Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Eberron 5e
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RealAlHazred" data-source="post: 6750808" data-attributes="member: 25818"><p><strong>Originally posted by Ogiwan:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Amen, brutha.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Elton74:</strong></p><p></p><p>Yes, I was trying to extrapolate what can be done with Backgrounds and Themes. <img src="http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/smile.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> Thats what we have so far with the playtest. However, as my players have me running Shadowruns, I can rest my creative muscles in this area. <img src="http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/smile.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> I can rest for a wait and see. I've been immersing myself into the Sixth World again.</p><p></p><p>It was good to think along those lines, even though it didn't seem perfect as a theory, a failed hypothesis. Perhaps after resting and looking at future of the playtest packet, I can get some great ideas on how to recreate Eberron on 5e. <img src="http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/smile.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Plaguescarred1:</strong></p><p></p><p>Background and Themes are areas where i think Eberron and other Setting could really shine, by having all sorts of elements defined therein.</p><p></p><p>Also I hope Warforged, Artificers etc...return in a future Eberron Campaign Book.... </p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by StormReaper:</strong></p><p></p><p>Apart from improved game mechanics in 5e which could describe Eberron more in line to the vision of it's creators, <strong>I would like to see an advancement in the timeline of the setting.</strong> </p><p></p><p>Really the 'fluff' and non-mechanical stuff is what draws you to a setting, and if nothing ('fluff') has changed, there would be little reason to buy any sourcebooks, when one can look up all the mechanical stuff in the online databases, and the setting has been descriped very well in 3.5.</p><p></p><p>So my biggest item on the 'wishlist' is that Keith et al. update the 'story' of the setting for 5e.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by AvonRekaes:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This. This with the fury of a thousand exploding suns.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Hellcow:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm curious to hear what people have to say about this. We originally planned a timeline advancement for 4E, but decided against it for a number of reasons. I know what *I* think on the matter, but I'd like to here what YOU think, since at the end of the day that's more important. <a href="http://bossythecow.com/hdwt/2012/06/eberron-discussion-do-you-want-the-timeline-advanced/" target="_blank">I've started a thread on HDWT</a>, and if people want to comment there, I'd love to get your feedback.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by DoctorBadWolf:</strong></p><p></p><p>I wouldn't mind a time advance, but only enough of one that it's still essentially europe in between the great wars. Maybe a handful of years, at most. No 50 year jump.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by areleth:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Since I still have all the old books, it wouldn't bother me to see it advanced a bit.</p><p></p><p>What would any of you guys want to see changed if it did get advanced? Like that Droaam/Breland war or Haruuc being killed?</p><p></p><p>I wouldn't mind Breland being at war with Droaam, since I'm always looking for an excuse to kill Sora Maenya in every game, but I like Haruuc and I'd prefer him alive.</p><p></p><p>Maybe the Inspired could be building a monolith in Q'barra, or the Valenar have moved from raiding the Talenta Plains into an open invasion in hopes of forcing Karrnath to act, or something is rumbling deep in Xen'drik that has mages across Eberron concerned, or Aurala has water accidentally splashed on her at a party and melts, throwing Aundair into its own mini-succession-crisis.</p><p></p><p>As long as the situation remains a boiling point that hasn't spilled over into a new war yet, then I think the themes of Eberron remain intact, but we'll have even more information to play around with.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by AvonRekaes:</strong></p><p></p><p>I agree. I think not advancing the timeline in 4e may have been... well, I don't want to call it a mistake, but maybe just misguided?</p><p></p><p>I do indeed have all the 3e material, and the 4e books. Perhaps 5e can advance the timeline some. I agree it shouldn't be much. Maybe just to the year 1000 YK and capture some of the "Millenium Fever" that we experienced during the early 2000s. </p><p></p><p>Having no huge history of metaplot was one of the big draws of Eberron. I think we can continue this by advancing the story in discreet ways. We don't need any "Realms Shaking Events" for Eberron. We don't need a Spellplague. We certaintly don't need the Gods being banished to the material world and walking among mortals.