D&D 5E July 11 Q&A: Cosmology, Monster Descriptions and Monster Variants

[Majoru Oakheart]

In this regard, are the planes/cosmology different in some way from "that kingdom over the mountains"?

Not really. I don't like coming up with worlds either. Which is why almost all my campaigns take place in Greyhawk or FR. I find most of my games don't really focus on the flavour of the world itself and work in just about any world with generic fantasy sensibilities. If I am running the Tomb of Horrors and the PCs spend most of the campaign in the dungeon then the politics and layout of the world are nearly inconsequential to my campaign. But at least if I set them in a prewritten world that extra information is there in case it happens to be required(for instance, the PCs insist on going to a nearby town for rest that I can at least add a touch of flavour to the game).

I certainly wouldn't take that as any measure or evidence for a lack of creativity! I think just about everybody in this hobby takes inspiration from all sorts of sources, and not just fantasy and the rulebooks, either. However, even if you'd never come up with Mechanus on your own, does that mean that its existence, properties, and relationships with the rest of cosmos is needed as a default assumption that the rules are built around?

For me, I'd say yes. Back when I was much younger and we played 2e D&D, we used to sit around and have metaphysical discussions about D&D. About the nature of the planes, about why they were created the way they were, why the denizens acted the way they did. We'd discuss what would happen if Elminster went through a portal and ended up in Dragonlance and met Raistlin. We'd discuss what would happen if one of the Wizards from one of our campaigns ended up stumbling across the Demi-plane where a Wizard from one of our other campaigns lived.

To us, D&D was as much about the meta-universe as it was about any particular D&D game. It was always assumed by us that every D&D game was connected to every other D&D game since they all took place in the same cosmology. They were all different Prime Material Planes...but they were all tied together by the same ethereal place, the same astral plane, etc. It made the game feel...well, bigger than any one particular game. We loved that part of the game possibly more than actually playing D&D itself.

But I love meta-plot. We'd spend just as much time discussing Rifts and what if scenarios for that game. We almost never actually played it because the game itself fell apart too easily, but we were interested in the setting and characters. To me, the planes, Orcus, the lords of hell, Sigil, demons, the Blood War, and so on ARE the setting and characters of D&D. Each DM's world is just a layer thrown on top of that.

However, my main point was that without it, I'd likely invent something stupid like a Plane of Pizza where souls go to die and turn into gooey mozzarella. I don't want to subject my players to that, so I'd be happy to use someone else's better ideas.

 

[Ratskinner]

Not really. I don't like coming up with worlds either. Which is why almost all my campaigns take place in Greyhawk or FR. I find most of my games don't really focus on the flavour of the world itself and work in just about any world with generic fantasy sensibilities. If I am running the Tomb of Horrors and the PCs spend most of the campaign in the dungeon then the politics and layout of the world are nearly inconsequential to my campaign. But at least if I set them in a prewritten world that extra information is there in case it happens to be required(for instance, the PCs insist on going to a nearby town for rest that I can at least add a touch of flavour to the game).

<snippage>

However, my main point was that without it, I'd likely invent something stupid like a Plane of Pizza where souls go to die and turn into gooey mozzarella. I don't want to subject my players to that, so I'd be happy to use someone else's better ideas.

I can understand that. That's totally appropriate for campaign settings, which I have no problem with. I mean, that's what they're for.

For me, I'd say yes. Back when I was much younger and we played 2e D&D, we used to sit around and have metaphysical discussions about D&D. About the nature of the planes, about why they were created the way they were, why the denizens acted the way they did. We'd discuss what would happen if Elminster went through a portal and ended up in Dragonlance and met Raistlin. We'd discuss what would happen if one of the Wizards from one of our campaigns ended up stumbling across the Demi-plane where a Wizard from one of our other campaigns lived.

To us, D&D was as much about the meta-universe as it was about any particular D&D game. It was always assumed by us that every D&D game was connected to every other D&D game since they all took place in the same cosmology. They were all different Prime Material Planes...but they were all tied together by the same ethereal place, the same astral plane, etc. It made the game feel...well, bigger than any one particular game. We loved that part of the game possibly more than actually playing D&D itself.

But I love meta-plot. We'd spend just as much time discussing Rifts and what if scenarios for that game. We almost never actually played it because the game itself fell apart too easily, but we were interested in the setting and characters. To me, the planes, Orcus, the lords of hell, Sigil, demons, the Blood War, and so on ARE the setting and characters of D&D. Each DM's world is just a layer thrown on top of that.

Ahh...well that's a different thing. I'm not sure anybody (even WotC) has any idea how important such things are or aren't for the game (especially since now there are two competing views on what the D&D cosmology "should" be.) I would guess that they would view that as some sort of branding thing, and perhaps is why we are getting a default cosmology.

 

[Tovec]

In this regard, are the planes/cosmology different in some way from "that kingdom over the mountains"?

Yes. At the same time it is both easier and harder to get to that kingdom over the mountains. News from that kingdom affects this one in vastly different ways than news from elysium. Basically I would boil this down to asking:

"Are outsiders/immortals different in some way from "random human NPC"?

The answer would still be yes. They are worlds different, pun partially intended. How varies by game but I doubt you would really argue it.

I certainly wouldn't take that as any measure or evidence for a lack of creativity! I think just about everybody in this hobby takes inspiration from all sorts of sources, and not just fantasy and the rulebooks, either. However, even if you'd never come up with Mechanus on your own, does that mean that its existence, properties, and relationships with the rest of cosmos is needed as a default assumption that the rules are built around?

