| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
 Posted - 29 Jan 2009 : 16:09:28
|
|
If nothing else intrigued me about 4e (which is not true), the new cosmology does. So, (keeping in mind that I am a stick-in-the-mud hardcore 3.x DM/Player) is there any 4e proponents out there that are willing to tell me if this book is worth buying or not? Is there a large amount of lore like the 3e Manual of the Planes? Or is most of it rules?
|
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
Edited by - Hawkins on 29 Jan 2009 23:49:54
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jan 2009 : 23:04:43
|
Strangely, despite my love for cosmologies and other planar stuff, I've yet to pick this. Which is doubly strange because I've always purchased the MotP for each edition on the day of its release.
Though, like Hawkins, I wouldn't mind some further info from those who do have it.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
Edited by - The Sage on 29 Jan 2009 23:05:27 |
 |
|
|
Edain Shadowstar
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 01:09:35
|
| I have only just given this tome a passing look, but the inclusion of Sigil has me waffling between curiosity and blinding rage...this requires further study... |
Edain Shadowstar
Archwizard of Rel Astra and Waterdeep
"Mmm…pie…"
- Gaius Solarian, Captain General |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 01:56:44
|
I have it and like it. In my opinion it is worth picking up as a tool for DMs more than players.
The updated sigil information is cool, if brief (I believe 5 pages of the book)
the world axis theory for the cosmology works for me, but I know others liked the great wheel or tree concepts. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
|
|
Edain Shadowstar
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 02:38:58
|
The section on Sigil (pages 25-29) isn't really anything special. Its a brief overview of the city and its divisions, environment and personages, and it contains little that you would not find in the original Planescape Campaign Set, indeed, some of it reads like it was copied straight out of a AD&D Planescape book, but with the same tone. Of course there are some 4e-isms slid in there (the linking of hte Lower Ward to the Elemental Chaos...okay...), but otherwise its boilerplate and I don't consider it on its own worth the price of the book, especially if, like me, you have a collection of old Planescape books or scans.
Please keep in mind, however, that I am merely commenting of the Planescape section and not the entire book, which I'm still examining. |
Edain Shadowstar
Archwizard of Rel Astra and Waterdeep
"Mmm…pie…"
- Gaius Solarian, Captain General |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 04:06:09
|
Ah, that's interesting. Thanks Edain.
What about the the ratio between lore and rules? Since I'd only really be purchasing this tome for the source material, I'm curious about what those sections are like?
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3290 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 04:26:27
|
-The book seems to me to focus more on the Feywild. I really like it. But I plan on using the Feywild, and Shadowfell in my 3E Games. I just like the way those sections are presented. 
BRIMSTONE |
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Edain Shadowstar
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 07:36:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage:
What about the the ratio between lore and rules? Since I'd only really be purchasing this tome for the source material, I'm curious about what those sections are like?[/i]
In the section on Sigil, there are no mechanics, but it only takes up about four and a half pages.
As for the rest of the book, its largely divided between the four overarching planar areas, The Feywild, Shadowfell, Elemental Choas and Astral Sea. Now, again I would like to preface this by saying that I still would not classify my perusal as anything beyond cursory, or perhaps more accurately I have not, as of yet, stopped to pontificate on the mechanics or the underlying design concepts as of yet, nor have I pin pointed any concepts for significant conceptual mining. That having been said, its mechanical mix is about what you would expect from a book entitled Manual of the Planes, its opening chapter containing mechanical information on the hazards and environment of the planes, portal malfunctions and random exits, etc.
The individual sections dealing with the aforementioned four primary overarching planar areas contain some limited mechanical information pertaining to certain unique hazards to those areas (Soul Rot? Really? So, we have abandoned all subtlety, rather than hope?), but are otherwise fluff pieces, detailing inhabitants, locations, etc. Around page 112 the book then starts dealing with planar monsters, items, rituals and paragon paths. So, for a book 159 pages, it spends about 47 pages dealing with largely mechanical stuff necessary to campaigning in the Fourth Edition cosmology, which I ought to note is called the World Axis cosmology, as its based around two different axises with the Material World at the center of both.
