Ok, this is a rant, but I want some feedback, which is why it's not on the rant thread. Also, I'm assuming the Great Wheel cosmology for all of the following.
The recent Dungeon 136 adventure, Gates of Oblivion (nicely timed only a month or two after the release of the game Oblivion, in which gates to hell threaten to over run the world....) got me thinking about what seems to be cannon: The infinite size of planes and an infinite number of Material worlds. This is completely internally inconsistent.
This galls me. Firstly is the statement of the infinite size of planes. I know they don't want to reduce the possiblities for adventures there, but making them simply the size of a world (a couple of ten thousand miles in all directions from a central point) is still HUGE, and leaves plenty of room for filling in whatever you want. How many times do you actually go to the planes, anyway? It's not like you're actually limiting yourself on development options for your game.
Also, if they were infinite, why haven't the infinite supply of demons over run the world by now? The celestials keep them in check? That seems cheesy and contrived, to claim there are an infinte number of these beings and they happen to not be able to do anything of note because they keep each other down. It just seems lazy. If there were, say, supposedly a 100,000 of each (celestials and fiends), locked in a constant battle but replenished in number from the souls of the deceased when one fell, I wouldn't have a problem with it. I supposed because it actually shows some concern for a more believable approach to the cosmology.
Also, how many times have the celestials come to stop a demonic invasion? Surprisinly little. It always seems to fall to mortals. Lazy b@$^$%ds.
Anyway, the problem is also "solved" if there are infinte Material worlds. Now, I don't necessarily have a problem with other Material worlds, but the possibility of an infinite number galls me like it does for any other plane. If there are infinite worlds, you bring in the thought of space as we know it, with quasars and black holes and other things that don't belong in D&D.
And there should be more transferrence between them. World-hopping is relatively simple: Plane shift, specify the world you wish to go to with another casting of the spell, and BLAMO!, you're there. Aside from the rare Gates of Oblivion or the pseudo-addressing of this issue in the description of Thessalar in Into the Wormcrawl Fissure, there's nothing.
Also, doesn't it seem a bit hokey that every cosmos-changing event happens on the world of the campaign setting? Sure, they are rare and might typically be prevented, but if there are infinite worlds out there, a fraction of them (and a fraction of infinity is infinity) should be embroiled in battles of a cosmic scale, which a small fraction of those would result in actual changes in cosmology, meaning that the planes and pantheons would be in constant roiling turmoil. But that doesn't happen.
Not that I propose that it does. I don't like the concept of that. But, all of this is simply avoided by putting a limit on the size of planes and Material worlds in existence.
As a side not, Gates of Oblivion fails to separate "world" from "plane" and as far as I understand the Great Wheel, by it's nature, there's not really room for more infinite planes or any unknown ones lurking around. It's all fine and good to say the Great Wheel is only an interpretation, but that undermines the whole reason for having the thing in that formation in the first place.
I am also galled by the infinite timeline of D&D. The history of the multiverse is presented with many new gods emerging and demonic and diabolic upheavals in power, ancient pantheons come and gone, etc., but it's all presented as having happened innumerable thousands of years ago, typically with a line like, "so long ago that all the facts are lost". LAZY. And that way, you have history without making the cosmology dynamic. It remains static and shallow. I hate that.
IMC, Vecna has been a god for less than a thousand years. Cuthbert is not much older, as a deity. The rebellion in the Hells in which Levistus was imprisoned and all that other good stuff happened is less than 3,000 years in the past. Elven and draconic sources from the time talk about these things as well as the rise of all the human gods. They are within the global cultural memory.
Now, I also am fine if someone wants to present this "infinite size of planes, infinite cosmic timescale," as fact in his world, or even as simply what the "people know", but I resent that it is presented as standard D&D cannon. I want something that's more internally consistent, which this isn't. Its ambiguous and nebulous, and often contradicts not only itself on the level of an in-game explanation of the multiverse, but also conflicts with in-game, world-specific explanations of certain events throughout the past.
I'm not sure what the point of all this is. Maybe there isn't one, and it's a completely personal problem that is, in the long run, inconsequential and easily remedies in my homebrew. But I just needed to get it off my chest.
STOP MAKING EVERYTHING INFINITE!!!!
|
Wow, I am glad your post didn't got infinite... ;)
I always understand it that way, that the universe as we (in real life) know it, is the place where all the settings are placed. This way you can think of the space where the orbs are floating which happen to be the home of the FR, GH, EBERRON, even our EARTH and so on as an infinite plane all for itself.
Another reason for going infinite might be, that it stays incromprehentable to humans, whose brain just can't grap something with no end, keeping those planes a touch of something foreign, strange or odd.
"Also, doesn't it seem a bit hokey that every cosmos-changing event happens on the world of the campaign setting"
Well, if not, we players and DMs would be denied a lot of fun and adventure, wouldn't we?!
"I am also galled by the infinite timeline of D&D.
I see it this way, that Demons, Devils, Gods or who/whatever don't measure time like humans do. For them, 3000 years may just be like a week, as they have a totally different view on the multiverse than mortals will ever have.
From the beginnings of D&D (red box) to the present 3.5 days, a lot happened to Orcus, Demogorgon, Zuggtmoy or Kyus (just recently). So these areas of D&D get development as well, just not as fast as the rest.
There are finite places "out there", but in the end, I am sure my players don't care if the plane they happen to be placed on by me is infinite or not.
Your point about how if there are always world changing catclysms happening the why hasn't one succeed actually has an answer. Simply put, it does, the fiendish codex mentions how lolth absorb conquered material planes into her layer of the abyss. And all the other things that would be felt all across the multiverse? That's probably when the celestials step in I should imagine, that or the fact that with infinite sized planes the effects of certain events might take a while to spread and there is, given infinte worlds, going to be someone who can reverse it.
