D&D 5E Eberron versus Multiverse

[Mirtek]

They would view the worship of such beings as a Cult of the Dragon Below;

But don't they recognize the dragon below (and the two others) as essentially overdeities?

 

[tetrasodium]

But don't they recognize the dragon below (and the two others) as essentially overdeities?

"Cult of the dragon below" is kind of a catchall term for any fringe religion (or literal cult.). It's like saying "$newAgeReligion is a satanic cult" rather than a literal thing. I'm pretty sure I've seen/heard Keith say that the CoSF itself was called one for a bit. Khyber (The dragon below) is both a place and a figure who may or may not have existed as more than part of a metaphor. Khyber (the place) is very much not the nine hells or underdark. The overdeities like Ao & such are a fact in certain settings, the progenitor dragons in eberron may have been real literal entities, or they could be no different from the pope saying this about god & evolution/creationism... ask your gm if the answer relevant & maybe they will tell you the truth rather than the interesting plot that you were raised to believe

 

[Seramus]

(Oh, and since it's been a while since I've been here— Hi! I'm Keith Baker, creator of Eberron.)

Thank you very much for writing this. It was a delight to read, and makes me more interested in Eberron as a setting in general. I would love for you to post this elsewhere so it doesn't become lost to the ages (If you haven't already). Huzzah!

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Khyber (the place) is very much not the nine hells or underdark.

Yeah it's kind of a mix of the Underdark, the Abyss and the literal underground hell.

 

[Yaarel]

A few thoughts on all of this...

Eberron has always been tied to the multiverse. Page 92 of the original Eberron Campaign Setting says "Eberron spins within its own Material Plane, enfolded by three coexistent transitive planes: the Astral Plane, the Ethereal Plane, and the Plane of Shadow, just as in the core D&D cosmology (see Chapter 5 of the Dungeon Master’s Guide)." WotC stated long ago that it was officially possible for people to travel to Eberron from other settings by using those transitive planes. You may not have noticed, because it's the default assumption of the setting that no one ever does... just as page 232 of Rising From The Last War establishes that the default assumption of the book is that "contact between the worlds and planes beyond its cosmology is impossible."

The idea is there that it COULD be possible, but it has absolutely ALWAYS been there: from the very beginning, Eberron had its own unique cosmology, but that entire cosmology was still part of the broader system of astral/ethereal/shadow. This simply calls that out more clearly, in part because it allows us to clearly say "This book is based on the assumption that contact with other settings is impossible." Again, the NEW aspect of this is to clarify that if you want it to be an aspect of your campaign, you're changing the default assumptions.

Likewise, the fact that this means that Cyric and Bane exist somewhere in the universe is utterly meaningless in Eberron. This doesn't mean that "Gods definitively exist", because as others have pointed out, the people of Eberron wouldn't identify the "gods" of FR as gods. The Vassals of the Sovereign Host believe that their deities are omniscient and omnipresent. The idea of one of them taking a physical form is pointlessly limiting; that's not a GOD, it's a powerful angel or an overlord. They would view the worship of such beings as a Cult of the Dragon Below; note that the Cults do worship coherent entities such as the overlords and daelkyr. And that's the point: the overlords have always been presented as beings that have the POWER of gods in other settings, but the answer of the masses wasn't to worship them, it was to bind them in spiritual chains. So yes, Rising acknowledges that the multiverse exists (as Eberron always has) and that therefore the gods of other settings exists; this doesn't change the critical facts:

• Those beings have no ability to influence Eberron unless you, the DM, choose to change that.
• As the default assumption is that they cannot and have never influenced the setting, they are absolutely and entirely unknown to the people of the setting.
• Those beings don't qualify as "gods" by the definitions used in Eberron, and the gods worshipped on Eberron do not follow their model. Eberron has always had beings that use the same rules as gods of other settings: those beings are the overlords, and rather than being worshipped, they were imprisoned.

Rising presents a clearer explanation of the principle presented on page 92 of the first Eberron book: Eberron COULD be connected to other settings if you want it to be, but the default assumption is that it's not. Beyond this, one of the core principles of Eberron is that canon is merely a starting point and that YOU decide what's true in your campaign. Ultimately, each DM decides if the Sovereigns are real, and each DM decides if Eberron is connected to the multiverse.

A few other minor points while I'm here...

• The default assumption of Eberron is that spells such as commune don't reach the Sovereigns directly, but rather connect you to a celestial that also believes in the Sovereigns. By default - and again, it's up to the DM to decide the truth - there's no absolute proof for or against the existence of the Sovereigns.
• The statement on Page 228 that "Some sages believe the moons are connected to the planes or are physical extensions of the planes" is 100% talking about the planes of Eberron. The sages have no concept whatsoever that there might be other planes, because the default assumption of the book is that contact with worlds and planes beyond its cosmology is impossible. The idea that the moons are tied to the planes of Eberron isn't new. There are (or were) thirteen moons and thirteen planes, and the giants specifically destroyed the thirteenth moon to sever ties with Dal Quor.