</p><p></p><p>But I have no issue with advancing the political and social intruige a few years and seeing where things are. </p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by DoctorBadWolf:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think most of the existing power balance should remain intact. No new outbreaks of violence or anything like that. </p><p></p><p>What I'd like to see is some new developments in Xendrik. The drow need a Carthage, IMO. They need a great center of civilization that the rest of the world is just finding out about, because of a sudden opening of trade with Stormreach. </p><p></p><p>New power struggles in Xendrik, while leaving the bulk of the continent unexplored and wild, is what I'd like. </p><p></p><p>Good aligned (or just normal shades of morality), surface dwelling, civilized drow <em>society? </em>Yes please.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Elton74:</strong></p><p></p><p>Advancing the timeline?</p><p></p><p>As long as there is an option to continue to play after the Last War, and other Eras of Eberron's History, I have no problem with this. Perhaps a ten to 20 year jump. Not too much that there is a build up of weapons for a new war on the horizon, but enough to bring new players up to date. </p><p> </p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Hellcow:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The Sulatar aren't GOOD, but I don't see them as culturally evil in the same way that the Lolth-worshipping drow are. If you adjust their current isolationist beliefs so they have reason to trade or interact with other cultures, you have a surface-dwelling, sophisticated drow culture waiting to be explored. And hey, I'm sure Cannith would love to learn more about their elemental binding techniques!</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Madfox11:</strong></p><p></p><p>I am not a big fan of a timeline advance. A good campaign setting thrives on unresolved potential conflicts in which the PCs can have an impact. Eberron shines in this regards, especially since none of these potential conflicts are welll defined let alone guaranteed. A DM has the arguments to let one come to the fore, or die a silent death. If you advance the timeline that would mean resolving some of the current conflicts, and adding new ones. Considering the outcry of fans for FR where it happened two times, I doubt the majority of fans really want it. You could stick with little changes, but some of them can have a huge impact (e.g. replacement of the Lhesh as in the novels with a new human-friendly one means that the current potential of conflict with Darguun is lessened a lot) and if not why bother? You are just making it harder to use older material since now you have to keep a close eye on the details.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Ogiwan:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthago_delenda_est" target="_blank">Carthage must be destroyed</a>!</p><p></p><p>I would prefer to have the timeline stay as it is. Now, the last chapter of the DM book, though, could have a few scenarios depecting Eberron 2, 5, 10, and 20 years into the future. Preferably with drastically different events (+2 years may feature Haruuc assassinated, whereas in +5 years, he's still alive and kicking). That way, the core of the setting is unchanged, but people who want to experiment have some foundation to work on. </p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by areleth:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>Alexandria then.</p><p></p><p>I'm fine with the timeline advancing if it could mean better sales for Eberron. I buy everything that says Eberron on the cover on principle, and I'm happy with the timeline as it stands, but if it gets more exposure for Eberron then lets do it.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by DoctorBadWolf:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's what I was thinking.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by jim11735:</strong></p><p></p><p>Collected Eberron books in 3rd but never played (pretty much always hombrews), loved the setting. Got to play in 4e on a 10 level Paragon run, and whatever 4e changes didn't directly come out of the DMs mouth I disregarded. TTRPGs are great that way.</p><p></p><p>Please, don't advance the timeline! Eberron, imo, is that world at that moment. DMs and adventure writers are free to move forward and back in time to tell their stories, but as a published campaign world I don't think the timing should change.</p><p></p><p>But feel free to change lots of the little details or big chunks as necessary. I'd rather an overhaul of Xen'drik than an advancement of the timeline.</p><p></p><p>I agree that Eberron was 3rd edition, so many of it's ideas were mechanics and mechanics were ideas. The translation to 4e was handled as best as it could. Mandates, sounds pretty much how it read. My hope would be 5th Eberron would again be written for that ruleset. I think changes in the campaign world that highlight the new edition mechanics would make it worth buying the campaign again. Dis/Advantage and the like.