That might be an interesting idea for a campaign, heroes in an alternate material plane fail to prevent the erasure of everything and the PCs have to undo the mistake befor the effect reaches their world.
Because the standard canon is so vague and contradictory on so many topics regarding the multiverse, I've formulated my own ideas of how the multiverse operates:
1. There are a set number of major planes (aside from demiplanes), which are all infinite. The material plane is the one that contains the real world and the many d&d worlds (aside from places like eberron with different cosmologies) and is infinite because that's the way it is in reality. (I don't believe in the 'big bang'; sounds too much like a typical human psyche trying to make sense of something that is inherently non-sensical) And yes, world-hopping does happen (I'm sure that Krynn is like a vacation in Paris for Mordenkainen; hell, he's probably best buds with Fizban!) but not very often because it's impractical. Why visit another completely alien world, when you have more power in your fingertip than all the kings of your own world? As an aside, I've never undertood why there are 17 outer planes; I think 9 would do just nicely. Why do we need 1.5 planes for each alignment instead of 1 for one? Meh, whatever.
2. On that note, time is infinite, in every plane. There's no record of ALL TIME because every library eventually gets burned, every wizard eventually gets killed. Ok, maybe Boccob or some cloistered wizard really has lived FOREVER and has a record of it, but he's survived this long because he doesn't advertise. That's why planar history is so nebulous and frustrating.
3. There are no cosmos-altering events. Period. The multiverse is the way it is and will always be that way. Sometimes the fiends find a way to overrun one material world or another, but they're not able to visit us willy-nilly. They have to be summoned in one way or another, and then there's the problem of killing or perverting the shmoe that summoned you! And aside from angels, there's also the rilmani which I've loved since the 2nd edition planar monster book II or so, that help keep the fiends in check. I think their illustrations suck in MM III; damn DiTerlizzi for moving on to other endeavors!
As an aside, I'm converting much of the standard D&D cosmology into my total game revamp because I love planescape so much!
Also, if they were infinite, why haven't the infinite supply of demons over run the world by now? The celestials keep them in check? That seems cheesy and contrived, to claim there are an infinte number of these beings and they happen to not be able to do anything of note because they keep each other down. It just seems lazy. If there were, say, supposedly a 100,000 of each (celestials and fiends), locked in a constant battle but replenished in number from the souls of the deceased when one fell, I wouldn't have a problem with it. I supposed because it actually shows some concern for a more believable approach to the cosmology.
Keep in mind that within an infinite plane there can be a finite number of souls. Read the recent Demonomicon on Baphomet: His maze continues for as long as you want to go on, and gets less populous the farther you go (though there are still some big nasties out there).
Perhaps the "epicenter" of an infinite plane is merely the source of life for that plane. It can't be damaged or destroyed (except under specific, dire circumstances), but it attracts and sustains life for that plane. Perhaps hundreds of miles away from the "center," sentient lifeforms cannot be concieved. I say sentient, because planes like Aborea (s.p.... don't have my books on me, don't even know if that's one of the infinite ones) would otherwise look pretty sparse past the radius of the lifesource.
Here's another idea for you:
The planes (and layers of the Abyss) are only infinite because no one has ever discovered an end to them. What would the ramifications be if an end was ever discovered?
Just a thought
TK
(I don't believe in the 'big bang'; sounds too much like a typical human psyche trying to make sense of something that is inherently non-sensical)
No offense, but as someone who loves the subject of cosmology (and the intertwined quantum physics), you are mistaken. The Big Bang theory allows for infinity. Physics have traced time back through the Big Bang (it's no longer just assumed there was something that exploded), and confirmed (in models that work with our understanding of the universe given by Newton) what happened was this:
In truth, according to String and M-Theory, there aren't just the three dimensions of movement that we are familiar with and the fourth of time. There are 11 dimensions, and the eleventh exists outside of our universe. In fact, our universe is merely a variation of an energy emanating from and tied to this 11th dimension. There are theoretically infinite universes, all tied to this 11th dimension. The Big Bang is what happens when two of them smack into each other. Our universe is constantly expanding and is circular, yet has no edge and no center. Also, it is accelerating in its expansion, not slowing down. As another side note, all the matter that we know of, including gas clouds of Hydrogen half the size of a galaxy, in all the universe, makes up only 4% of the mass in the universe. The rest is "dark matter", a strange sub-atomic particle that doesn't easily interact with "normal" matter but does give off gravity. By the way, gravity is a trans-dimensional force that leaks from our universe into others....
Still think the Big Bang and all that is just an attempt to concieve the inconcievable?
D&D Great Wheel cosmology? Well that's a matter of which one you want to go with. The two I'm familiar with (and I'm sure it was even different before this back in other editions).
Late 2nd edition--home of Spelljammer and Planescape et al. According to this there are an infinite number of prime planes, each floating in the phlogeston. The mechanics of the universe are hardly the science-fictioney quasars and nebulae, rather they go back to Ptolemay (sp?) and the idea of crystal spheres and epicycles with each world as the center of its universe. I like this *infinitely* better. Sorry. This setting is much more likely to hemmorhage conflicts from one prime world to a number of others--but just because it's infinity doesn't automatically mean an event on one world spreads to infinite other worlds because of some math game. It spreads until it's stopped. That might be in one cave, one city, one continent, one world, ten worlds, a million worlds--whatever it takes. Likewise the infinite angels and infinite fiends are each individuals with their own agendas and motives, it's not like they're just two huge sides in a big chess game with infinite pieces and no turns--rather I find it closer to a huge Shakespearian power drama with various figures at various levels of power looking to raise or protect their station from the many many others who are doing the same thing. There's friction, there's change, but cosmology wide there's no universal wars--just ones that seem that way to the people and whatnot fighting them.
