An Eberron Review by SKR

[BrooklynKnight]

For an extensive discussion of why you might use warforged instead of human soldiers, from Keith himself, check this out:

http://www.coveworld.net/eberron/rules.html#forged-ruleshttp://www.coveworld.net/eberron/rules.html#forged-rules

Or click here!

http://www.coveworld.net/eberron/rules.html#forged-rules

 

[Desdichado]

I admit, I was biased about Eberron. From the first time I read about Eberron I was thinking, "What are they smoking?! $100,000 for that! It's not even fantasy or steam punk, it's fantasy-punk!"

Reading these reviews opened my mind. I may have to give this book a full flip through to see if I can mine ideas for my campaign setting/homebrew. Thanks.

P.S. The name "Eberron" still bugs me, though.

Well, what do you mean by fantasy-punk anyway? According to the masses, D&D is already fantasy punk. Eberron, to use another useless label, they'd call fantasypulp.

 

[Gez]

More adventures in SKR's world.
DM: The lady greets you: "Well met, adventurers. I am Lady Selinia of Stormhold."
Player: "Charmed, milady. I am..."
DM: "Wait wait wait, what do you mean, charmed? She hasn't cast any spell, I would have made you roll a Will save!"

 

[Flyspeck23]

Well, what do you mean by fantasy-punk anyway? According to the masses, D&D is already fantasy punk. Eberron, to use another useless label, they'd call fantasypulp.

No, it's called noirpulpfantasy now. Or was that punkpulpfantasy? Punknoirpulp? Noirpulpnoir? I forgot, sorry.

 

[Vocenoctum]

It was a dumb complaint then, Sean. It's a dumb complaint now.

While it's not a major issue, it does show a certain laziness on WotC's part. It doesn't make a difference on this particular phrasing, but when you get into other parts of the system it can. It's not an IC text saying "enchanted" it's a rule book refering to Enchanting Armor. It's also a bit of a cast off comment by SKR, so I don't think calling it "a dumb complaint" is fair.

Of course, there are enough editing errors anyway.

Y'know, they should have abolished the restriction altogether in 3.5. If you find yourself making the same change in each setting, that should tell you something about the rule that you are over-ruling. I don't really blame a setting for not spackling holes in the system.

I enjoy Paladins a lot, and nothing is more irritating that having to try to convince a DM to allow you to multiclass for a specific theme. It's bad enough to have to go through the process, it's worse when the DM doesn't give in, and you're restricted from multiclassing.

So yeah, having any paladin-aligned PrC allow Multiclass, then having faith based exceptions, then now we have feats that do it. WotC needs to acknowledge it at some point...

 

[Ranes]

I found SKR's review helpful. I have to agree with his complaint about using the word 'inspired' for a monster name. How ironic.

I'm not too worried about the 'enchanted' thing though. I'd be much more upset by the use of multiple, contiguous exclamation marks. But that's just me.

Anyway, the review was very informative and at least Sean backed up his opinions. I'm going to have to take a look at this book now.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Of course, there are enough editing errors anyway.

You know, I like the book. I bought the book. But man... some of the mistakes in there are just whacked. The fluff writing is all fine. Pretty good for a campaign book, I think. But every time I examine a rule or feat or class or sample NPC I find mistakes.

I'm actually really tired of encouraging Wizards to create sloppy, ugly mistakes that simply should not be there. Before Eberron, the last thing I got from Wizards was Book of Exalted Deeds. I probably won't buy anything again for a while.

 

[vox]

game terms

I guess I have been trolled but I agree with SKR that when a game product is functioning as a technical manual and describing a game concept it should be precise in its terminology. Writers shouldn't use game-defined terms to mean something other than those meanings if they are writing rules text. This is different than text which is dialogue or narrative, where a term's normal sense would take precedent.

Compare:

"Jonath wished that he had never struck the noble, as he was now in serious trouble."
This makes perfect sense and I don't think it contradicts what SKR has said. It certainly doesn't seem problematic to me.
----------------
"I will grant you anything you wish," said the sorceror to the party.
This statement wouldn't be clear to the players but that is okay; people aren't always easy to understand. The party may be confused about whether the sorceror will cast a 9th level spell ("Wish") for them or if he is agreeing to grant them any service which he can reasonably perform. Again that's okay because the character is being unclear, rather than the writer.
--------------------
In this encounter the characters will meet a sorceror who will agree to grant them any wish he can.
This is an example of the sort of sloppy writing that matches the "enchant" example. In this sort of behind-the-scenes writing "wish" should use it's meaning as a game term. If the writer means to use "wish" as a synonym for "desire" or "request" then he should use one of those terms instead. In for-the-DM text "wish" and other game-defined terms should only use their game-defined meanings. English is versatile enough to produce an alternative word that doesn't have a game definition.


In short, it just seems like sloppy word choice to me.

 

[Olive]

I agree with SKR that when a game product is functioning as a technical manual and describing a game concept it should be precise in its terminology.

I agree as well, and you would to if you'd ever watched Hypersmurf in the rules forum.

That said, why did this review come ont he week I had to pay bills and buy presents? I wasn't going to get it, but it's looking better and better now. I'll probably never run it, but there looks like some cool mechanics in there.

 

[pensiv]

In response to SKR's complaints about Warforged being LA+0. Warforged take PC classes, which automatically makes them better than the average soldier, which would have a weaker, NPC class. No need for level adjustment.