I would prefer if they made Mechanus have the crunch needed for people to be able to play in Mechanus the way the creators intended. That would be a sourcebook or setting book of some kind.

I would also prefer if they made Mechanus vague enough that I can use "clockwork and measured" universe in my own way. This step has taken me years to get comfortable with.

Most importantly they need a default cosmology to be broad enough that either interpretation can work, but one common enough that people can make material for Mechanus, or any plane, and know what that means. We do NOT need it to be pervasive enough that you have to know about the details of Mechanus or have Mechanus at all.

IE. Ethereal Jaunt needs the Ethereal plane. However, if people don't use the Ethereal then that is fine and they can change how it works or if it exists at all. That doesn't mean that they should not have the Ethereal or assume that it does not exist as a default. Maybe for some of the more obscure things they can give ideas but they shouldn't let the limits of what someone wants or does not want in their game hugely effect what material they make for the game as a whole.

There is nothing wrong with the default cosmology as long as you aren't forced to use it. And Nothing I've seen from WotC so far says you will be forced to use it. Just that they will use it as a default or starting point when making or expanding upon cosmology.

 

[Ratskinner]

Yes. At the same time it is both easier and harder to get to that kingdom over the mountains. News from that kingdom affects this one in vastly different ways than news from elysium. Basically I would boil this down to asking:

"Are outsiders/immortals different in some way from "random human NPC"?

The answer would still be yes. They are worlds different, pun partially intended. How varies by game but I doubt you would really argue it.

Certainly they are different mechanically (by amount of detail/weight, if nothing else), but we are talking (or at least I'm asking) about from the strictly creative end of things. Which is to say, is there a qualitative difference between imagining the "kingdom next door" and "some plane"? In particular, some difference that would cause a new DM to need a default exemplar of the one but not the other? I don't think there really is.

What I do think cries out for examples (in either the DMG or MotP), is how to take that imagining and translate that into mechanics. I mean, that's the real trick in D&D, the mechanics. Whether its a monster, plane, or kingdom, I think the creative aspects and uses of the core game are better served by having examples of how to make a concept work well within the rest of the rules than by having defaults.

I would prefer if they made Mechanus have the crunch needed for people to be able to play in Mechanus the way the creators intended. That would be a sourcebook or setting book of some kind.

I would also prefer if they made Mechanus vague enough that I can use "clockwork and measured" universe in my own way. This step has taken me years to get comfortable with.

Most importantly they need a default cosmology to be broad enough that either interpretation can work, but one common enough that people can make material for Mechanus, or any plane, and know what that means. We do NOT need it to be pervasive enough that you have to know about the details of Mechanus or have Mechanus at all.

Crunchy Mechanus in a setting book. No objection.

Vague Mechanus to use in your own way.....umm....If you want to use your own "clockwork" plane, why does it need to be Mechanus at all? I'm not feeling certain of what you mean by this.

I don't see how you make those concepts play together well.

IE. Ethereal Jaunt needs the Ethereal plane. However, if people don't use the Ethereal then that is fine and they can change how it works or if it exists at all. That doesn't mean that they should not have the Ethereal or assume that it does not exist as a default. Maybe for some of the more obscure things they can give ideas but they shouldn't let the limits of what someone wants or does not want in their game hugely effect what material they make for the game as a whole.

On the contrary, I think its the other way 'round. The Ethereal Plane needs Ethereal Jaunt to justify its existence in the default conception of D&D cosmology. Rename the spell Planar Jaunt or even better Etherealness or Ghostly Form and eliminate the plane from its description:

Ethereal Jaunt
You become ethereal, along with your equipment. For the duration of the spell, you are in a place called the Ethereal Plane, which overlaps the normal, physical, Material Plane. When the spell expires, you return to material existence.
An ethereal creature is invisible, insubstantial, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down, albeit at half normal speed. As an insubstantial creature, you can move through solid objects, including living creatures. An ethereal creature can see and hear on the Material Plane, but everything looks gray and ephemeral. Sight and hearing onto the Material Plane are limited to 60 feet.
Force effects and abjurations affect an ethereal creature normally. Their effects extend onto the Ethereal Plane from the Material Plane, but not vice versa. An ethereal creature can’t attack material creatures, and spells you cast while ethereal affect only other ethereal things. Certain material creatures or objects have attacks or effects that work on the Ethereal Plane.
Treat other ethereal creatures and ethereal objects as if they were material.

If you end the spell and become material while inside a material object (such as a solid wall), you are shunted off to the nearest open space and take 1d6 points of damage per 5 feet that you so travel.

Etherealness
You and your equipment become ethereal, much like a ghost. When the spell expires, you return to normal existence.

An ethereal creature is invisible, insubstantial, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down, albeit at half normal speed. As an insubstantial creature, you can move through solid objects, including living creatures. An ethereal creature can see and hear, but everything looks gray and ephemeral. Sight and hearing are limited to 60 feet.

Force effects and abjurations affect an ethereal creature normally.
An ethereal creature can’t normally attack material creatures, and spells you cast while ethereal affect only other ethereal things. Certain material creatures or objects have attacks or effects that work against Ethereal Objects or Creatures.

Treat other ethereal creatures and ethereal objects as if they were material.

If you end the spell and become material while inside a material object (such as a solid wall), you are shunted off to the nearest open space and take 1d6 points of damage per 5 feet that you so travel.

Which doesn't do anything to prevent the Ethereal Plane from appearing in an appendix as an example or in another supplement to wrap the planar aspect back into it.