Okay, now third edition Great Wheel. This is somewhat simpler. Prime planes aren't infinite in number. There's one, Greyhawk, and the possibility of reaching alternate ones through the Plane of Shadow--but then everything changes and you're no longer on the Great Wheel anymore. Outside of this Wheel is a plane of madness that would make H.P. Lovecraft proud--a place of tenticle headed monstrocities and pulpy horrors. There's Sigil in the "middle" of the planes and a kindova' interdimensional trade city on the "border". But that's it.
Now here's my problem with all this. You have a plane like Bytopia that's infinite, right? Rolling grassland to hills to mountains until finally the mountains get so tall that they meet at the top and people can travel from one layer to the next. Okaaaay. So how far is it on this infinite plane from the field to the first hill? From the first hill to the first mountain? To the first bridge? What's past the bridges? If there's an answer to these questions then oops the plane isn't infinite anymore--if the answer is infinity than good luck ever getting to the crossing point unless you're okay with walking forever to get there. Yarg. It's this kind of poorly thought through cosmology that gets to me. Or layers! Layers bug the heck outta' me. You have a ledge and you drop down onto another layer, or a big cone shaped sequence of layers one atop the other nine deep. Um...if there's an *edge* to the layer THEN IT AIN'T INFINITE! Likewise if the two geographical features of one plane and another are in the same physical space then guess what guys! They're ON THE SAME PLANE!! Ditto you have a river that runs through a dozen different planes, but like on some there's just big pointy double ended volcanoes and on the next there's layer on top of layer of fiery caverns--where does the freakin' river go? That's the thing for me in contemplating the Great Wheel that causes me a catastrophic system crash. It's not that my human mind reels at the vastness and planar illogic of it--it's that my human mind understands it just fine and it seems really fakey and like it wouldn't work that way at all and how am I supposed to narrate this stuff to a player group...*sigh*
lol; that bothers you; hehe try this one on; has been bugging me since the 4th grade; there are an infinite amount of numbers between - infinity and + infinity meaning you can just keep counting up and down. There are also an infinite amount of numbers between 1 and 2; there are also an infinite amount of numbers between any other numbers. So, if there are the same amount of numbers between 1 and 2 as there are numbers in known and unknown existance. Knowing this; I have no problem with there being infinite planes and prime material worlds in D&D; and most peeps agree in the abyss that 666 is only the explored ones and there are probably and infinite amount of planes there and with that much variation some are probably good or lawful because the game has never stated something cosmically simple like the good planes float to the top or some such nonsense; heeh dont let any of this worry you; you can alway impose limits on infinity; usually the gm device called dieties.
Thank you, Grimcleaver, I think you understand me. Infinite layers in the Abyss? Do we really need 32 googleplex layers? Because there's that, the square of that, and the square of the square of that many if it's really infinite. I'm fine with that in physics, but it seems completely out of place in fantasy. Or, do we really want the plane of Mechanus to stretch for 172 trillion miles? That type of number system has no place in D&D, at least to me. Or the problems with the planes obviously being finite and yet described as finite simultaneously. What?
Again, if the people of the world happen to imagine it that way, I'm fine with it, but the information is presented as a fact for the DM to use, when it doesn't work that way in application.
I guess I just find it unimaginative, hokey, and lazy. It's not like they have to measure the size of the Abyss, but they could have easily said each layer was "the size of a whole world" and it would have kept the feeling a lot better and left practically infinte room for adventure without actually throwing in the problem of infinite size. Or just not mentioned an overall size for the planes at all! No one would have thought twice about it at all. But no, they throw in infinity to make it sound cool where it should have just been left out.
And the problem with having those multiple material worlds and each having their own pantheon is that the gods are real in D&D. They actually exist. And they are on the Outer Planes, completely circumventing any barriers in geography or space. Overall, with very few exceptions, the same gods should be worshipped on all the Material worlds, since they can send emmissaries to each. Or there should be an extremely large number of gods all competing for worshipers, and the ones found on any given world are there because they managed to eek out a following, but then people would know when they went to other planes and saw all the gods fighting each other. While this would be an interesting idea for a campaign, it is, again, not presented this way and thus assuming this is the case is not a valid argument when contemplating the flaws of the RAW.
Lol; ok think of infinite prime material worlds like this; I run a world; that is one;hehe the prime; many other peoples run D&D worlds; and many people run the same world, Greyhawk for instance; that have more or less the same features and many of the same heroes and villians, but as each game is different and each gm uses different rules; each prime material world is different; hence, an infinite number of prime material worlds that you cannot necessarily visit or shift too. This is the way they explained infinite prime material world way back in the 80's and it still makes sense to me.
Thank you, Grimcleaver, I think you understand me. Infinite layers in the Abyss? Do we really need 32 googleplex layers? Because there's that, the square of that, and the square of the square of that many if it's really infinite. I'm fine with that in physics, but it seems completely out of place in fantasy. Or, do we really want the plane of Mechanus to stretch for 172 trillion miles? That type of number system has no place in D&D, at least to me. Or the problems with the planes obviously being finite and yet described as finite simultaneously. What?
Again, if the people of the world happen to imagine it that way, I'm fine with it, but the information is presented as a fact for the DM to use, when it doesn't work that way in application.
