You repeat this line a lot here in this thread. Maybe it's not us . . .
Nah, it definitely is. I can be sure of that both because multiple people in this thread aren’t having any trouble getting it, and I have this issue often here, but almost never anywhere else.
Again, how you prefer to view the D&D worlds and multiverse is fine, how you choose to use it in your games is fine. Not trying to tell you your preferences aren't legit or are somehow lesser. But to be upset that your ideas don't match up with current official canon, and that others actually like the existing canon, or have even other ways of looking at things . . . I mean, it's okay that they don't, but it just isn't something to get so worked up over.
Voicing a preference opposed to the direction the game is going isn’t “upset” or being “worked up”.
But of course... that would just prove our points that the lore doesn't matter, because it would show once again that no lore is official and any lore can be written and re-written on a whim by whomever has the WotC D&D letterhead at the time.
No, it wouldn’t, because one doesn’t even follow from the other.
From what I can see, the language used for the creation portion are "legends say" and "sages agree" and so on. It's rumor that they created the universe, and it's possible that it was true that they created the Eberron universe by isolating it from the rest of the Great Wheel. Or that they never existed at all.
Is there something outside of the 3.5 creation myth that gives the progenitor wyrms objective reality and says definitively that they created everything?
Blinkingman.gif
Okay, let’s try again. The point is not whether the progenitors are real and the story is true. Nitpicking the example does not engage with the point being illustrated by the example, for one thing.
For another, the scenario presupposes that the DM in the example has decided to use them as real, and use them as a vehicle for a cosmic revelation. Therefor, the question of whether they are real is
completely irrelevant to the scenario in question.
Lastly, the statement that I made was not about whether they are real. I stated that
if they are real, the new lore demotes them from what they would be in a game without the news lore in which they are also real.
I had and have no need to comment on the effect of the lore on games where the cosmology doesn’t matter and the progenitors aren’t treated as/revealed to be real.
Thank you for clarification. I believe I see the issue, but I no longer think I can offer you any help. We are just to different in this respect. I don't think I can explain any better without sounding condescending and that would not be my intent. You will just have to be unhappy I guess (until WotC changes course) - sorry!
I’m not…unhappy? I don’t get it. I don’t assume that someone who dislikes a change or prefers a different model is upset about it.
And how exactly are the people of Eberron supposed to have that happen? If it CAN'T happen... then the "truth" doesn't matter.
Guess what? Maybe we "people" on planet Earth aren't actually on a planet and we are all just computer simulations being run by some advanced species. You and I aren't real. Boom! I've just shattered your worldview.
Oh, but I didn't... because we have no way of knowing whether or not what I just said is true. All we know is what we know. So the "truth" does not matter. You and I are going to just continue to live our lives without any existential brainmelting.
You all keep trying to attribute OUR knowledge of players of the D&D game and our knowledge of how the books wrote all this crap down to the fictional people within all these worlds. But none of them care. None of them know any existential truth. None of them have a complete picture of the entire story. So just because WE meta-players know the so-called "truth"... a "truth" mind you, that was only invented for this edition of the game and can just as easily be retconned by the next shlub that come along... doesn't mean it affects any character within any world.
I mean, you can play the game in a way where cosmic truth is not knowable, but that’s hardly a safe assumption about games broadly, and it certainly isn’t better than the other way, it’s just
your preference.
...Unless, you as a player just aren't able to compartmentalize things at all, and keep having these existentials truths of the multiuniverse intrude upon your brain as you roleplay your Shifter in the Eldeen Reaches. If that's the case... I'm sorry you have that problem. But you're not going to get the other 99.999% of the gaming populace to understand.
Ah yes, from “ego” to “bad roleplaying and/or inability to compartmentalize”. Can you make an argument on this topic without insulting the people you disagree with, or no?
That quote is from Rising actually.
Rising has another section that more explicitly details possible interactions between Eberron and the rest of the multiverse.
Eberron and the Multiverse
It is theoretically possible to travel between Eberron and other worlds in the multiverse by means of the Deep Ethereal or various spells designed for planar travel, but the cosmology of Eberron is specifically designed to prevent such travel, to keep the world hidden away from the meddling of gods, celestials, and fiends from beyond.
The three progenitor wyrms worked together to form Eberron and its planes as a new cosmic system in the depths of the Ethereal Plane. They recreated the elves, orcs, dragons, and other races found throughout the multiverse and placed them in their new world, but allowed them to develop beyond the reach of Gruumsh, Corellon, Lolth, and other influences for good and ill.
In your campaign, you might decide that the barrier formed by the Ring of Siberys is intact, and contact between Eberron and the worlds and planes beyond its cosmology is impossible. This is the default assumption of this book. On the other hand, you might want to incorporate elements from other realms. Perhaps you want to use a published adventure that involves Tiamat or the forces of the Abyss meddling in the affairs of the world. In such a case, it could be that the protection offered by the Ring of Siberys has begun to fail. You might link the weakening of Siberys to the Mourning — perhaps whatever magical catastrophe caused the Mourning also disrupted the Ring of Siberys, or perhaps a disruption of the Ring of Siberys actually caused the Mourning!
If contact between Eberron and the wider multiverse is recent and limited, consider the implications for everyone involved. In the Great Wheel, Asmodeus is an ancient threat, with well-established cults, lines of tieflings, and a long history of meddling that sages might uncover in dusty old tomes hidden in remote libraries. But if Asmodeus has only just discovered Eberron and begun to influence it for the first time, there is no lore about him to be discovered on Eberron. He has no power base and needs to recruit new followers. Unusual alliances might form against him, as celestials and fiends join forces to expel this hostile outsider.
Thank you. Honestly I’d forgotten just how far Rising goes to make Eberron explicitly a sub domain of the Great Wheel.
Like, DMs who do stick to canon now have origin revelations about the various races cut off from them as options, as do writers putting works on DMsGuild. Now, Eberron DMs who modify from canon have to contend not just with Eberron lore, but also with Great Wheel lore. I’m very glad that my group pretty much agrees that the lore change is silly and/or bad, and we continue to use the same lore we used when starting the campaign, but future games of Eberron, for many groups, will be different.
Like, the only thing I’m “upset” by in this thread is people acting like no campaigns interact with the cosmology enough for this stuff to impact a campaign, or try to claim that there literally hasn’t been a change. There objectively has been. You prefer it, great. At least admit it’s a change!
www.enworld.org
). They are quite different.
