Eberron: The End?

[Scrivener of Doom]

I just saw this posted on Keith Baker's page:

http://keith-baker.com/have-a-gloomy-holiday/

In gloomier news, the current issue of Dragon marks the final installment of the Eye on Eberron series. It is my hope that Eberron will continue to be supported in D&D Next, but I don’t have any news on that front.With that in mind, I am developing a new fantasy setting that I’ll be using as a foundation for games and fiction. Expect to see a more detailed discussion of this new world over the next few months!

I'm a bit surprised. I thought it had its fans but evidently not enough.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

To be fair, there's many more unsupported settings than there are supported ones, many of them quite popular even now. Eberron was supported longer than Planescape, I believe, which is a pretty good run.

And no setting ever truly dies: I'd count on it popping up, either later in 5E or in 6E, when 3E is the nostalgic well from which they draw from.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I wonder a bit at the plan for settings in 5e. They've been hyping FR like nobody's business in some of the release material, I wonder if Toril is going to have a special place in 5e (perhaps the "example" setting!). Eberron is looking like they're going to be silent on it for at least a year or so. I dunno if they plan on keeping Dark Sun 4e stuff up there for much longer.

I bet we're seeing (yet another) transformation of Dungeon and Dragon magazines in the not-too-distant future, and I bet dropping the Eberron column is part of that.

Doesn't mean Eberron is a dead setting, just means that it's probably going to sleep for a little while.

 

[Crothian]

Luckily, they never over did the setting like the Realms of Greyhawk. It has some great books for it and even if nothing more is ever published for the setting I'll still be able to play there with whatever gaming system I want to use.

 

[DaveMage]

I'm just glad they got through all the continents in D&D 3.5. I don't really need anything else for Eberron.

 

[Derren]

Not surprising that WotC would focus on their (previously) successful "kitchen sink" generic fantasy setting for 5E and ignores the specialized, "strange" setting (for a time?).

 

[delericho]

Can't say I'm terribly surprised. Unfortunately, 4e's "three books and out" model of setting support seems almost designed for this sort of thing to happen.

In any case, I choose to see this as a good thing - at least it means that the setting won't be seeing the sort or major upheavals that so damaged Forgotten Realms (and Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Dark Sun...).

 

[JeffB]

I would be thankful WOTC has not totally ruined the setting by producing tons more product during 4e and changing the setting significantly.

Too bad they never took that approach with FR or GH in the time they have owned those properties.

 

[delericho]

Too bad they never took that approach with FR or GH in the time they have owned those properties.

To be fair, WotC never did GH much harm - 'twas TSR did for that setting.

 

[JeffB]

To be fair, WotC never did GH much harm - 'twas TSR did for that setting.

I am not a fan of the 98 GH story reversals, or the continued storylines of the LGG or LGJ, and the lip service given to the setting in the 3.x products.


Though I did not care for WARS or the FTA storyline either, at least Zeb and Carl did a damn good job with the mess they were given. FTA era products are well done from a home use perspective and are fun reads. . TAB is a decent read but the 3.x era.material bores me to tears...mostly a history lesson with preciouus little adventure hooks. A good setup for LGH, but abysmal for a home game. The 98 era modules from.SKR are horrendous as GH products as well.

IOW, respectfully I disagree. WOTC is just as guilty of botching the product line as TSR was.