I guess it feels natural to me to think of divine or cosmological places as infinite, the idea of a world without borders or limits feels genuinely old and primordial--like the world itself was before science and if you wanted to know how big it was you had to climb a tree, or a mountain like the old prophets and gurus. It felt good to be in a place where you could see everything, but yet there was more beyond that. I think the overly science part of it is when you start labeling it in googleplexes or trillions. That feels too scientific, true, but what about "leagues without end" or "stretching forever more than the sand of the seashore" or "a thousand spans of the titan wyrm".
I just wish it lived up to that feeling of being limitless--that for example there weren't...maps?? What scale do you render an infinite plane at? That and the above posted absurdities of planes that have an epicenter and change as you move toward the "edges" or from which you can wave at the petitioners of other planes but yet they are supposed to still be on other planes? Wierd.
Personally the problem with the gods of every cosmology shoehorned into the Great Wheel somewhere is one of the biggest reasons I love the new cosmology. I mean it seems pretty clear that at some level the gods do share a realm, that what are considered the "true" gods of a certain realm are not much different than the most powerful avatars per world--thus when a god dies in one setting he does not die in all of them, and likewise gods from one world can also appear in another (as the ubiquitous Llolth) or not (as for example, Hextor). Frankly I was pretty irritated by the new cosmology for a while but now I wouldn't have it any other way.
Another head scratcher for you. going back to the Great Wheel? Why is it that the gods themselves have such a slight presence in the planes? I mean most rule not even an entire layer, sticking instead to a castle or something, and the planes look nothing like what you'd imagine the gods would design. Take Mechanus. Is there a single tech god in Greyhawk? Anywhere? But there's Mechanus chugging away with its legions of various lockstep races all mindlessly churning away in support of their various hiveminds. I mean there's something like three gods of magic, but no overtly magical planes...hmmm. I guess it would have been interesting to give the gods a bit more carte blanche in their own realm rather than just patterning everything out of crazy quilt real world mythology.
No offense, but as someone who loves the subject of cosmology (and the intertwined quantum physics), you are mistaken. The Big Bang theory allows for infinity. Physics have traced time back through the Big Bang (it's no longer just assumed there was something that exploded), and confirmed (in models that work with our understanding of the universe given by Newton) what happened was this:In truth, according to String and M-Theory, there aren't just the three dimensions of movement that we are familiar with and the fourth of time. There are 11 dimensions, and the eleventh exists outside of our universe. In fact, our universe is merely a variation of an energy emanating from and tied to this 11th dimension. There are theoretically infinite universes, all tied to this 11th dimension. The Big Bang is what happens when two of them smack into each other. Our universe is constantly expanding and is circular, yet has no edge and no center. Also, it is accelerating in its expansion, not slowing down. As another side note, all the matter that we know of, including gas clouds of Hydrogen half the size of a galaxy, in all the universe, makes up only 4% of the mass in the universe. The rest is "dark matter", a strange sub-atomic particle that doesn't easily interact with "normal" matter but does give off gravity. By the way, gravity is a trans-dimensional force that leaks from our universe into others....
Still think the Big Bang and all that is just an attempt to concieve the inconcievable?
Yes, I do. I recently saw a tv special about the new string theory and the 11 dimensions. I'm no dummy, but certain parts of the show reminded me a whole lot of...religious folks trying desperately to explain the 9 layers of hell to me (or the 7 layers of heaven or whatever). In other words, a lot of it made sense and was buyable but the show skipped over certain links in its chain of logic and just expected me to 'take their word for it'. They never did explain just how they arrived at the notion of 11 dimensions which is why I sat thru the show!
You say physics has traced time through the big bang, and that this 'trace' is confirmed by Newtons models? Well that's great and I'm sure that some very smart scientists came up with all these new theories, but here's my problem; they're only theories. Newton's models, Einstein's and all the rest are still just theories. And as I understand the scientific world, theories are constantly changing and being disproven and forgotten. So in the end I am confronted by unprovable theories that make no intuitive sense to me (strings, really? why not ropes? 11? why not 10 or 12?) that are created by a group of scientists that are funded by money that could be used for more practical purposes (world hunger? AIDS? war?) but instead is used to research esotoric subjects that the average joe shmoe couldn't care less about.
The average joe could also care less about D&D, yet here we are discussing D&D, cosmology, and physics.
Actually I was reading the rant for the pure enjoyment of it and only decided to post to clear up why the infinite number of demons don't overrun the world. It seems that they're busy fighting the infinite number of devils in the Blood Wars.
Actually though, I'd rather have thoeries and models than pray to the sun for a healthy child. ;)
I have to say I've really found this thread interesting, and everybody brings up some very good points. As a planescape fanatic I thought I'd just throw my two cents in.
There are two assumptions that cause problems when trying to conceptualize the great wheel cosmology. The first is the word infinite. Infinite does not mean 'goes on forever', it simply means 'not-finite'. That's to say that it is not measureable. Another way of thinking would be to say that the planes go on for as long as they need to (think of the astral plane and how the better you are at visualizing your destination the faster you will arrive at the color pool).
The second, related assumption is to think of the planes as geographical space. They are not. The planes occupy philosophical space and therefore cannot be measured or thought of in geographical terms. These are the realms of the abstract and things that might seem contradictory (the center of a plane for instance) in geographical terms make sense in philosophical terms (in bytopia for instance there is a core or 'central' ideology but an infinite number of ideas and expressions within that ideology, where the bytopian ideolgy converses with other ideolgies are the borders of the planes).
This kind of shceme might not appeal to you but you have to remember that D&D took a theological approach to defining its cosmology, not a scientific or mathematical one. If you're going to judge it you have to consider its internal logic rather than looking at it through the lens of a different world view. Its really just a matter of style and taste. In real life I would never buy into any of this stuff (and actually find the physics that have been discussed here really cool), but I think that the great wheel fits with a fantasy themed game very well.