</p><p></p><p>I still think Warforged should be presented solely in the Eberron campaign.</p><p></p><p>But my guess is that 5th will be less campaign specific, compared to 4e, which will lend itself to a 5th edition of Eberron. </p><p></p><p>I could see Eberron, purely on the Modular framework, have a distinct feel to D&D in general. Heavier emphasis on exploration and interaction, for example. Or subsystems that cover new ground.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Edymnion:</strong></p><p></p><p>It would be nice to use the modular system to revamp the Dragonmarks into their own fully developed little side system.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Edymnion:</strong></p><p></p><p>So far I'm liking what I'm seeing in the latest 5e playtest package.</p><p></p><p>There is definitely a lot of potential for setting specific alterations and refinements. Eberron Next is looking a little brighter.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:</strong></p><p></p><p>The latest wandering monsters article discusses some Eberron creatures, as dinosaurs and rats. This may indicate that Eberron may get at least some support in dndnext. The link is: <a href="http://wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4wand/20130625" target="_blank">wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4wand...</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by DoctorNecrotic:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I know I'm not supplying much to the conversation, but...</p><p><img src="http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/woot.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /><img src="http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/dancin.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /><img src="http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/soexcited.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> HAPPY DAY!</p><p></p><p>Back on track, so far the references to Eberron in the polls have been very popular, if that brings even more hope.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Syltorian:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanks! Eberron is actually mentioned, and when I voted, given as a reason why dinosaurs need to be in the game. A good omen from the Sovereigns! </p><p></p><p>Also, the article is written by James Wyatt, someone who has put a lot of work into Eberron, and who has been able to accomodate fans by not advancing the timeline (despite his and Bassingwaithe's books, which were laying the groundwork for just that; so being able to put the fans before their own ideas takes a lot of strength). That too is a good sign. </p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by IAmSylar:</strong></p><p></p><p>I'm planning on switching to Pathfinder for all my Eberron needs. I don't think 5E will do a good job with Eberron, at least IMO. The system is just to flat and simplistic to support the setting.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:</strong></p><p></p><p>I am actually looking forward to Eberron support in dndnext. In fact, I prefer rules light systems, as the core of dndnext will likely be. Yet, the modularity approach will likely permit adding more complexity if that is what you like. Furthermore, support in dndnext implies new products covering additional places, groups, etc.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Syltorian:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Still, no matter the edition, new <em>fluff</em> written for Eberron would be welcome. I've had and I have no interest in 4E either, but most of what came out for Eberron was worth it. I do hope WotC can be encouraged to continue support for the setting; if that means doing some additional work of converting the rules to 3.5 or PF - should I dislike 5E - I'm still going to purchase Eberron material. That is provided said fluff does not involve a changing the setting (advancing the timeline, unleashing a spell-plague, or deciding to add five more dragonmarked houses for fun - I'll trust they learned from the Forgotten Realms, which I gather lost quite a few fans with the transition to 4E). </p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Hellcow:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Actually, this isn't necessarily true. Consider Eberron support for 4E, which <em>primarily </em>covers the existing places and groups, with a few new things and clarifications of old things.