Like the Forgotten Realms Fourth Edition books, I felt it was short, but I might be spoiled by my in excess of a thousands pages of Planescape material plus several past Manuals of the Planes and so forth. It seems a piece that certainly has potential ideas in it, but as my tastes still run towards the Great Wheel I'm satisfied I didn't pay anything for it (before anyone thinks anything untoward I have friends in publishing who get me stuff for free, so I have, as of yet, not actually purchased any Fourth Edition books). Interestingly, the Great Wheel gets a sidebar (that consumes most of page 15) where the authors decided to assign all the Outer Planes alignments from the Fourth Edition five-point alignment system, as if it would endear me to the product (if I didn't respect books so much I may very well have burned the sidebar portion, i.e. most of the page, away). It isn't that I don't respect and acknowledge their right to change the system and make a new cosmology, but I find it kind of annoying when they take a two second pass at retooling the old cosmology for an alignment system is was simply not designed to operate under.
But all of my borderline grognard-esque reactions to certain segments of the book (Shemeshka is now a raavastas?! Is that even legal?) I wouldn't go so far as to begrudge anyone using it. Bluntly, I wouldn't personally consider it worth paying for, allowing for the briefness of the examination and noting that I have played Fourth Edition and my group has collectively opted to reject it at this time, but if you are interested in the new cosmology, or more practically actually playing Fourth Edition in it, then, yeah go for it. I mean, its your money and no one's holding an arquebuss to your head, right?
NOTICE: I am not a professional reviewer, nor would I claim to be even if drunk (unless you've heard something I haven't). For the third time I still consider my evaluation of this product preliminary, so take it for what you will, if you will, as you will...er...yeah. I am not an employee of Wizards of the Coast, nor am I their frontman, although if the money is right and they are offering...well, have your people call my people, we'll do lunch. |
Edain Shadowstar
Archwizard of Rel Astra and Waterdeep
"Mmm…pie…"
- Gaius Solarian, Captain General |
Edited by - Edain Shadowstar on 30 Jan 2009 07:37:20 |
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
|
|
Edain Shadowstar
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 12:56:50
|
The World Axis cosmology is incorporated in the Fourth Edition Forgotten Realms already, via the FR Campaign Guide, so, mechanically, yes. As far as content, the Manual of the Planes does not contain any references to the Realms that I saw, though many the Core (i.e. WoG) deities get nods.
Now, if you're asking me to evaluate whether the tone or milieu, if you will, of the Realms and the Manual work together, well...I suppose. I admit, I do not have the same attachment to the Fourth Edition feel, as it were, and therefore am not as sensitive to it. |
Edain Shadowstar
Archwizard of Rel Astra and Waterdeep
"Mmm…pie…"
- Gaius Solarian, Captain General |
Edited by - Edain Shadowstar on 30 Jan 2009 12:58:29 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36971 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 15:32:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Edain Shadowstar
So, for a book 159 pages, it spends about 47 pages dealing with largely mechanical stuff necessary to campaigning in the Fourth Edition cosmology, which I ought to note is called the World Axis cosmology, as its based around two different axises with the Material World at the center of both.
Almost a third of the book is rules? That seems a disproportionate amount... |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Edain Shadowstar
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 16:07:34
|
Well, obviously terming the sections pertaining to monsters, items, paragon paths and rituals as purely mechanics ignores the fluff pieces, such as the small blurbs about each monster. Further, the Third Edition Manual of the Planes at 221 pages probably has about the same amount of space dealing with monsters, spells and planar mechanics. I wouldn't call the new book mechanically bloated, more like its been trimmed in other ways relative to past versions. Of course one could make a not unfair argument that with only four primary overarching planar areas (ignoring Sigil, Far Realm and the Plane of Dreams) versus the plethora of distinct and separate planar areas in the Great Wheel (six main elemental planes vs. the Elemental Chaos) that it requires less space to convey the necessary information about the planes. As I said previously, take it for what you will.