The only thing that I feel IS overstated is the statement that the Progenitors DID create the creatures of Eberron being presented as absolute fact. The rest of the book presents the idea that the Progenitors may have been metaphorical, and that is still the default assumption. The primary point of the section was to concretely say that despite default 5E stating "All orcs are tied to Gruumsh" and "All Elves are children of Corellon" that this does NOT apply to Eberron—that the elves and orcs of Eberron are part of EBERRON and have no ties to the multiverse beyond it. As others have called out, Rising does point out that the drow of Eberron were created by the GIANTS, not by Lolth OR the Progenitors. As with the Sovereigns, it's up to the DM to decide if the Progenitors truly existed, and if so, what they actually were. What's important is—just as has always been the case—Eberron is a part of the multiverse, but it is an isolated part that has its own cosmology and that has no contact with the rest of the Multiverse unless you, the DM, choose to change that.

(Oh, and since it's been a while since I've been here— Hi! I'm Keith Baker, creator of Eberron.)

Keith, I appreciate you commenting here and your specific comments. My disappointment that I express in this thread is because I love the Eberron setting that you pioneered and continue to develop.

The Eberron setting successfully achieves the difficult task of approaching religion in a way that is both authentic and suitable for gaming. Premise of ambiguity allows a great diversity of kinds of spirituality and philosophical ideas, and embraces multiculturalism, granting diverse points of view comparable dignity.

I feel the Eberron approach to religion is the ‘correct’ approach that the 5e Core must model.



In my view, the 5e designers took the beauty and profundity of Eberron, and then shat Forgotten Realms gods all over it. The damage is enormous and deep.



I find your comment here helps me feel a little better.

‘This doesn't mean that "Gods definitively exist", because as others have pointed out, the people of Eberron wouldn't identify the "gods" of FR as gods. The Vassals of the Sovereign Host believe that their deities are omniscient and omnipresent. The idea of one of them taking a physical form is pointlessly limiting; that's not a GOD, it's a powerful angel or an overlord.’

And similarly.

‘Those beings don't qualify as "gods" by the definitions used in Eberron, and the gods worshipped on Eberron do not follow their model. Eberron has always had beings that use the same rules as gods of other settings: those beings are the overlords, and rather than being worshipped, they were imprisoned.’

The same reason why I hate the Forgotten Realms polytheism, seems the same reason why the inhabitants of Eberron would reject the Forgotten Realms gods. Divinity is inherently omniscient and omnipresent, while the Forgotten Realms gods are ‘pointlessly’ finite.



That said. The damage done is official. The healing must official too. The 5e Core rules need to explicitly say, the beings of the outer planes are powerful beings. Some groups worship these beings as if gods, while other groups reject such worship as an error. Eberron is a setting that views the worship of Forgotten Realms gods as an error. Concepts like the Wall of the Faithless actualize religiously-motivated evil terrorism.

And the Eberron point of view has to be explicit and official. And Core.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

The same reason why I hate the Forgotten Realms polytheism, seems the same reason why the inhabitants of Eberron would reject the Forgotten Realms gods. Divinity is inherently omniscient and omnipresent, while the Forgotten Realms gods are ‘pointlessly’ finite.



That said. The damage done is official. The healing must official too. The 5e Core rules need to explicitly say, the beings of the outer planes are powerful beings. Some groups worship these beings as if gods, while other groups reject such worship as an error. Eberron is a setting that views the worship of Forgotten Realms gods as an error.

And it has to be explicit and official. And Core.

No.

Limited Gods are just as worthy of belief as omniscient ones.

 

[Yaarel]

No.

Limited Gods are just as worthy of belief as omniscient ones.

If people want to worship demons or angels, that is their business.

The KEY is ambiguity that is open to different cultural interpretations.

Where Forgotten Realms goes wrong is its polytheistic extremism that is religiously supremacist.

Supremacist and extremist, even to the point of the evil Wall of the Faithless.

 

[Salthorae]

In my view, the 5e designers took the beauty and profundity of Eberron, and then shat Forgotten Realms gods all over it. The damage is enormous and deep.

And there we go!

So the Creator of the setting tells you, "it's been this way the whole time", and your response is "5e designers ruined it!" still.

Divinity is inherently omniscient and omnipresent, while the Forgotten Realms gods are ‘pointlessly’ finite.

So the Greek gods aren't gods? They are not omniscient or omnipresent. Neither are the Norse gods.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

If people want to worship demons or angels, that is their business.

The KEY is ambiguity that is open to different cultural interpretations.

Which is fine in many settings. But the fact that the gods exist and are like the greek and norse pantheons is a default D&D assumption.

 

[Yaarel]

So the Greek gods aren't gods? They are not omniscient or omnipresent. Neither are the Norse gods.

The Norse goð are not ‘gods’.

The Norse meaning of the word goð literally means ‘invoked one’. In other words, a helpful nature spirit.



The Greek θεοι are ‘gods’ in the sense of being formally worshiped by priests.



But again, being open to a multiplicity of cultural philosophical interpretations is key.