</p><p></p><p>Unfortunately, there's a logical foundation for this, which raises the question of what you'd like to see for the future. </p><p></p><p>An Eberron guide designed for DDN needs to, first and foremost, support DDN players. WotC presumably hopes that their market will continue to grow, which means that there will be people buying this book who have never encountered Eberron before; they can't rely on a new customer having read a 3.5 sourcebook. There's a few ways to handle this. </p><p></p><p><strong>Retread old ground</strong>. This is what happened with 4E. The 4E ECG stands alone, bringing in a lot of little details from many different 3.5 sourcebooks. It sheds a little more light on some old subjects - more details on the Lords of Dust and House Tarkanan, more details about the impact of the Last War - and it adds a few new groups like the Mournland Magebred, the Feyspires, and the Fading Dream. But it is designed so that someone who has never heard of Eberron before can pick it up and run the setting with just this book. This is good for the new player, but means that it has relatively little to offer the player who knows the setting and owns all the previous books. A DDN ECG needs to accomplish the same purpose: to make the setting accessible to someone who knows nothing about this... which means relatively little space for new material or additional detail on old topics. A book like <em>Planes of Eberron </em>is a great product for people familiar with the world who want to know about this obscure element of it; it's a terrible product for people who have never even heard of the setting before. </p><p></p><p><strong>Timeline Adjustment. </strong>The point of doing a timeline adjustment is to make the world new for the old players. By doing this, you <em>theoretically </em>get a product that's good for everyone. Entirely new players get a guide that provides them with everything they need to play in the setting. While old players get a lot of new material because <em>everything has changed</em>. So even if the book goes over the Five Nations again, they aren't the Five Nations you remember, so see what they look like now! With that said, <em>theoretically </em>it's a good book for everyone; in practice, there's the danger that people who liked the original setting don't want to have that original setting warped into something new. And yet, would they want to see the same old thing all over again? From a business perspective, it's not an easy question to answer. </p><p></p><p><strong>System Neutral Support. </strong>While this doesn't seem like a route WotC would take, it's worth putting out there. In my opinion, the most likely way you'd see a book that explore things that have never been covered before while staying in 998 YK is if that book is actually setting neutral. Rather than being aimed directly at DDN players who may know nothing about Eberron, it's aimed at Eberron players regardless of what system they are playing in. In this sort of scenario, what you'd likely see is minimal system support for the setting in DDN - conversions for races, classes, dragonmarks, etc - but not a full ECG for DDN. Essentially, rather than bringing new people to the world, it would be an effort to make sure that the old players<em></em></p><p><em></em>have what they need to convert, and then create material than any existing Eberron player can use. Frankly, this seems like an unlikely scenario, but it seems like the most logical way that you would get deeper coverage of obscure elements of the existing setting. </p><p></p><p>If these are the three options, what would you prefer to see? Can you think of a different option that hasn't occured to me?</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Syltorian:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I fall into the category of people who don’t want “the original setting warped into something new”. Strongly.</p><p></p><p>Iunderstand the business reasons for doing it, but it will make the setting a lot less attractive to me.</p><p></p><p>Even advancing it by only a few years will destroy the immediacy of the Peace Treaty and the Mourning. Nations will have recovered, and either a new war has broken out or the peace has been stabilised, and the fate of the world does not hang quite so much in the balance anymore. Unless the timeline advancement has brought with it a new war, an extended Mourning, or a spellplague, in which the world doesn't hang in the balane either, because the balance has crashed. There is no more suspense.</p><p></p><p>Cannith will either have split completely or found a new baron everyone agrees on (since, if we go by J. Wyatt’s novels, at least one of them will be out of the count!). Time heals many wounds, and it is those wounds (hurt national pride or the Mourning) which make the setting interesting.</p><p></p><p>From a far more personal point of view, it will dramatically alter a lot of the characters I have played, or wanted to play and did not get a chance yet, since many of their back-stories rely on the war just being over.</p><p></p><p>I’d put in my veto on a timeline advancement if I somehow manage to get that right in the first place.</p><p></p><p>Now, how to reconcile this with the need for something new, rather than ending up with Eberron products not selling because it’s more of the same?</p><p></p><p>First, I found the new material in the 4E ECS quite useful - despite owning all the 3.5 Eberron books and never having been interested in 4E. Naturally, with each iteration, it will be more difficult to find new stuff, but with 4E ECS, they found the right combination - for me.