Dragon 373: Ecology of the Sharn
- Thread starter Wrox
- Start date
Nivenus
First Post
Let's keep the snarkety to a minimum, shall we?
Anyhow, as for the article itself, I haven't had the time to read it over in full (I'm doing this between classes you see) but I have to say it looks good to me. The sharn does look weird, but I can't see how it looks any weirder than it did in 3e. I also like that, unlike in the FRCG, the article reclaims sharn rightfully as chaotic neutral / unaligned rather than chaotic evil (never seemed particularly evil to me, just crazy). Best of all, I like the fact that the article, unlike every other 4e ecology article before it has actual details for FR specifically. This, of course, wouldn't be necessary for more broadly-used creatures (like dragonborn) but it would have been nice for the creatures with specific ties to FR (can anyone say "genasi?").
All in all, I look forward to reading it in more detail.
Anyhow, as for the article itself, I haven't had the time to read it over in full (I'm doing this between classes you see) but I have to say it looks good to me. The sharn does look weird, but I can't see how it looks any weirder than it did in 3e. I also like that, unlike in the FRCG, the article reclaims sharn rightfully as chaotic neutral / unaligned rather than chaotic evil (never seemed particularly evil to me, just crazy). Best of all, I like the fact that the article, unlike every other 4e ecology article before it has actual details for FR specifically. This, of course, wouldn't be necessary for more broadly-used creatures (like dragonborn) but it would have been nice for the creatures with specific ties to FR (can anyone say "genasi?").
All in all, I look forward to reading it in more detail.
avin
First Post
~ I've edited out the original, so I've edited out this too PS~
Well, some people are just rushing to defend 4E instead of thinking about what topics mean.
You could check my sign, you could check my posts and see that I'm only DMing on fourth edition at moment. But you don't and you won't be missed. I don't care about editions. I don't care about systems.
I don't get it. A full time 4E DM being ignored just because he doesn't like 4E art? What's going on people? Geez...
Alzrius, thanks for that picture, looks cartoonish too. Or it's just me?
Well, some people are just rushing to defend 4E instead of thinking about what topics mean.
You could check my sign, you could check my posts and see that I'm only DMing on fourth edition at moment. But you don't and you won't be missed. I don't care about editions. I don't care about systems.
I don't get it. A full time 4E DM being ignored just because he doesn't like 4E art? What's going on people? Geez...
Alzrius, thanks for that picture, looks cartoonish too. Or it's just me?
Last edited by a moderator:
Shroomy
Adventurer
The 4e backstory was very nice, with its connection to alternate universes and Tharizdun.
I though that the sharn presented in the FRCG were corrupted by the Spellplague, which explains their alignment change (presereving the Spellplague as the last remnant of the Weave was a nice touch, and given that would result in death, destruction, and madness, chaotic evil is probably appropriate), but the Core sharn and some of the sharn mentioned in the FR section of the article definitely act more like their original incarnations. Good stuff.
Shemeska
Adventurer
*reads the preview bits*
Wait. Did they adopt FR's sharn to core 4e, or did they just insert core 4e backstory into an FR creature?
Or does the article present a core-adopted sharn and an FR sharn as well? Becuase if the FR sharn suddenly has references to Tharizdun dropping all over the place, I'm going to go have a drink.
Wait. Did they adopt FR's sharn to core 4e, or did they just insert core 4e backstory into an FR creature?
Or does the article present a core-adopted sharn and an FR sharn as well? Becuase if the FR sharn suddenly has references to Tharizdun dropping all over the place, I'm going to go have a drink.
Shroomy
Adventurer
*reads the preview bits*
Wait. Did they adopt FR's sharn to core 4e, or did they just insert core 4e backstory into an FR creature?
Or does the article present a core-adopted sharn and an FR sharn as well? Becuase if the FR sharn suddenly has references to Tharizdun dropping all over the place, I'm going to go have a drink.
The background elements are split into two parts. The first incorporates the sharn into the 4e core (which is where the references to Tharizdun originate), the second builds on information from the FRCG; those stories are distinct from one another. For the most part the section on the Physiology, Culture, and Psychology could be used interchangeably, as can most of the crunch (the one sharn specific magic orb mentions Tharizdun in the fluff text).
Last edited:
Keefe the Thief
Hero
I really like the new background, even more because it comes from a FR expert. Gonna use those beauties immediately. More articles like this - using cool FR creatures and reimagining them with indepth information for POLand is always useful.
And that picture with a sharn/human comparison is so going to be a handout next session.
And to Shemeska: There are "general" and "Sharn in FR" parts in the article.
And that picture with a sharn/human comparison is so going to be a handout next session.
And to Shemeska: There are "general" and "Sharn in FR" parts in the article.
Last edited:
fissionessence
First Post
I really like the core 4E backstory for these creatures. The race sounds really awesome and very interesting . . . too bad they look super silly: way too silly for me to consider using them without giving them a total makeover.
~
~
SPECTRE666
Adventurer
-I think its a good article, written by a person I respect. I liked how they were added to the "Core World".
SPECTRE
SPECTRE
Similar Threads