Edit: Hmmm...would an index have killed them.../sigh... |
Edain Shadowstar
Archwizard of Rel Astra and Waterdeep
"Mmm…pie…"
- Gaius Solarian, Captain General |
Edited by - Edain Shadowstar on 30 Jan 2009 16:08:49 |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2009 : 16:47:12
|
| Thank you Edain. I may pick it up used then. I have resolved not to spend any money on 4e and 4e-related material in the new form already. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jan 2009 : 01:35:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Edain Shadowstar
So, for a book 159 pages, it spends about 47 pages dealing with largely mechanical stuff necessary to campaigning in the Fourth Edition cosmology, which I ought to note is called the World Axis cosmology, as its based around two different axises with the Material World at the center of both.
Almost a third of the book is rules? That seems a disproportionate amount...
estimated 26 pages of monsters, 10 pages of paragon path builds, 4 pages of rituals, and 9 pages of magic items. The rest is mostly lore |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jan 2009 : 01:49:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Does it go well with 4E FR?
It does and is consistent with everything published for 4E at this point IMO. |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 05:59:12
|
I read through a copy of this at the FLGS, and I found a few bright spot, but its a mixed bag for me. I wouldn't have minded a shift in how the planes "really" are if there had been less of a definitive change (for example, had the Abyss been a hole in the Astral Sea, I'd have a lot less of a problem with the outer planes, for example).
I didn't like that the designers felt compelled to come up with a new reason for the Blood War . . . I realize that they didn't like the Law versus Chaos angle, but it still seems to me that one group of beings that wants to control the universe and impose their laws on it would probably class with another group of beings that wants to dismantle the universe and unravel anything established, usually violently. One of the trends that 4E has started has been to define, as simply as possible, the underpinnings of various D&D isms, but once again, its been done in a very simplistic, two dimensional way.
I was not a fan of folding the Domains of Dread into the Shadowfell. I don't think it would have been impossible to set Ravenloft in the Shadowfell, but just dotting it with domains seems . . . well, like preserving the idea with the bare minimum throwback to the setting itself.
The Feywild was one of my favorite sections, although I like it much better as a separate entity than with any connection to Toril, since the eladrin from the Feywild don't strike me as being the same beings as moon or gold elves. I really, really still wish they had gone with sidhe for the "eladrin" name in 4E, especially since the description from the 3E Manual of the Planes vaguely suggested a race of sidhe that fits the 4E description of eladrin. Still, I really liked the various courts and intrigues . . . those kinds of RP background political discussions have been sorely missing in 4E material that I've read.
I think, and this may just be me, that they could have done a better job of bridging the gap between editions if, instead of Sigil being its own alternate plane, the whole Outlands existed "in between" the normal cosmology, with the wheel and the gate towns and all, and thus it could be explained how some people used to see the planes as a wheel.
The guys at the Tome Show made a very good point when it comes to the logic of the Elemental Chaos versus how they presented the Far Realm. Supposedly, planes that you can't adventure on are bad and shouldn't exist. But then they stress the influence of the Far Realm, a plane where you can't really adventure. I think it irks me more when people don't stick to their own design parameters than just changing the design objectives does.
|
|
|
|
ranger_of_the_unicorn_run
Learned Scribe
USA
292 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 18:34:43
|
| Is FR still in the celestial tree cosmology format, or did they change it for 4e? |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 20:13:11
|
Nope, according to a sidebar in the Manual of the Planes, all D&D cosmologies will conform to the new "World Axis" cosmology from this point on in 4E. Basically, they mention in the sidebar that they decided that not every setting should conform to the same cosmology as it did in 2nd edition, so they gave different worlds different cosmologies in 3rd edition, and the 3rd edition Realms cosmology helped them to realize that, indeed, every cosmology should conform to the same cosmology in 4E.
