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

[Plaguescarred]

I am good with settings having a common shared cosmology. I could still see some crystal spheres having limitations towards some planes.

I expect every monsters entry to contain a physical description and piece of artwork.

I think seeing some monsters variants based on specific adventure or setting make senses. I am also glad to hear we’ll see more varieties among low-level humanoids than monstrous one as i think we don't need to see variety in each and every monsters necessarily but monsters we're more likely to encounter in greater numbers should offer diversity.

 

[MarkB]

Whilst I approve of the concept of a default cosmology that can incorporate a variety of gameworlds in a generic fashion, allowing GMs to 'plug in' to it if they don't want to design their own, I really dislike the idea of it being an all-inclusive cosmology that ties all of D&D's branded products together in-universe.

I love Eberron's take on the planes, and consider it a complete cosmology in and of itself, and having it integrated into a wider generic cosmology detracts from that setting's unique mythology.

 

[Weather Report]

I love Eberron's take on the planes, and consider it a complete cosmology in and of itself, and having it integrated into a wider generic cosmology detracts from that setting's unique mythology.

I can see that, I guess it comes from specific campaign approach, if you run an Eberron campaign, you might embrace its unique cosmology, but if you run a Planescape campaign, you might make it embrace the Great Wheel (as I have, we had a great Warforged Ranger they met in Sigil), just different approaches, that should be optional.

 

[Ratskinner]

And without the default, everyone who wishes to use the planes/cosmology needs to produce a not-so-mini-setting book from scratch. Way more work for everyone instead of a few.

Not so. If your game will not focus on such matters, you just don't need it. If your game will focus on any particular subject (the EvilEmpire, the OrcInvasion, the OmnicidalManiac, the FreedomLovingRebellion, etc) you'll have to produce some information about that. If your game wont focus on any particular subject, then you certainly don't need a default particular subject. Its only when you've got a default particular subject that you have to de-program your incoming players. (Imagine if the Red Wizards of Thay were written into the rules as default adversaries.) I've started some of the best D&D campaigns I've ever run (in early 2e, where it was easy) without a thought to what the cosmology looked like and it works fine...perhaps even better than having one at the start, because you can adapt it during play.

As for "fluff-lawyers", there's always the old addage: Don't play with d**ks. Bad players are no excuse for leaving a relevant portion of DMs with no structure off which to build or use whole cloth.

You don't need to be bad player or person to read "default" material in "core" rulebooks and assume it is true for the game your signing up for. Many folks just assume that anything presented as default is just a part of D&D. Certainly 4e weaves its cosmology very tightly with its classes and motivations. You might choose any number of classes (or features) presuming that you will get to involve yourself in one its cosmological struggles.

 

[Weather Report]

Not so

Very much so, you and your blanket "nope" and what-not do not make you right (and are dismissive and snide), many early DMs may be overwhelmed by the planes, a default could help; but I am not at all advocating all campaigns must adhere to one default cosmology.

 

[Ratskinner]

For me, the primary reason to have a cosmology set up has nothing to do with setting up an adventure -- it's for the PCs to figure out what/how they can interact with/take advantage of the "stuff" in the game world. A strong secondary reason is to act as inspiration for situations and NPC plans/actions.

Are there nearby transition planes like the Ethereal that allow covert intelligence gathering? Do some effects (bodily functions, ageing, poison, curses, divination magicks, etc.) cease on some planes and can the campaign movers factor that into their plans ? How easy/hard are the planes to traverse? Are there specific dangers stories speak of for traveling away from this world? About how difficult is it to "break free" of the base plane? What known magic exists that deals with planar traversal?

Having default answers for all of those narrows (or can narrow, depending on how much its burned into the rules) playstyle...which I thought was bad for a "unity" edition.

Also, how are "inspiration for situations and NPC plans/actions" and basically your second paragraph not a part of your adventure set up? I mean, I suppose we could sit around musing about such things all day, but unless they are part of an adventure or gameplay what difference does it make?

A default cosmology grants the basics for these answers and has me consider consequences and implications for the game world that I then use to introduce and evolve situations. The use of a default cosmology also gives me one less area I need to brief players on for knowledge the characters would have since I can tell the players to RTFM (or at least limit the briefing to what changes I've made to the default).

I'm not sure how "someone did it for me" has you considering consequences and implications for the game world. Otherwise, I'm fine the rest of it...in a setting book or boxed set. Just hand the players the Player's Guide to <X> instead of the MM, PHB, and DMG.

 

[Ratskinner]

Very much so, you and your blanket "nope" and what-not do not make you right (and are dismissive and snide), many early DMs may be overwhelmed by the planes, a default could help

Sorry about sounding dismissive and snide, that's not particularly my intention. Although I am trying to say that I flatly don't buy the point that newbie DMs need default fluff, so I suppose it may sound that way. I can't say I've ever witnessed such a thing. Can you describe for me what an early DM that is "overwhelmed by the planes" looks like and how he got there without somehow choosing it for his game? (Outside of conflicts with the default cosmology...which is my issue.) IME, fluff is the one thing that people freely and easily generate (and I think cosmologies generally fall into that category).

 

[Weather Report]

Sorry about sounding dismissive and snide, that's not particularly my intention. Although I am trying to say that I flatly don't buy the point that newbie DMs need default fluff, so I suppose it may sound that way. I can't say I've ever witnessed such a thing. Can you describe for me what an early DM that is "overwhelmed by the planes" looks like and how he got there without somehow choosing it for his game?

Could take awhile, there are a lot of new DMs out there.

 

[Nagol]

Having default answers for all of those narrows (or can narrow, depending on how much its burned into the rules) playstyle...which I thought was bad for a "unity" edition.

A game needs some default answers for those things it is attempting to emulate. The biggest tent of all would be a game on a single piece of paper that says "Go. Play. Be fair. Have fun." It won't lead to much in the way of a common experience from play, however. Does this need to be one of the default answers? Possibly not, but it's an area I appreciate since the default assumption across all the editions has been in strong variance to 'real life' and most genre fiction.

Also, how are "inspiration for situations and NPC plans/actions" and basically your second paragraph not a part of your adventure set up? I mean, I suppose we could sit around musing about such things all day, but unless they are part of an adventure or gameplay what difference does it make?

I use those elements to shape/drive the environment. Adventures are those parts of the environment with which the PCs engage for good or ill. PCs may adopt a planar element as part of a tactic... or not. PCs may or may not become aware of the otherworldly element in a situation and can approach or ignore it at their whim.

I'm not sure how "someone did it for me" has you considering consequences and implications for the game world. Otherwise, I'm fine the rest of it...in a setting book or boxed set. Just hand the players the Player's Guide to <X> instead of the MM, PHB, and DMG.

Because typically I find I'm a better editor than originator -- as an originator I tend to develop blind spots toward the creation whereas as an editor I can look critically and more holistically at the piece for consequences that will impact the game world.

 

[Weather Report]

Because typically I find I'm a better editor than originator -- as an originator I tend to develop blind spots toward the creation whereas as an editor I can look critically and more holistically at the piece for consequences that will impact the game world.

Eloquent; nice.