Search results

As I said, they can just Wish any losses back. There's a basis in the rules prior to 3e as well, making 3e's rules not really relevant. It doesn't really matter if the designers were inspired by the 3e rules, those rules are not a part of Eberron's theme. Quite literally every other edition of...

That's a pretty common mistake you are making there. That automatic loss of con pertains to the spells made permanent in the spell description, not all castings of permanency. The spell does not talk about magic item creation. "The magic-user casts the desired spell and then follows with the...

Looking at the FR Campaign Setting for 3e, it seems to be higher than that. Under Mage Fairs it says, "Any town or city with a population of more than a dozen wizards and sorcerers is likely to host an annual mage fair." Without even looking at every other class, there are towns(not even...

No. 1e and 2e have spells in the PHB explicitly so that PCs can make magic items. PCs making magic items and spells was a staple of TSR. The knowledge to make artifacts and relics has been lost I believe, but by no means is the knowledge to make magic items anything but common in those...

It assumes no such thing. What it does assume is that NPCs make lots of magic items and cast lots of spells, backed up by literally every edition ever. PCs don't make enough magic items, even in 3e, to have any affect at all on Eberron or any other official setting. Not even a drop in the...

It negates it completely. If Eberron was "built specifically for 3e mechanics," but BECMI, 1e, 2e, 4e, and 5e do functionally the same thing, then they it wasn't really built around 3e mechanics. It was simply a theme that relied on the creation of magic items and common magic, which every...

Yeah. Back in 3e it really bothered my group that fighters became more likely to fumble every round as they rose in level gaining extra attacks. So what we did was make it so that at levels 1-5, you fumbled normally. At levels 6-10, if you fumbled you got a DC 15 dex check that turned the...

Even those events didn't really change anything. I've been running FR since 1e. When 2e brought the Time of Troubles, I adopted that because I liked it. When the Spell Plague and Sundering arrived, I didn't adopt those because I didn't like them. When you take all the FR lore from every...

None of which changes what I've been saying even the slightest bit. 1e is every bit as likely to result in an Eberron as 3e was. Magic items creation being entirely player facing doesn't make magic items more common in that edition than any other.

Don't mistake the pushback against your premise as folks being against new settings. It's just the idea that the setting needs to be tied to the editions mechanics that is flawed. Not only isn't that a need, it really isn't ever done. Even Eberron wasn't really tied to 3e's mechanics, as I've...

Um, the game goes out of its way to say that magic item sales are very rare and that few can afford them. The vast majority of those few would be nobles. I don't think you appreciate or understand the noble mindset. Magic items = works of art, not tanks. Billionaires will buy and collect...

Actually it's the opposite. Only adventurers would be time pressed to the point where the hour might be problematic. Non-adventurers could have many useful magic items that they switch about as needed. A noble could afford a dozen magic shields of various types, attuning to a new one every...

Enchant an Item and Permanency are literally 1e PHB spells explicitly for the creation of magic items. The 1e DMG doesn't say it requires the breath of a falling star and the like to make magic items. This is what it says. "With respect to the former, you must determine which spells and...

People seem to forget that all it takes is a short rest to attune to something new. Why would characters be unable to use magic items and/or give them away when they can just keep it on hand and attune to it for use when needed?

Right "Has to include everything in 3e" is functionally the same as "has to include everything in 1e/2e/4e/5e." And as I pointed out, Glantri did the magic/magic item centric society first. And 1e, 2e, and 4e all had magic item creation where magic items were pretty darn common as well. 3e...

Sure, but that applied to literally every edition up until that point. Basic gave us Glantri before Eberron was a gleam in anyone's eye. You could magic and craft in 1e and in 2e, which meant that the same setting could have arisen in those editions as well. Same with 4e. 5e is the only...

In what way was it designed specifically for 3e mechanics?

A setting is just a place where the game happens. It's not created to represent any specific set of rules. I can pull out a 1e setting and run 5e in it with zero changes or vice versa. Sometimes a setting has some setting unique mechanics, but those are not edition mechanics.

In fact it has Sorcerer Kings. :p

All of those colors are the colors of Suns, and the red surrounding it all is pretty Dark. :unsure: