D&D 5E First World: Possibly One of the New D&D setting?

[teitan]

Oh god I hope not. Marvel and DC are an inconsistent mess when it comes to cosmology over the years, IMO. I mean the embodiment of the universe were defeated by the infinity gauntlet. Really?!

I much prefer the Primordials and the Dawn War to anything Marvel or DC have created.

Thanos Supplanted them, not just then but also with the cosmic cube in the Captain Marvel series. He assumed their roles with both objects but with the flaw of 1: an imperfect understanding of the universe 2: flawed vision and 3: his own internal wish for failure.

 

[dave2008]

Thanos Supplanted them, not just then but also with the cosmic cube in the Captain Marvel series. He assumed their roles with both objects but with the flaw of 1: an imperfect understanding of the universe 2: flawed vision and 3: his own internal wish for failure.

Yes, terrible, just terrible.

 

[Rogerd1]

I do think that is the point of presenting the First World from the viewpoint of the Dragons. They truly believe that their gods (Tiamat and Bahamut, with some help from Sardior) created the Prime Material Plane. They believe that they are the rightful inhabitants of the Material Plane, and everyone else is an invader that took what was rightfully theirs. This explains why all dragons are xenophobic and narcissistic naughty words. They truly believe that the Multiverse was created by them (or their gods) and that they're justified in killing these so called "invaders".

WotC has not said that their viewpoint is correct, just that the Dragons believe it. Which, in my opinion, is good worldbuilding.

Trouble is that the gods in DnD are really not that powerful.
Especially if a bunch of level 30 players can take them on.
Build an infinite material plane - yeah right.

Oh god I hope not. Marvel and DC are an inconsistent mess when it comes to cosmology over the years, IMO. I mean the embodiment of the universe were defeated by the infinity gauntlet. Really?!

I much prefer the Primordials and the Dawn War to anything Marvel or DC have created.

Neither Marvel, nor DC, are as inconsistent as you think.
Some Marvel stuff was plain stupid, and IK am not going to defend the whole Beyonders thing. But post that, with the Celestial rebels and First Firmament arc I really liked. And if you replaced the Gods of DnD with cosmic beings would make a lot more sense. Mutants and Masterminds does exactly this.

And Grant Morrisson sorting out DC cosmology into something coherent, which is eerily similar to DnD, and the way the gods are portrayed would make sense for in 5e. So there are a bunch of ways to go here.

The current DnD cosmology, is just garbage, and ill conceived, and ill thought out. And how the gods and Mystara immortals (another silly name) interact is not very good either.

 

[dave2008]

Trouble is that the gods in DnD are really not that powerful.
Especially if a bunch of level 30 players can take them on.

Not really always the case in D&D (not 2e and not 5e at least). Also, that is infinite better than Thanos supplanting all of the cosmic powers with the cosmic cube or the infinity gauntlet. The stupidity of that idea just boggles the mind.

Build an infinite material plane - yeah right.

Sure, why not. But like I said I prefer it as the Primordials started it. Gods can play the long game. It may have taken them a billion years to create the ritual that produced the big bang, but they can do it

Neither Marvel, nor DC, are as inconsistent as you think.
Some Marvel stuff was plain stupid, and IK am not going to defend the whole Beyonders thing. But post that, with the Celestial rebels and First Firmament arc I really liked. And if you replaced the Gods of DnD with cosmic beings would make a lot more sense. Mutants and Masterminds does exactly this.

I did say across time. I really haven't read comics in 20-30 years so my info is very outdated. Are there still things like parallel universes with different versions of the earth and stuff like that? When that became a thing I was just like...ugh!

The current DnD cosmology, is just garbage, and ill conceived, and ill thought out. And how the gods and Mystara immortals (another silly name) interact is not very good either.

I'm curious, what do you consider the D&D cosmology?

