Do you think Eberron will go the way of Ghostwalk?

[dbm]

an entire continent to ignore if you don't want psionics in your game...

Yes, but you have to ignore an entire continent if you don't want ninja's or samurai in you campaign. This isn't a new state of affairs.

Dan

 

[WizarDru]

I am not at all a fan of the steampunk (or cyberpunk, or any other -punk) genre, so I am not going to buy the Eberron campaign setting. My interest in Eberron extends only as far as the impact of Eberron on other WotC past, current and potential campaign settings. I hope they will not be further marginalized. If you enjoy steampunk, though, then you will probably enjoy Eberron and more power to you.

Which is an odd stance to take, given that Eberron is not supposed to have Steam technology, nor be the dark dystopian 'punk' style of setting. I mean, by all means...dislike it. If the marketing is giving you a bad feeling, then you should avoid it...but AFAIK, Steampunk is a terrible label to apply to it.

 

[buzz]

Look at the recommended reading list in the 1E DMG.

I have, many times. I still don't really consider the implied setting of D&D (any edition) particularly "pulp," but maybe that's just me. At least, this is the first time I've seen it referred to as "pulp."

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Forgotten Realms - "It's like D&D, but take away the chance of your character really being important."

ROFLMAO!!!!

 

[rounser]

I still don't really consider the implied setting of D&D (any edition) particularly "pulp," but maybe that's just me.

Not "pulp" - "pulp fantasy". Thinking about the stuff not inspired by Tolkien might help. e.g. theives and the concept of theives guilds, barbarians, evil high priests, cthulhoid horrors like mind flayers, that sort of thing. I'm probably missing great swathes of derivative material that you take for granted as "D&D" there.

 

[Arnwyn]

Forgotten Realms - "It's like D&D, but take away the chance of your character really being important."

Oh, for crying out loud. I'm with Bendris: ROFLMAO!

Nice to see that you're trying to put the above statement forward as fact. Needless to say, any credibility your arguments might have had was shot to hell after that...

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

Oh, for crying out loud. I'm with Bendris: ROFLMAO!

Nice to see that you're trying to put the above statement forward as fact. Needless to say, any credibility your arguments might have had was shot to hell after that...

It was an opinion. My opinion. I didn't see a reason to state "this is my opinion" when it should have been obvious.

I'd love to hear your opposing arguments however.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

It was an opinion. My opinion. I didn't see a reason to state "this is my opinion" when it should have been obvious.

I'd love to hear your opposing arguments however.

<<begin rant>>

I too get tired of being forced to state that something is my opinion when it should be obvious. People seem to be just waiting for someone to make a blanket statement so they can jump all over the principle of it as a blanket statement and not stop and consider the content of the statement. I especially hate when people harp on a post using the word "Everyone". I don't pretend to know even a fraction of what all of the gamers in the world think and I'm not saying that I do. When I use the word "Everyone" I am implying people who I have gamed with and people who I currently game with. I get sick of all the extra wording required to make it politically correct.

<<end rant>>

 

[buzz]

Not "pulp" - "pulp fantasy". Thinking about the stuff not inspired by Tolkien might help. e.g. theives and the concept of theives guilds, barbarians, evil high priests, cthulhoid horrors like mind flayers, that sort of thing. I'm probably missing great swathes of derivative material that you take for granted as "D&D" there.

Right. I know all this. I'm just saying, I dunno if that makes the game "pulp fantasy", IMHO. A lot of these elements can be found pre-Pulp as well.

"Pulp fantasy", to me, implies a certain mood and feel that I don't get from straight-up D&D. But that could just be me.

 

[Arnwyn]

It was an opinion. My opinion. I didn't see a reason to state "this is my opinion" when it should have been obvious.

Sorry - normally I catch when somebody is stating his/her opinion as opposed to fact. Your post was not obvious (or else I never would have said anything).