</p><p></p><p>It would be possible to produce a book offering multiple timelines – though this might confuse new players, as well as authors of future support books and novels. Pre-Mourning Cyre could be shown, however, as it will aid both character backgrounds for the current timeline, as well as flashback campaigns. Say, presenting Galifar at the height of its power, or the war just before the Mourning. But as said, this will be difficult, and end up requiring more material than an introductory book can handle.</p><p></p><p>I was thinking whether we should not rethink where the focus of Eberron lies. The 4E ECS took a step in that direction by dedicating a large part of its pages to Sharn. So, perhaps, a DDN ECS could go another step further and focus exclusively on a small part of Khorvaire. You’d still get the main elements – immediate post-war uncertainty, cold war, intrigue, pulp action – and the chance to expand these so they become attractive to old players as well. In this scenario, everything outside the Five Nations would be stuff for further articles and books. Further information would then come in the form of supplements, Dragon articles, website posts, and so forth. The ECS would give the framework for a World of Intrigue and Adventure, with a few base cities (Sharn, Flamekeep, Fairhaven, New Cyre, and either Atur or Korth) and a few adventure sites (more akin to the Explorer’s Handbook), which will then be expanded upon elsewhere.</p><p></p><p>Alternatively, the book could work from the perspective that what makes Eberron so great is not Aundair and Breland, but the pulp-noir mixture. So it could focus on that. It would rehash a necessary minimum some old materials needed to get the world going, but focus on how to run intrigue campaigns (which are difficult to pull off) and pulp elements.</p><p></p><p>The first book would thus be more of an exploration of what the “spirit” of Eberron is, rather than trying to fit every thorp in. The DM could be given special methods to use gang-warfare (Dhaask vs. Boromars), covert ops (keeping covers, managing assets, industrial espionage as well as political one, etc), crime-solving adventures, a criminal underworld (reaching up into the top-levels of society), political manoeuvring (Parliamentarians against Royalists), as well as ideas as to how magic is integrated into everday life. That would be something that’s very much communicating the Eberron-feeling, sure to attract other players without offending old fans, and will actually be useful to old fans too.</p><p></p><p>Further supplements would then flesh out the world, once that framework is set, and people can extend these principles to the druid factions of the Eldeen, to the warring tribes of Xen'drik Drow, and the underwater Empires of the Sahuagin.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That’s be my favourite. I see a glimpse of a hope in WotC’s desire not to fragment the market further. They are already republishing 3.5 material, despite the fact that they are gearing up for DDN. Separating the Settings from the Systems might work in their favour, since they could draw on the people who prefer other systems, but are drawn to Eberron as a system.</p><p></p><p>With some additional work, books could come with web-enhancements (free, payable, or through codes in the books) to get the crunch for your edition of choice. The <em>Multi-System Support. </em>Some companies already manage to publish their material for a few systems, so why not WotC? It might mean going electronic copy rather than printed, to save on costs as each alternative version will reach too small a market, but the overall sum of copies sold might exceed what a book focused on a single edition might achieve. Plus, they get to sell more of their newly printed old stuff, too. </p><p></p><p>A way to let this happen is to sell or lease a license. WotC would still get a piece of the income and keep the intellectual property rights; if they are afraid of companies “going rogue” and becoming a concurrence, as happened with the OGL, they probably have lawyers to figure out how to close those loopholes without eliminating the possibility that it could be subcontracted. Another way would be to put up new books on kickstarter. So, if enough people want a <em>Planes on Eberron</em>, they'll have at least part of their costs covered before they contract it. </p><p></p><p>Anyway, I hope those thoughts, compiled at 2 a.m. with my body screeming to go to rest and my head yelling it still has matters to do, make sense despite the circumstances under which they were composed.