Searn, I think you're thinking too much and too hard about this. You're trying to rationalise what is essentially a fantasy setting. It is the way it is; use up as much of the planes as you want to use and forget about what's infinite. I mean, you don't get wizards teleporting to other planets/moons in your plane do you? So why is it infinite so important? Relax, play in the locale and have a good game.
On the subject of maps, I like them. They seem like someone trying to make sense out of the nonsensical, much like early Earth maps, and therefore maybe completely wrong. Still it adds to the feel of the mystery of the planes.
Whilst I touch on the subject of trying to rationalise fantasy, a great example of this, which was disastrous for many campaigns, was Infravision and Ultravision from 1st and 2nd ed. Many gamers began picking holes in these abilities just because the names suggested that Infra means you can see heat and therefore could see a thief hiding in shadows or track where someone had been. Ultravision caused similar loopholes to be exploited over DMs who couldn't rationalise an argument against it. The solution? The name changed; Darkvision: it's vision that works in the dark.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is just leave it be; it's fantasy.
Thank you all for your comments. Combined with just finally saying this to get it out of my system, it's helped me to not have so much of a problem with it.
Tequila- Netwon's thoughts of gravity and inertia were esoteric with no practical application to the average schmoe in his day, and on a large view, still are. Without them we would have virtually none of the scientific wonders of today. Want a cure for AIDS? You need a knowledge of physics on a molecular level, since that's what DNA and viruses are, just complex molecules, and if you could find a way to circumvent it through quantum phyics, that would be great.
You consider war to be a practical expediture of science's efforts? I beg to differ with every ounce of my being, but you are wrong even if that is true- we would not have the nuclear age without Einstien's work (E=MC2, anyone?).
Gaining an understanding of the workings of our universe can only be a good thing. As I've said somewhere else on this board, the Earth is a precarious place and, if we wish to survive as a species, we will eventually have to leave it, and an udnerstanding of quantum phsyics will really help in getting out of the stellar town when you have to load up into your spaceship (maybe not you, but your descendents- willing to cut them loose to their fates just because you didn't understand the "esoteric" in your lifetime?).
Science, unlike numerology, mysticism, etc., rests on the prime princicple of proving that it works. Science sees that something exists; it is, and there is no debating that outside of philosophy, which is not science since there is no physical proof. It then works with theories until it comes up with one that works. Science then demands it be tested again and again to make sure it is right, and if so, then it becomes a Law (Newton's models aren't theories, they are Laws), which is an underpinning statement of the essence of the nature of the cosmos. But, as humans can be wrong, if evidence comes up later that contradicts our understanding of a Law or Theory, it may need revision, or to be compeltely scrapped and replaced. There in lies the brilliance of science. It can change.
However, you have to go on what is thought to work at the time, or there is no progress. And in doing so, you either help to prove that it really is right, or that it is incorrect and needs revision.
Why not 10 or 12 dimensions? They don't work. The physicists developing these theories wanted to make it 10 for a long time, but no matter how they tried, it wouldn't work with the Laws of nature, so when they finally realized they were wrong, they looked and found that 11 was the answer. And, this can all be traced back from these seemingly useless, esoteric discussions back into simple phsyics, and define our world.
The other dimensions exist on a quantum levels- they are ways of movement for subatomic particles, not ones that affect objects as large and complex as anything we can see, even with an electron microscope. Yet, these particles have clear, indirect effects on the things we can see, and thus we can study them by the "shadow" they cast.
And yes, it is better than worshipping the sun or a statue and hoping for the best. That never provided results. Science has. It has reshaped our world, and whether the end net result is better or worse, it has done immense good along the way.
Being cynical is okay. It's what got science started- cynics of the church. But try to be more cynical of a school of thought within the proven institution of science, rather than dismissing the upper levels of the method entirely.
|
lol; that bothers you; hehe try this one on; has been bugging me since the 4th grade; there are an infinite amount of numbers between - infinity and + infinity meaning you can just keep counting up and down. There are also an infinite amount of numbers between 1 and 2; there are also an infinite amount of numbers between any other numbers. So, if there are the same amount of numbers between 1 and 2 as there are numbers in known and unknown existance.
I had to laugh when I saw this and felt the need to comment. Being a math major -- Infinity is a really odd thing and if you really start studying it, the more confusing it becomes. Some "infities" are "larger" than others. There are an infinite number of integers from 0 to infinity. There are also an infinite number of integers from negative infinity to positive infinity. But it should be fairly obvious that one is larger than the other. Because of this, infinity divided by infinity is NOT equal to one.
I don't know if it really matters. I like the thoughts that there are areas that are more heavily populated than others. Maybe if you go too far away on the plane, it simply becomes a wasteland -- you can keep going if you want to, but why?
I don't think that there are an "infinite" number of worlds out there. I just think that there are so many that it seems silly to put a limit on something that apparently has no limit. Star Trek and Stargate SG-1 deal with this to some degree. Every episode (or nearly) they were on a different planet. I guess that they could have limited themselves and said that there were a billion habitable planets out there, but what was the point?
If you want some other fun (mathematically) with infinity -- do a search on the internet for "Koch's Snowflake". This is a figure that has an infinite distance regarding the perimeter and a finite area. On a similar note, if you have taken Calculus, take the graph of 1/X and rotate it around the x-axis from 1 to infinity. The surface area of this figure is infinite, but it has a definite volume. What does this mean? You can fill the figure with paint, but you cannot paint the inside. (That will mess with your head.)
Bottom line. The way I see it, the writers could have said "There are so many different worlds and different planes out there in the myriad cosmos that it would be silly to try and catalogue them all and have any kind of meaningful relationship to how to get there or how to get out or where they might be located..." Or they could have said "There are an infinite number of worlds and planes -- fill in as you see fit." (Which is basically what they did.)
