmology, and in the process stripping setting unique elements in order to have everything stuck into that 4e default core cosmology. That's horrible design.

No, it isn't. It's finding the middle ground between having older stuff that people would like to see updated (spelljammer, planescape, etc...) but still wanting more than 4 people to buy it.

If you like the old version, that already exists. I don't want what Kenzer did with Kalamar. Don't give me the same book I already own with a few changes to the mechanics, along with a word search replacement from "Grey elf" to "Eladrin".

I love the fact that all settings will have the same wireframe. That's easier to get players to agree to try out setting x or y. Thank you, WotC. You guys get it.

 

[Sir Brennen]

You're still not getting what I'm saying. I'm not arguing for one or the other, I'm saying you can have both. Someone said that you shouldn't have a seperate plane where the PC's can't go without serious magic or face instant death. I say you can have both.

Okay, I'm not saying you shouldn't have such planes. But for the company putting out the actual game, it makes much, much more sense for them to open up that design space and give DM's a wider range of options for setting adventures.

Each edition of D&D has had an established core cosmology. When making such a cosmology, certain choices have to be made (even if some were done so unconsciously). This adds consistency when designing spells, creatures, adventures, etc. which are connected to the planes.

In this edition, they decided, yes, having planes where you can't go without serious magic or face instant death was something they didn't want. Now they've got additional locations which they can publish material about in a way that can be actually used in a campaign.

Does this imply you can't have planes which are inaccessible? Do the rules really need to spell out you also make access to a given plane more restrictive if you want? You have the ability to do this if you want. Therefore, both options exist.

However, I think that choosing the option of having any plane be inaccessible cascades into closing more options to the DM and players, and therefore is a limit itself. I can choose A and have 1, 2 and 3, or I can have B and... that's it.

 

[Storminator]

Do your campaign worlds have places that your PC's can never/should never/will never go?

The question being posed seems to be: what's wrong with planes that the PC's can never/should never/will never go to?

For me, the answer is no. There is not a single place in my multiverse that is defined to be out of bounds. Some places may be less accessible or hospitable, but they can get there. Having them choose not to go there is something completely different.

PS

 

[Aldarc]

Er, who said 666 is cool? It's a "dumb and meaningless" number kids love to write like they were evil incarnate

What some think it's cool some think it's dumb and meaningless, no news here.

And this is a fantasy game, inifinte is a fantasy tool, why people keep comparing our universe to some place where people can cast fireballs?

Calls for realism in fantasy or fantasy in reality generally never is upheld consistently, but only when it is convenient for the argument particular.

How is having 1+1=2, instead of just 1 arguing for limits? I'm arguing for more choices.

I fail to follow your reasoning here. If you argue for 2, you are still arguing for impossing a limit, but now it has only advanced by a unit of 1, which remains to be seen as to how much utility of "option" is gained in the advancement of 1 to 2. Furthermore, it is also just as easy for the opposing side to make a similar argument in which the Elemental Chaos has numerous locations that would be inaccessible by PCs given the danger of the surrounding Chaos. And instead of confining elements to just a cosmetic cosmology in which elements are mostly restricted to simply their particular elemental plane, DMs using the Elemental Chaos could choose to keep the elementals in ever-changing elemental domains amongst their own kind or DMs could choose to have the elementals roam around the Elemental Chaos in battles within. To argue that the use of particular elemental planes somehow creates more options than the Elemental Chaos seems short-sighted based on the set-up of the Elemental Chaos.