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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 3991809" data-attributes="member: 710">Why is this not an artifical game construct? Someone decided "In D&D, we have 4 alignment components and they are cosmic forces. Let's build our world around that idea!" The problem is that this base assumption alone might seem wrong to many game(r)s. And even if the cosmic forces of evil/good/chaos/law exist, that doesn't mean that every world should follow the Great Wheel. Because the wheel is just one possible setup. Well, in 3E, the moon, the deep sea and the sun don't have any supplements describing how they look exactly to visitors.But the elemental planes did. The sun and the bottom of the seas are rarely (not never) an important part of a fantasy setting that the adventures get to explore or visit. But that's not really to the point. The Great Wheel is probably even a step more artificial then the 4E Astral Sea & Elemental Chaos setup. From what I saw so far, the new cosmology supports a lot more variety and unpredictability into the whole planar travel thing. On a said note: What I don't understand is why there is even the assumption that either anew or the old cosmology is somehow more important then others. The Astral Sea & Elemental Chaos will be part of the implied setting (Points of Light) for 4E. But that doesn't mean that it has to be used in every campaign setting. In 3E, the focus on alignment as game-mechanic made it hard to shred the core assumption of good vs evil & chaos vs law out of a game or game world, but nothing really forced one to use the Great Wheel in its entirety. The Astral Sea seems even a bit more "forgiving" in this regard.</blockquote>

Verification