• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Elemental Planes Killed

Off-topic here, but I always thought the Plane of Air had subjective gravity. That is, you shift in and begin falling aimlessly through the giant expanse of air until you realize your "down" is completely up to you. Then you figure out where you want to go, make that direction "down" and fall away on your journey. (The tough part is the stop! :eek: )

Am I wrong?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Caliber said:
Off-topic here, but I always thought the Plane of Air had subjective gravity. That is, you shift in and begin falling aimlessly through the giant expanse of air until you realize your "down" is completely up to you. Then you figure out where you want to go, make that direction "down" and fall away on your journey. (The tough part is the stop! :eek: )

Am I wrong?

You're correct (though IIRC, large bodies might have their own gravity, or at least make it difficult to pull the subjective gravity trick by virtue of being a point of orientation, etc).
 

My conception of an elemental plane is a place where only that element can exist. So unless you are a fire elemental you can't exist in the elemental plane of fire, etc. But I wouldn't want to change the plane to be "a hot fiery plane where you can walk around if you protect yourself from fire." I'd say "you're not fire, you can't exist there."

There are plenty other planes to adventure in.
 

lukelightning said:
My conception of an elemental plane is a place where only that element can exist. So unless you are a fire elemental you can't exist in the elemental plane of fire, etc. But I wouldn't want to change the plane to be "a hot fiery plane where you can walk around if you protect yourself from fire." I'd say "you're not fire, you can't exist there."

There are plenty other planes to adventure in.

That would be pretty much fine by me. It fits well with that "demiplane" level of importance I mentioned a few posts back. I.e. the existence of the elemental planes is academic, even to the inhabitants of the implied setting.
 

lukelightning said:
My conception of an elemental plane is a place where only that element can exist. So unless you are a fire elemental you can't exist in the elemental plane of fire, etc. But I wouldn't want to change the plane to be "a hot fiery plane where you can walk around if you protect yourself from fire." I'd say "you're not fire, you can't exist there."

There are plenty other planes to adventure in.
I get that, but I'd question why such a place would need more than a sentence in any core book. Just say "there exist absolutely inhospitable places that are the primal embodiments of fire, water, earth, air and other building blocks of the universe. No mortal has ever ventured to these wellsprings and returned to tell the tale." And that's it.

I'd prefer the column inches be used for places that can be used in the most possible games at the most possible tables. The abstract cosmological stuff that has no impact on except the most esoteric of planar games can be saved for a sourcebook released shortly before 5E changes it all again. ;)
 

Mercule said:
the existence of the elemental planes is academic, even to the inhabitants of the implied setting.
Whizbang Dustyboots said:
I get that, but I'd question why such a place would need more than a sentence in any core book.

Exactly. In my setting the elemental planes would be pretty much unreachable. They are a source of energy and matter for various magical effects but not a destination. It would be like having a Plane of Gravity or a Plane of the Strong Nuclear Force. Or perhaps they don't even exist as planes and elemental energies are just knit into the fabric of reality.

By putting the elemental planes "behind the scenes" it's easier to reconcile why there can be fire in Hell (since in the traditional cosmology Hell doesn't connect at all to the elemental planes).
 

see said:
As it says here

So, are we also going to see the elimination of deep water from D&D? I mean, the bottoms of oceans make pretty poor adventure locations. The skies, too; who adventures at 30,000 feet in the air? Why stop at getting rid of the Elemental Planes, if we're going to get rid of places that are "boring"?

You know, as much as I hace a hideous gut feeling about the rest of 4e, this may be one of the best ideas so far. Nearly nothing was done on the elemental planesand what was was not veru enticing.

In 20 years of D&D, i only remember one adventure on these planes. As long as the City of Brass is still around, I am OK with it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

lukelightning said:
Exactly. In my setting the elemental planes would be pretty much unreachable.

Pretty much anything that exists is reachable given D&D's high magic level. In your proposed setting, I would think that you could get into an elemental plane using an astral projection spell, thereby emboding my thought on the target plane in a body made of fire while my more elementally complex body was still safe on the prime. In this way, 'you can't get there unless you are made of fire', and 'is a hot place where you can walk around and adventure' might prove to not be a mutually exclusive thing.

If your intention is to really make it unreachable, I'd do away with the concept all together. Of course, conceptually you'd need to do away with Elementals altogether, but it wouldn't force you necessarily to change there stats. You'd just call them 'Fire Spirits' and use the same stats in the background.
 

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
I get that, but I'd question why such a place would need more than a sentence in any core book. Just say "there exist absolutely inhospitable places that are the primal embodiments of fire, water, earth, air and other building blocks of the universe. No mortal has ever ventured to these wellsprings and returned to tell the tale." And that's it.

I would be perfectly fine with that. All the reference to them in the three AD&D 1e core books was being named in the PHB, showing up on the PHB's planar diagram, and a couple passing mentions in spell/magic item/monster descriptions. The original 3e core books had a sentence in the PHB glossary about the Elemental Planes and a few passing references in spells/items/monster descriptions. I'm not asking for 3.5 levels of coverage (much less coverage on the level of Manual of the Planes, Planescape boxed set, or The Inner Planes), just a small nod to continuity and those of us that happen to like the Elemental Planes. (I'd like a sentence each for Quasi- and Para- Elemental Planes, too, but I'll let that sleeping dog lie.)

If they then wanted to spend a bunch of detail on (a) new, additional plane(s) at the same time, inhabited by elementals and genies or whatever? Hey, go right ahead! Just leave the one sentence mention of the Elemental Planes, and all my objections melt away. Or if they just want to spruce up the existing Elemental Planes, again, I have no objection.

But, once again, that's not what they're doing, according to the blog post I quoted. They are taking out the Elemental Planes and putting in an alternative. Maybe he miswrote, and we'll find out the Elemental Planes are still in. I'd sure like that to be the case. I'm not betting heavily on that.

I see some have taken me to task for suggesting the only reason to not include even a single sentence to retain cosmological continuity was that the designers wanted change for change's sake, saying the reasons presented in the blog post explained the situation just fine. Well, if the PHB and DMG are both so tightly written that there's no way to slip in Elemental Plane: One of the Inner Planes consisting entirely of one type of matter: Air, Earth, Fire, or Water without eliminating something "interesting", I'll admit I was too quick to accuse the change of being merely for the sake of change. Presumably, if the PHB and DMG turn out not to be so tightly written, they will admit I was correct and that the explanations given in the post do not explain the elimination of the Elemental Planes.
 

I think we'll see a plane of 'Emerald Frost' ;)

Now, really, I don't have much of a problem with this new _alternative_ view of the elemental planes. It's definitely less revolutionary than Eberron's cosmology, which btw. was a step in the right direction because it made other planes more relevant for the game.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top