My head spins when I follow the logic . . . |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36971 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 20:21:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Nope, according to a sidebar in the Manual of the Planes, all D&D cosmologies will conform to the new "World Axis" cosmology from this point on in 4E. Basically, they mention in the sidebar that they decided that not every setting should conform to the same cosmology as it did in 2nd edition, so they gave different worlds different cosmologies in 3rd edition, and the 3rd edition Realms cosmology helped them to realize that, indeed, every cosmology should conform to the same cosmology in 4E.
My head spins when I follow the logic . . .
How's that going to work for Eber-whatsit, then? Its cosmology is unique and doesn't mesh with the Wheel or the Tree. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Asgetrion
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1564 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 20:40:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Nope, according to a sidebar in the Manual of the Planes, all D&D cosmologies will conform to the new "World Axis" cosmology from this point on in 4E. Basically, they mention in the sidebar that they decided that not every setting should conform to the same cosmology as it did in 2nd edition, so they gave different worlds different cosmologies in 3rd edition, and the 3rd edition Realms cosmology helped them to realize that, indeed, every cosmology should conform to the same cosmology in 4E.
My head spins when I follow the logic . . .
How's that going to work for Eber-whatsit, then? Its cosmology is unique and doesn't mesh with the Wheel or the Tree.
Well, despite what they've said, I have a suspicion that Eber-whatsit is going to be hit with something called... 'Mournplague'!
(alright, seriously, I think they're going to explain it away as the astrologers and diviners and planar travelers having made mistakes or deliberately spreading false information or something...) |
"What am I doing today? Ask me tomorrow - I can be sure of giving you the right answer then."
-- Askarran of Selgaunt, Master Sage, speaking to a curious merchant, Year of the Helm |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 21:08:42
|
| One of the last few podcasts, I can't remember which one, mentioned that Eberron's unique cosmology was a "problem" and that it was going to be brought in line with "standard" D&D settings, using the "World Axis" cosmology. They also mentioned that it as a "problem" that, for example, traditional demon lords, couldn't be villains in Eberron . . . so, um, I'm not so sure how "change free" the setting is going to end up. |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 21:58:27
|
Yup yup, a few people, over on ENworld, already showed their annoyance about this change. Kind of made me laugh because people were like, least they didn't do what they did to FR! And others were, yea, well, just wait and see.
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
One of the last few podcasts, I can't remember which one, mentioned that Eberron's unique cosmology was a "problem" and that it was going to be brought in line with "standard" D&D settings, using the "World Axis" cosmology. They also mentioned that it as a "problem" that, for example, traditional demon lords, couldn't be villains in Eberron . . . so, um, I'm not so sure how "change free" the setting is going to end up.
|
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 22:10:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Yup yup, a few people, over on ENworld, already showed their annoyance about this change. Kind of made me laugh because people were like, least they didn't do what they did to FR! And others were, yea, well, just wait and see.
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
One of the last few podcasts, I can't remember which one, mentioned that Eberron's unique cosmology was a "problem" and that it was going to be brought in line with "standard" D&D settings, using the "World Axis" cosmology. They also mentioned that it as a "problem" that, for example, traditional demon lords, couldn't be villains in Eberron . . . so, um, I'm not so sure how "change free" the setting is going to end up.
I will bet that they will make whatever changes needed to redirect the Eberron setting to be consistent with the rest of the 4E models.
if not, it will just further alienate grognard realms fans, who would then be able to articulate that WOTC was just picking on the realms with the re-do of the setting. |
Edited by - scererar on 01 Feb 2009 22:11:56 |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 22:57:14
|
I'm a big enough person to not want to see someone else's setting screwed up just to make me feel like its not just my favorite setting. I ran into enough of that with a handful of Greyhawk fans that reveled in anything that annoyed FR fans, for no other reason than that TSR made FR the default 2nd edition setting and didn't do enough to promote Greyhawk as a setting.