I personally think there isn't one. We are just provided with rumors and suggestions, but nothing concrete IMO. That is the way I like it so I can weave what I want and don't want into my own game's.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

in the animated crisis movie from DC they had 'prime earth' or 'the first world' be so important that if you blew it up you blew up the multiverese....

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Trouble is that the gods in DnD are really not that powerful.

That. Does. Not. Matter.
The story is a myth that the dragons tell to justify their narcissism and xenophobia against all other creatures. Whether or not you think the events described in it actually could have happened does not matter. Because it's a story that may or may not have actually happened (and probably didn't happen as the dragons tell it).

Especially if a bunch of level 30 players can take them on.

No such thing as level 30 in D&D 5e.

Build an infinite material plane - yeah right.

Again, it's a story. If you're taking it seriously and as written, you're interpreting it (and the purpose of it being included in the book) incorrectly.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That. Does. Not. Matter.
The story is a myth that the dragons tell to justify their narcissism and xenophobia against all other creatures. Whether or not you think the events described in it actually could have happened does not matter. Because it's a story that may or may not have actually happened (and probably didn't happen as the dragons tell it).

No such thing as level 30 in D&D 5e.

Again, it's a story. If you're taking it seriously and as written, you're interpreting it (and the purpose of it being included in the book) incorrectly.

Again, its the only version of the First World we have, and Perkins at least seems very excited about it. Small wonder that those who don't care for it are up in arms.

Does it actually say anywhere that it's probably not true, or is that an assumption on your part?

 

[Parmandur]

Again, its the only version of the First World we have, and Perkins at least seems very excited about it. Small wonder that those who don't care for it are up in arms.

Does it actually say anywhere that it's probably not true, or is that an assumption on your part?

Goodness gracious, it's right there in the commentary. Fizban's in a few pages gives a bunch of completely contradictory interpretations and throws up it's hand saying "but who knows what it really means, if anything?"

The DM knows, because it's just a tool introduced to allow WotC to talk about how their Drgons behave like D&D Drsgons in different worlds, but give DMs the freedom to change everything or just some parts.

 

[Parmandur]

Honestly, @Micah Sweet you should get the book from the library and read the tiny bits by yourself rather than get worried about it. It's really a very minor note that just offers Wyatt a tool for making a general supplement.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Again, its the only version of the First World we have, and Perkins at least seems very excited about it. Small wonder that those who don't care for it are up in arms.

Yeah, that's stupid, though. It is really, really stupid to get angry about a creation myth that is explicitly mentioned to just be a story that "suggests" things about the dragons and creation of the multiverse, and has a ton of variations in different worlds. It literally says that it could be either an interpretive myth or historical record.

Getting angry or "up in arms" about that is stupid. Really, really stupid. And shows that the people complaining about it probably haven't actually read the section about it, based on your next question.

Does it actually say anywhere that it's probably not true, or is that an assumption on your part?

It never says that it's "probably not true", but it hammers in pretty hard that this is just a story that is not proven to be true in the D&D Multiverse. It says that multiple times.

Straight out of Fizban's Treasury of Dragons:

Whether it is regarded as interpretive myth or historical record, “Elegy for the First World” offers an explanation for the common elements that appear in the legends and mythology of so many worlds across the Material Plane.

“Elegy for the First World” is an ancient Draconic poem of unknown origin, found with minor variations in the collections and traditions of dragons across many worlds of the Material Plane. Various creation myths told on different worlds echo some of the themes and notions of this poem, particularly when they describe dragons or draconic gods being involved in creating the world. But the heart of the poem is a profound assertion not found in any of those individual myths.

The elegy suggests that before the myriad worlds of the Material Plane came into being, before Oerth and Toril and Eberron and Krynn existed, the primordial dragons—Bahamut and Tiamat—worked together to create the Material Plane in the form of a single First World. All the worlds that now constitute the plane are, in the words of the poem, “seedling realities” formed when the First World was sundered in some unexplained catastrophe.

The story told in “Elegy for the First World” suggests a number of truths regarding the nature of dragons.