Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Marandahir" data-source="post: 8004614" data-attributes="member: 6803643">Nor would I. Though playing RAW, 4e changed that nature. We can pretend 100 years passed without much to say in FR, and just gloss over the Spellplague years, but it happened, and FR gave rationalizations for the changing rules.Meanwhile, Eberron introduced the Feywild Spires to handle the new 4e cosmology but then mostly stuck to its own original cosmology in 4e. It didn't want to change the nature of its denizens of Khyber, which include creatures that other settings might have called demons or devils or elementals or other dark things. This did not align with the Nerathi World Axis cosmology, and that's okay. But what it means is that Eberron doesn't fit into the Nerathi Material Plane at the center of the World Axis. It's a separate Material Plane with its own planetoid planes of influence and Siberys and Khyber affecting it in a local planarly way.This is irreconcilable with both the Great Wheel and the World Axis, because Eberron wasn't built to be part of a one-size-fits-all cosmology. It was built to showcase what the D&D rules of 3.5e could do with a setting build from the ground up with few of the sacred cows carried over from past editions. It also came into its own in 4e as a perfect example of a setting 4e works well in, despite having a significantly different cosmology from the core rules assumed setting. Keithh explores this pretty eloquently in an article on his blog here: <a href="http://keith-baker.com/dm-stars/" target="_blank">Dragonmarks: Reaching For The Stars</a>So to bring it back to the Multiverse of planes, Eberron and its 12 attendant moons and planes would be in their own "crystal sphere" as it were, which would encompass its whole cosmology, not just its material plane, unlike 2e Spelljammer. This of course leads us to the question, "why include it at all if you're just going to say its silo-ed off?I think again Keith says it best in the article above, and I quote:"By canon, Eberron is the only planet in its material plane. Between the planes and the demiplanes of Khyber, there’s ample opportunity for adventurers to explore strange new worlds, and deep space exploration was never planned as part of the setting; we don’t need to have alien invaders come from a distant planet when we already have alien invaders crawling out of Xoriat. Nothing’s stopping the DM from going full Spelljammer and breaking through the wall of stars. But by default, that’s not the story Eberron was designed to tell."So we CAN have an inter-dimensional, multiverse-hopping adventure. At that point, though, Eberron is a waypoint on a larger field of planar stories, and that cannot be the focus of any Eberron-centric book or article, by definition. Similarly, Magic the Gathering stories are built around their set's plane. But crossing between planes is a larger metagame story that explains both the players having cards from other sets in rotation and also explains the newer-ish planeswalker cards/characters, and how these characters ended up in a different set's world. But the sets themselves are not about the planar travel between them, and neither can books such as MOT or GGR focus much on that element of the MtG mythos.That is the purpose of a setting like Spelljammer, as opposed to a setting like Planescape - it is explicitly about travel between settings, rather than exploring the assumed cosmological setting of the core rules of D&D. So if we ever get Spelljammer as a 5e book, I would expect extensive revisions to the setting's concepts of Crystal Spheres, so as to better allow for breathing room of different campaign settings' cosmologies.</blockquote>

Verification