As it stands, the core 4E experience and its hard wired elements trump any setting consideration. If I were to run a 4E campaign, I'd avoid any established setting and make my own campaign setting, but that's just my thoughts on the matter. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 01 Feb 2009 : 23:00:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
How's that going to work for Eber-whatsit, then? Its cosmology is unique and doesn't mesh with the Wheel or the Tree.
There's actually been plenty of debate on this. As it stands now, both the cosmology of EBERRON and most of the unique setting material that supports it will likely be altered to confirm more specifically to the core D&D planar cosmology of 4e. And that means some of the best bits of planar lore for the setting will probably be lost, or changed significantly, at the very least.
Which is unfortunate, because the unique planar cosmology of EBERRON was, for me at least, one of its greatest selling points.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36971 Posts |
Posted - 02 Feb 2009 : 03:58:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
How's that going to work for Eber-whatsit, then? Its cosmology is unique and doesn't mesh with the Wheel or the Tree.
There's actually been plenty of debate on this. As it stands now, both the cosmology of EBERRON and most of the unique setting material that supports it will likely be altered to confirm more specifically to the core D&D planar cosmology of 4e. And that means some of the best bits of planar lore for the setting will probably be lost, or changed significantly, at the very least.
Which is unfortunate, because the unique planar cosmology of EBERRON was, for me at least, one of its greatest selling points.
I wasn't a fan of the setting, but I thought its unique cosmology was quite interesting; in fact, it was one of the more interesting aspects of the setting for me. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 02 Feb 2009 : 04:10:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
How's that going to work for Eber-whatsit, then? Its cosmology is unique and doesn't mesh with the Wheel or the Tree.
There's actually been plenty of debate on this. As it stands now, both the cosmology of EBERRON and most of the unique setting material that supports it will likely be altered to confirm more specifically to the core D&D planar cosmology of 4e. And that means some of the best bits of planar lore for the setting will probably be lost, or changed significantly, at the very least.
Which is unfortunate, because the unique planar cosmology of EBERRON was, for me at least, one of its greatest selling points.
Oh my God! Does that mean that there will no longer be coterminous planar junctions?!
They do realize that Sharn has skyscrapers because of the coterminous planar effect from the Plane of Air, which allows them to build the buildings so high. If they take that away, by all logic, the buildings should fall.
Of course, when has logic stopped them... |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 02 Feb 2009 : 06:39:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I wasn't a fan of the setting, but I thought its unique cosmology was quite interesting; in fact, it was one of the more interesting aspects of the setting for me.
Indeed. I borrowed heavily from the planar framework of EBERRON when I designed a basic cosmology for a one-shot PS campaign I ran last year. It was for players who didn't like the majority of EB, but loved its cosmology. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 02 Feb 2009 : 06:43:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Oh my God! Does that mean that there will no longer be coterminous planar junctions?!
They do realize that Sharn has skyscrapers because of the coterminous planar effect from the Plane of Air, which allows them to build the buildings so high. If they take that away, by all logic, the buildings should fall.
Of course, when has logic stopped them...
I'm not sure how the co-terminous aspects of the planes or the manifest zones will work under the core D&D cosmology once its incorporated into EBERRON. I'm assuming the core rulebook for the 4e update of the setting will clarify that.
...
As an aside from this, has the concept of co-existent/co-terminous planes [like they were in the 3e MotP] being detailed in the 4e MotP? Maybe the co-terminous aspects of EBERRON's planes and the manifest zones can be expressed with the new rules for those cosmological aspects -- if they exist in the core 4e D&D cosmology. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3290 Posts |
Posted - 02 Feb 2009 : 08:38:40
|
-I really like Eberrons Cosmology. I always thought of it as an Atom. 
BRIMSTONE |
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
4e Manual of the Planes