Tequila- Netwon's thoughts of gravity and inertia were esoteric with no practical application to the average schmoe in his day, and on a large view, still are. Without them we would have virtually none of the scientific wonders of today. Want a cure for AIDS? You need a knowledge of physics on a molecular level, since that's what DNA and viruses are, just complex molecules, and if you could find a way to circumvent it through quantum phyics, that would be great.You consider war to be a practical expediture of science's efforts? I beg to differ with every ounce of my being, but you are wrong even if that is true- we would not have the nuclear age without Einstien's work (E=MC2, anyone?).
Well I still think the Big Bang is a pointless excersize in theoretical acrobatics, but I've reached the nauseous in 'ad nauseum' with this discussion. One thing that I would like to clear up is that I should have mentioned Peace instead of War, which is almost invariably a pointless excersize in human cruelty.
No offense, seriously, but I just feel like pointing this out as it seems an extremely opportune time to do so. Anyone ever notice that when someone makes a statement and is confronted with a strong dissenting opinion that offers up a large amount of evidence to support said dissenting opinion while the original speaker has little to none for himself, he tends to reach the "ad nauseum point" extremely quickly and retire from the discussion? I tend to feel this is due to people become flustered, frustrated, or embarrased, and/or simply refusing to consider the point differing from theirs, which is really a shame since many times (at least, I try to do this), the dissenting opinion offers a great chance to learn and enrich ones own perspective and understanding, filling one out as a better person overall... kind of like an understanding of things that may not have a direct implication on life.
There's little practicle, measureable value to art as a societal function, either, (comparing it to cosmology and quantum physics) but how bleak would our life be without it? Isn't it so much better to try to answer these questions, only to gain some answers and many more questions that beg exploration? The sense of mystery and magic that is our existence is alive and well in the world, largely because of things like physics.
Also, any endeavor in science can be made into an endeavor towards peace or war. It's simply dependent on what society chooses to do with it. And how can a society that emphasizes science simply say what is and isn't worth study? All fields overlap and provide a mutual advancement and benefit to culture they exist in.
Is everyone entitled to their own opinion? Yes. Am I trying to change yours?
Yes.
Well, I think at least part of the problem becomes a matter of what you are willing to accecept as your common ground for arguement. While I will admit that I have not had an extensive background in physics (oddly enough, you don't have to take a lot of science classes with an accounting major), I don't feel that I am unqualified to make comments on it, but depending on exactly how the conversation goes, I either have to bow out of the discussion or accept your basis for arguement and argue the topic based on what you have presented (kinda like fighting on a battlefield chosen by your opponent, and forgive me for making this sound perhaps a bit more adversarial then it should).
When we start talking about quantum physics and the like, we start talking about basing extrapolations upon other extrapolations. There may be some very strong reasons for this, and some very sound equations these are based on, but they are building on theoretical foundations themselves. The last time I checked, we haven't actually proven alternate realities or strand theory, so its hard to prove that the Big Bang happened due to colliding strands, etc. when we haven't proven alternate realities yet. I'm not saying we won't, and that all of this will not be a valuable guide, but I think sometimes we put the cart before the horse in these kinds of discussions.
I feel my post is misplaced. I thought we were discussing D&D and somehow it's turned into an academic lecture on quantum theory.
I am not at all qualified to get involved in this. The most I know about quantum stuff is what I picked up in Michael Crighton's Timeline **LOL!** which is probably a load of science fiction cr&p.
Now let's just pick up those dice, roll 'em and smash those fiends to infinity and beyond!
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Infinity in the game serves the function of allowing multiple creators to craft new material in the same space without bumping into each other. If the next issue of Dragon details Steve, the Demon King of Stinking Cheeses and meanwhile, WotC publishes The Demons of Medeval France, which fails to include Steve but does have Dale, the Demon Prince of Brie, that's okay. Both Steve and Dale can exist in the same universe and not be aware of each other because it is infinitely large.
As a DM, an infinitely large universe is a pain, particularly given how easy it is to transverse by mid to upper level characters. By all means consider a finite universe for your table. For publication though, an infinite universe allows a lot more freedom. I don't think authors have infinite universes because they are lazy, I think infinite universes are necessary to have a shared universe with a multitude of creators.
A similar problem occurs in comics. How the heck does Wolverine travel with the X-men, the Uncanny X-men, go on a trip to Japan in his own comic, and yet still have time to guest star in the latest issue of the Avengers? He can't possibly do so, but the demand for Wolverine stories is greater than the bounds of logic and reality allow. Similarly, the demand for cheese related demons is too great for a finite univerise.
Infinity in the game serves the function of allowing multiple creators to craft new material in the same space without bumping into each other. If the next issue of Dragon details Steve, the Demon King of Stinking Cheeses and meanwhile, WotC publishes The Demons of Medeval France, which fails to include Steve but does have Dale, the Demon Prince of Brie, that's okay. Both Steve and Dale can exist in the same universe and not be aware of each other because it is infinitely large.
As a DM, an infinitely large universe is a pain, particularly given how easy it is to transverse by mid to upper level characters. By all means consider a finite universe for your table. For publication though, an infinite universe allows a lot more freedom. I don't think authors have infinite universes because they are lazy, I think infinite universes are necessary to have a shared universe with a multitude of creators.
A similar problem occurs in comics. How the heck does Wolverine travel with the X-men, the Uncanny X-men, go on a trip to Japan in his own comic, and yet still have time to guest star in the latest issue of the Avengers? He can't possibly do so, but the demand for Wolverine stories is greater than the bounds of logic and reality allow. Similarly, the demand for cheese related demons is too great for a finite univerise.
