Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JEB" data-source="post: 9146918" data-attributes="member: 10148">I suspect there are some folks who would disagree that Eberron doesn't need a reboot (the drow of Xen'drik have been cited as problematic, for example). But Wizards didn't see an issue with such at the time, it appears.Can be used, sure... if you avoid the parts of the world that were different from SCAG's version of the Realms during those timeframes. (That said, I do expect some kind of "evergreen" Realms reset next year, that vagues things up. Probably taking a page from how they handled Dragonlance. Or maybe Planescape will provide a hint.)Correct, the canon policy in 2021 was a change from the approach in the 2014 5E rulebooks (the DMG explicitly says novels and video games are assumed to take place in the official versions of settings like the Realms). One approach in 2014, a different approach as of 2021. By definition, that isn't consistent.True, Greyhawk also got this treatment. Though they tried to integrate some 5E-isms into the existing setting canon, such as having tieflings be from Iuz's kingdom (rather than just saying tieflings were a common, widespread species all along).Again, you can only argue this approach has been consistent if you look at it in the broadest possible sense. Once you get into specifics it's clearly been a number of shifts over the course of the edition.</blockquote>