The Best & Worst of 3rd Edition: Ultimate 3E: Unearthed Arcana, Eberron, Pathfinder

[TerraDave]

With 453 Votes, Pathfinder is leading. Followed by Eberron and Unearthed Arcana. Pathfinder is also leading among "registered voters", again followed by Eberron and UA. (Though the margin does seem to be smaller).

But this poll isn't over yet.

With 633 votes the rankings are:

Pathfinder: Rise of the Runelords 272| 42.97%
Eberron Campaign Setting 237| 37.44%
Unearthed Arcana 124 |19.59%

Pathfinder still leads, but Eberron is gaining. Among "registered voters" the lead has also tightened. One thing worth noting: I actually recognize the screen names of a lot of voters. Its kinda funny to see who voted for what.

 

[Kristian Serrano]

Some of those being(These are there opinions not mine)...

Those aren't reasons to dislike Eberron; they're reasons to keep playing in Forgotten Realms or other "traditional" fantasy settings.

And yes, you can have a car. It's called an elemental land cart.

 

[Syltorian]

Pathfinder still leads, but Eberron is gaining. Among "registered voters" the lead has also tightened. One thing worth noting: I actually recognize the screen names of a lot of voters. Its kinda funny to see who voted for what.

Minor problem here: I believe when I voted, I was not properly logged in - so I fear my vote might not be counted amongst 'registered voters'. At any rate, I cannot find my name on the list. Still the poll tells me that I have already voted. Does this mean I spoilt my ballot?

 

[MartM]

ECS, plain & simple.

Cool new rule (action points), amazing new races (all coming in the core MM 4e book) and i don't talk about the setting itself... Which is responsible of the "coming back" to the game table of many player at my table*



*Sorry for the surely not good syntaxe; i'm french canadian.

 

[Klaus]

I love Pathfinder and Eberron, but my vote has to go to Pathfinder.

After several horrible attempts to run and play in Eberron games, I started to wonder if I was the only one in my group who like this setting. Most of the people I associated with didn't like some Eberron's design elements.

Some of those being(These are there opinions not mine)...

-That the gods may or may not exist. But if they do they don't interfere with mortal affairs. "Heck atleast in the Realms I can have a sit down chat with my god."

-Warforged/Changeling/Shifter. "If I wanted to play a robot/doppleganger/werewolf I would".

-Shades of Gray. "How is it a NG Queen could want war, and a Vampir King wants peace"

-No moving Timeling. "If the Realms does, why not this"

-Too much is left for the DM to dicide. "At least the Forgotten Realms books tells me what I need to know."

-Trains. "So since there's trains, can I have a car"

-Native Outsiders. "So you're telling me that we even though we killed that group of Rakshasas, they're just going to come back?"

-The way the planes are set up.

-That there is no Sigil. "How are we supposed to get to Greyhawk and the Realms than?"

-That there are not enough high/Epic level NPCs to "pal" around with. "In my last game Elminster was my best friend. We would go drink and tell tales."

-To plot heavy. I still can't see what they meant by this one

The list goes on.

But after running through the first part of RotRL most of the old group is now back. Most of them feel that Pathfinder has a "classic", for lack of better term, feel to it.

Pathfinder brought peace back to the gaming table for now. And if my players are happy than I'm happy.


P.S. I have added somethings I like from Eberron into my Pathfinder games though. (ex., Soon my PC's may find themselves up against a small group Warfoged. Created long ago by those that inhabited Runeforge)

Y'know, their list is pretty much exactly why I *do* like Eberron.

 

[TerraDave]

Minor problem here: I believe when I voted, I was not properly logged in - so I fear my vote might not be counted amongst 'registered voters'. At any rate, I cannot find my name on the list. Still the poll tells me that I have already voted. Does this mean I spoilt my ballot?

Log out. Then log back in. If it says you voted, then you already voted as "syltorian". If you can still vote after logging back in, please feel free to do so.

 

[Syltorian]

Log out. Then log back in. If it says you voted, then you already voted as "syltorian". If you can still vote after logging back in, please feel free to do so.

Thanks a lot! That worked.

 

[Blackrat]

Y'know, their list is pretty much exactly why I *do* like Eberron.

Asides partially the planar system I agree with Klaus. Those are mostly the reasons eberron got my vote

 

[Pseudopsyche]

Needless to say, the same goes for everyone taking part in the poll, whatever you vote for. I haven't worked on Pathfinder to date, but I've worked with Paizo in the past and I hope to do so again in the future. I'd like to know exactly what you love about Pathfinder or UA - what they've done for your game. The numbers are fun to see - but it's the words that really interest me.

I read the ECS cover to cover and loved it. Eberron is my favorite campaign setting. But I voted for Pathfinder anyway. The reason is that I am trying to finish my PhD, and as a (slow, methodical, newbie) DM I don't have time to create adventures from whole cloth. I treasure polished adventures and adventure paths that I can use as starting points in the design process. For Eberron, the closest thing we have to an adventure path is STILL the original three WotC adventures (Shadows of the Last War, Whispers of the Vampire's Blade, Grasp of the Emerald Claw), after which you have to graft on Eyes of the Lich Queen or shift tone for Nic Logue's trilogy in Dungeon. And those first three adventures really do not do the campaign setting justice.

Many posts in this thread knock Pathfinder for being just an adventure. For a busy 20-something like me, that's exactly what I need. Paizo offered us not just any old adventure path, either. They provided enough of their new campaign setting to give Rise of the Runelords flavor and texture, just the things that I valued most from Eberron. (Clearly it's a different flavor and texture, but the point is that it gives the product something extra.)

Long story short: I love the Eberron Campaign Setting, but right now I value good adventure paths more than good settings. I hope that the new 4e license will allow companies besides WotC finally to try their hand at generating a library of good published adventure material.

 

[Hellcow]

Eh, what the heck. If Andy Collins can vote for UA and Mike McArtor and James Jacobs can vote for Pathfinder, I suppose I can go ahead and vote for Eberron. So with that said, looking to my reasons...

-That the gods may or may not exist. But if they do they don't interfere with mortal affairs. "Heck at least in the Realms I can have a sit down chat with my god."
-Shades of Gray. "How is it a NG Queen could want war, and a Vampir King wants peace"
-That there are not enough high/Epic level NPCs to "pal" around with.
-Too much is left for the DM to dicide. "At least the Forgotten Realms books tells me what I need to know."
-To plot heavy.

As others have said, these are the things I like about Eberron (in fact, I just recently posted a whole bit about the NG warmonger on the WotC boards). Now, this doesn't mean that I expect EVERYONE to like them... but as Edymnion says, the point is that if you don't like them, the Realms offers you pretty much exactly what you're looking for. The Realms IS a setting where you can have lunch with a god, where there's a lot of epic level people for you to pal around with, and most of the key facts are laid out - to the point where a player may feel justified in telling the DM he's made a mistake.

I like active gods. I grew up on Greek and Norse mythology. But FR has that. So with Eberron, I wanted religion to fill the role it does in our modern world - where faith is paramount and it's up to us flawed mortals to interpret the gods' wishes, making a level of schism, heresy, corruption, or simply misguided attempts to do good that you wouldn't expect to see in a world where the god could just pop down and say "UR doin it wrong". A cleric - or, for that matter, an angel - KNOWS his god exists, and it's this conviction that grants him access to divine power. But he could never do something so trivial as have lunch with his god, or actually fight his god, any more than a Christian or a Muslim could today. Of course, he might tell you that he DID have lunch with his god - because his god is always with him. His god is the hand that rolls the dice, bringing him fortune or testing his faith. In any case, the point to me is that it allows for a type of story you simply couldn't tell in a world of active gods. Of course, it means that you CAN'T tell the Time of Troubles or the Trojan War - but if you want that, there's many setting that DO have active gods that you can turn to. Eberron isn't supposed to be the One True Setting; it's not as if WotC stopped supporting FR when they put out Eberron. So it's there to offer something DIFFERENT - if it did things exactly the same as FR, why even have both of them?

Regarding the level of detail that's left to the DM, again, that's something I can understand. It's hardly surprising that some people should feel that they've paid for a setting precisely because they don't WANT to have to develop the details of the world, and because they want to know everything about it. Meanwhile, growing up, I always made homebrews instead of using settings. So for me, Eberron provides a solid foundation while still leaving some opportunity for the DM to exercise personal creativity. Do the gods exist, or does divine power flow from Siberys? What actually caused the Mourning, and will it happen again? Are there chaos gnomes somewhere in the world? (Remember, it's not that everything in core D&D IS in Eberron - it's that there's an easy place to add it if you WANT it to be in Eberron.) I love the fact that if I go to a convention and play in a stranger's Eberron campaign, I DON'T know what he's going to do with the Lord of Blades - even though I created the setting!

Again, I understand their dislike of these elements; it's all a question of what style of game you prefer. I don't DISLIKE FR because it has active gods, a highly detailed canon, and lots of epic NPCs; I just expect a different experience when I play it, and if I want a Trojan War game, I WILL play it. We aren't bound to one setting; I play Champions when I want superheroes, Over the Edge for modern suspense, and I'll play FR or Eberron based on the style of fantasy I want. So these certainly aren't flaws I'll try to correct; they are a part of the flavor of the setting, and admittedly, a reason it's not going to be to everyone's tastes.

So, I guess I'll vote now.