Brillaint summary Sebastian. "Infinate" is essentially a code word for "large enough for use to have wiggle room for new things/old things we may have forgotten about." Its hard to prove or disprove that a plane is infinate, since you would have to travel for an infinate amount of time to never find the end. A little cheesy in your explanation, however.
Oh, and infinate is a relative measure, given that demiplanes are often times measureable, some being no bigger than the amount of space that it takes to actually arrive in the demiplane. Compared to a demiplane, any fully realized plane is going to seem infinate, though obviously there are a lot of large demiplanes out there (Ravenloft anyone?).
|
|
No offense, seriously, but I just feel like pointing this out as it seems an extremely opportune time to do so. Anyone ever notice that when someone makes a statement and is confronted with a strong dissenting opinion that offers up a large amount of evidence to support said dissenting opinion while the original speaker has little to none for himself, he tends to reach the "ad nauseum point" extremely quickly and retire from the discussion? I tend to feel this is due to people become flustered, frustrated, or embarrased, and/or simply refusing to consider the point differing from theirs, which is really a shame since many times (at least, I try to do this), the dissenting opinion offers a great chance to learn and enrich ones own perspective and understanding, filling one out as a better person overall... kind of like an understanding of things that may not have a direct implication on life.
There comes a point when the conversation/discussion can't really go much further without something else happening. I haven't heard about these 11 dimensions. I didn't see the tv show mentioned (and we should all believe what is shown on the tele). I have very little to go on to continue to discuss the subject matter. I could do my own research, but to what point? I could take your word for it, but that wouldn't lead to much of a discussion.
This is what I know:
The earth used to be flat.
The sun used to orbit the earth.
Boulders would drop to the earth faster than pebbles.
There were far fewer elements on the periodic table.
People would never fly -- and the thought of landing on the moon was preposterous.
The atom was the smallest element in the universe.
You say that there are 11 dimensions. Maybe in ten years we will find out that there are actually 121 dimensions but each one of the 11 that we have "found" have 11 more each at different frequencies (or whatever).
If there is one thing that I have learned in life is that the more we know, the more we know how little we know.
You are young -- pursue quantum physics for as long as you can or want to. When I get home at night, my 4 year old son wants to know if I will play catch with him. Whether or not there are 11 dimensions in reality or an infinite number of layers in the Abyss no longer seem to matter.
For me, ad nauseum is the point in time when I realize that arguing any further with you is like arguing with another about religion; it's useless. We both believe what we believe and aren't likely to change no matter how blue-in-the-face we get. The day that someone gives me a succinct and satisfactory explaination of 11 dimensions, I will believe in them. If you think you can do better than that show I saw, be my guest. I'll read anything that you post or care to email me (nine_moons_9@yahoo.com) so long as it is succinct and clear. For now though do me the favor of not discussing anything other than these 11 dimensions; I don't have much better than a modern attention span.
So we're good now?
Right, so when we play on the planes we don't really care if it's infinite or not, right?
Absolutely. I wasn't seeking to wage wars, and I thank the posters that came later for actually responding in a fashion that everyone, including myself, could take something valuable from it. And sorry for dragging a D&D thread into "reality" too far- I just have a passion for those things.
Anyway, all the arguments here make a lot of sense. I no longer have a problem with the infinite multiverse presented. Though it may never come into play, my neurosis orders me to define these things if for no other reason than myself when creating my homebrew.
To add my opinion...
In Planescape, it was stated that the Outer Planes represent emotions, feelings, and whatnot. They aren't actually infinite, but more subjective in size and distance. Your speed of travel depended on how true to the plane's ideals you were (Doing good on Elysium would get you to your destination in a day or two, while being a jerk would get you lost). One could say that the plane itself bends and warps based on belief (A core theme in the setting).
Absolutely. I wasn't seeking to wage wars, and I thank the posters that came later for actually responding in a fashion that everyone, including myself, could take something valuable from it. And sorry for dragging a D&D thread into "reality" too far- I just have a passion for those things.
Anyway, all the arguments here make a lot of sense. I no longer have a problem with the infinite multiverse presented. Though it may never come into play, my neurosis orders me to define these things if for no other reason than myself when creating my homebrew.
S'okay. Reminds me of when a certain someone said to me once that being such an uber-canon nazi was just me thinking too much and how I was torturing myself unneccessarily. It's nice to see I'm not the only one who likes to tie himself in mental knots for the love of the game.
I have often noted that while knowing things is one of the greatest benefits in roleplaying, that the more you know the harder it is for you to be entertained. I have one friend who loves guns, but whenever there's a gun in a show if it's from the wrong era he goes nuts. Its the same with me and Star Trek--the continuity has been shot to pieces and so I just throw up my hands, whereas people who got started on the show during Voyager won't know why I get so frustrated (likewise the frustrating technobable infuriates me, like when the ship was being bombarded by "high intensity photon immitions") My two friends who post here are both science nuts, and telling a sci-fi story with them is a challleng since they know so much that its hard to satisfy them without their extensive backgrounds.
Personal feelings on quantum physics? We're missing something. Things have gotten overcomplicated, the results counterintuitive and oft paradoxical. I think much like with epicycles we can either continue studying this fascinating phenomena occur all the way to a real dead end (which for me was back in the 50's I think when light turned out to be simultaneously a particle and not a particle) or start backtracking to see where we made a faulty assumption. It's like phlogeston. People used to think that the key to making metal was to heat earth and thus imbue it with phlogeston, Aristotles heat element, which rendered it metal for a time until the phlogeston burned off--at which point it began to turn back into earth again: ie rust. Making the stuff was this delicate dance, with many of the requirements becoming increasingly counter-intuitive and paradoxical until one guy finally said, what if there was in fact something being taken out of the process rather than added? Maybe there's this oxygen stuff. From there on things snapped into focus and made a lot more sense. This is what Thomas Kuhn reffers to as paradigm shift and looking at my watch I'd say we're due for one--which is exciting in itself.
