Klaus
First Post
I'm sympathetic to the 4e setting designers' concerns here. I get that if you put setting material in the Core Books and people start to associate that with playing D&D, that it then becomes something that you kind of WANT to include in every product. Like, if people are used to the Feywild, or the Elemental Chaos, or teleporting blink elf PCs, because that's the "default," the thrust is to include the "default" in every setting so that someone coming from just the Core Books still gets to play with their favorite game element. Arguably, this is why so many settings have elves and dwarves and halflings and gnomes, and why they're kind of vaguely similar to each other in most settings: the default intrudes on other settings by its nature as a default.
I kind of get that pressure. Which is part of why I've come to the idea of "no default, just examples." That way it's clear from the outset that D&D itself doesn't necessarily involve X, Y, or Z, but it is only by the choice of the DM and the group that their particular game has it. Which frees you up when you're making a setting to do what makes sense for the setting without having to accommodate an assumption that X, Y, or Z, because it's in the core rules, should be part of every D&D game.
Eh, I dunno. Imagine the opposite: the core books presenting the older cosmology, and then you get a Nentir Vale setting book that presented the World Axis. Is that really any different? In 3e the core books had the Great Wheel, and then Eberron came along with a whole new cosmology and new takes on monsters' origins. Dark Sun did that in 2e, Dragonlance did that in 1e. All had defaults, but specific settings (with the notable exception of FR) didn't change to match the default, they presented the changes to the default.