Standard D&D cosmology and souls

John Morrow said:
To some degree, D&D suffers from the fact that it draws information from several incompatible source traditions. On the one hand, it has Clerics who come from a quasi-Medieval Christian tradition (more clear in earlier editions) which have spells like Raise Dead and Resurrection. On the other hand, it has Druids who come from quasi-Celtic (or even quasi-New Age) tradition that has the spell Reincarnate. On the third hand, it has a popular Mythology set of Outer Planes inhabited by quasi-Norse gods, quasi-Greek gods, quasi-Egyptian gods and even quasi-Judeo-Christian devils and demons. And along with all of that, there is an alignment system that (by 3e) tries to stay agnostic on the issue of whether Evil is nature or nurture.

Basically, I think there just isn't one coherent cosmology at work here. Some source traditions have a soul take a one way trip while other source traditions have a recycling of souls.
I concur 100% John. One of the reasons D&D remains interesting to me is that due more to sloppiness and inconsistency than design, there is more than one way to interpret the metaphysics/physics represented by D&D.

The rules are silent on the question of pre-mortal existence. Similarly, they state there is some kind of body/soul dichotemy but are silent on what aspects of the self inhere in the body and what aspects inhere in the soul. There is plenty to mess around with here. And depending on which aspects of the rules you emphasize, you can create radically different theories of the soul.

On the other hand, it would be an interesting project to take every reference to this question in the rules and try to reconcile it with every other one. Would the rules even cohere? Look at a spell like Speak With Dead, for instance, and try to sort out the implications to the spell of the D&D theory of the soul.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Enchanted Trinkets Complete

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top