Just to make sure I'm not missing out on a golden opportunity, d13- you DO mean you were just slacking off at work, right? Because if you were really getting paid to read this thread... where do I apply? ;P
Also, a paradigm shift may not be completely out of the question, as illustrated by the differing opinions of the need for/existence of dark matter, in which the major view is that it is in fact real and holds the universe together, and another view states that, as with the quantum, Newton's laws are simply in need of modification on the extremely large (galactic and up) scale, and that the force of gravity may not hold constant (though still true) throughout all space. Not much info was given on this theory, so I can't really judge it, but I'm more inclined to believe dark matter, but still... the thought that there could be a revolution in need of discovering as far as an underlying Theory of Everything (the current title of M Theory), is quite exciting in and of itself, although as you all know, I'm extremely partial to the cosmology already presented by physicists and cosmologists.
As a final note, someone made a mention about all this coming from TV and the credibility of the source. My info comes from PBS and the Science channel (an offshoot of Discovery). I'm fairly certain that these sources are reputable, since there would be absolutely no reason/gain to distorting the facts, and in fact, it would undermine the entire endeavor. I don't trust anything from Sci-Fi movies/shows (although they may present interesting thoughts for consideration), as too many of them become exactly what Star Wars is/was (and this isn't a bad thing): Fantasy.
Every time I hear the words 'dark matter', I shudder. I had this friend in college that I went to work-study with for a short time. Every time I asked him to do something, he'd say "What's the point? Earth could be hit with dark-matter at any moment and then it wouldn't matter whether the work is done or not." In the end, I would invariably end up doing whatever I'd asked him to do. (How I never nailed him in the face, I'll never know)
Uhm... your friend was waaaaaay off. Dark matter, as currently understood, makes up about 71% of the universe. In fact, we are bathed in it on a constant bases, and it passes harmlessly through virtually everything, including the Earth itself... do yourself a favor, look him up, and nail him in the face like you always wanted to.
Director of Sales
|
Just a side note RE: 11 dimensions...
If anyone's really interested, here's the TV show that I'm assuming everyone's referencing:
The Elegant Universe on PBS.org Make sure you have broadband and a good 3 hours. And you might want to have some asprin ready 'cause it's mindsplitting stuff.
I read the book. It was phenomenal. I read 100% of the book, I understood maybe 70% as I read it and have retained maybe 8%. But I'm pretty sure he actually addressed the "Why 11, why not 10 or 12?" question.
(/stupid reality)
To further confuse the issue the Fiendish Codex has described some of the layers of the Abyss as being infinite and some of the layers of the Abyss as being finite.
Most people are prescribing to the theory that infinite actually means "too big to be traversed or mapped". This is an assumption of the logical human mind trying to rationalize the irrationalities of D&D cosmology. Why can't a place be endless? Lovecraft's world of dreams was without end, as was the land in the Neverending Story movie, yet both had finite dimensions. How is this possible? It's not. That's because its magic and mystical and nonsensical on purpose.
Here's another thing. Some planes, like Mechanus, are made up of a single layer that is infinite in size, while the Abyss is made up of an infinite number of layers (to get away from the whole 666 thing, probably) of generally infinite size. Does this make the Abyss bigger than Mechanus? If each were finite then the answer would be yes. If each were infinite than the answer would be no.
How does the Eberron's cosmology fit into this? Eberron must be one of those places that can only be accessed by going through the Plane of Shadows. Is this how the rest of you see it?
Well, I like the idea that a plane's size is all based on emotions and thoughts- it really serves to differentiate and illustrate why the Material Plane is Material and the Outer Planes aren't. The Legends Trilogy (Dragonlance) comes to mind, when Raistlin was in the Abyss and trying to reach Takhisis, and only when he adjusted his thinking and realized it was all based on emotion and insight could he do it.
One more thought and question about how to answer something. Deities like Vecna, Cuthbert, and Zuoken were once mortal, correct? And they have at least passing mentions in Greyhawk's history, right?
How come other ascended mortals aren't accounted for in the deity lists- ascended mortals from other worlds?
Options that come to my mind include just changing it so that some such deities simply did appear out of no-where, seemingly, and were later identified as originating from other worlds by divinations.
Or, possibly, a variation on the crystal spheres: Anytime a deity arises from another world, its power is linked only to that world. John the God from Furyondy could become as powerful as he wants in Greyhawk, and in his realm on his Outer Plane, but would have no power on any other world in that Material Plane. (Perhaps this should be limited to demigods and/or lesser gods? Once one assumes intermediate or greater status, you become known throughout the worlds?)
If it was thought (or was a hidden secret) that such barriers could be breached, it would make for a good (very good epic) campaign. It also might add another level of detail to the world, in that priests try to repress knowledge of other worlds, or ways to get there, as their gods would then have to compete with interlopers, or (for the more good-aligned gods) would threaten the world. This also helps explain why some previously unknown gods can pop into and out of a campaign's lore (Kyuss comes to mind) when the DM otherwise keeps a pretty tight ship about number of deities/who and what really exists and can grant clerical spells.
Finally, one could simply assume that all human deities were once mortals who became gods, but they didn't tell their priests that. No, they've been around since the dawn of time, of course! (Read: propoganda) Any human god not mentioned to have once been mortal really was, but on another Material world.
Thoughts?