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Hellcow:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Same here. I'm just trying to help people see how these decisions get made. WotC is a big company that answers to an even bigger company, so they don't have the luxury of doing things just because they want to; they have to a limited number of slots and have to make a case for each product that fills one of them. A setting-neutral book has the potential to appeal to everyone who plays the game. A setting-specific book innately pushes away a segment of the audience who dislikes that setting. If it's furthermore either inaccessible to new players (because it requires advanced knowledge of the setting) or something that won't appeal to the existing fans (because it provides little that's new) that's a serious blow against it. If I had the license, I might make a <em>Planes of Eberron </em>book knowing it's a smaller market because it's a big enough market for me and I want to do it; WotC can't do that. So essentially, my challenge here is <em>if you don't want to see a timeline advance and you don't want to see the same stuff all over again, come up with a product you think WotC could sell. </em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Excellent idea. A sourcebook that focuses on the <em>flavor </em>of Eberron and concrete systems for running those different styles of campaigns could provide mechanical systems that could appeal to people who don't plan on using the setting, provide some interesting depth on things like the gangs, the intelligence services, etc, and provide enough hooks for a new DM to run a small-scope campaign without reprinting all the existing information on the world. If that book was successful, it would then help justify further support for the setting. </p><p></p><p>As opposed to a timeline <em>advance</em>, one thing I could see as a possibility would be to step BACK a few years, and focus on the Last War. As with what you describe, a focused book that doesn't encompass the entire world, but instead focuses specifically on the war and the role of adventurers in and around the war. You could bring in systems for intrigue and mass conflict, and take a deeper look at the role of magic in the war. Players could either take part in the conflict - be it in a <em>Three Musketeers </em>style or something more akin to <em>300</em> - or simply be going about their normal adventuring lives in the midst of it. Personally, I would be prepared to have events of the campaign contradict canon - so it remains a mystery to the players as <em>will the Mourning happen, or is it something we can avert?</em> If your 998 YK characters were veterans, remake them and consider this a flashback of their previous career.<em></em></p><p><em></em>The main thing here is that additional information on, say, Zil elemental weapons, the military of Droaam, the Royal Eyes, or what have you could all be adapted to a 998 YK campaign... because it's in the near past as opposed to the future, it's a matter of telling you more about things that are already there as opposed to making up new things. </p><p></p><p>What other ideas can people come up with? What's a product you'd like to have that could make sense for WotC to do?</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Syltorian:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It’s a pity this is the way things are, but regret won’t change them. Blaming WotC neither; their people have families to feed, after all, and the market is not forgiving. As said, I do believe that WotC is currently trying to re-united the market by appealing to as many parts of it as possible. Republishing older editions points into that direction.</p><p></p><p>Publishing flavor-only material might push away those who do not like Eberron, but if it is edition-neutral or multi-edition, that could be, in part or entirely, balanced out by reaching people still playing 3.5, Pathfinder, and 4E, instead of creating yet another divide with DDN.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The challenge could also be to <em>find a way to get Keith Baker the license/subcontract for Eberron</em>. A subscription, kickstarter, or similar move might be a way to work this out. We just need to make sure WotC sees this as an opportunity, not a concurrence.</p><p></p><p> As for the original challenge:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanks! An Eberron Campaign Manual (rather than Setting) with a focus on intrigue, noir and pulp adventure would certainly appeal. Setting material would be introduced to support these rules and suggestions, so this would be a cross between <em>Heroes of Horror</em> (or <em>Crime and Punishment</em>)<em></em></p><p><em></em>and the <em>Eberron</em></p><p><em>Campaign Setting</em>. I believe this would be a great way to go ahead with this, appealing to both parts of the market.</p><p></p><p>If, in addition, WotC reprints the original 3.5 books, updated with some errata and conversion notes, their production costs would also be fairly small (most of the writing and editing being done already), and continuity would be safeguarded. It would then be possible for new people to acquire the material already on the market without going through second-hand markets or illegal downloads, and writers could focus on new elements, such as <em>Planes of Eberron</em>, <em>Conspiracies of Eberron</em>, <em>Empires under the Waves</em>, etc.</p><p></p><p>As said in my previous post, I could also see a very focused approach on only a few sites. An inside-out design, essentially: You get some highly developed locales – Sharn and New Cyre, for instance – to start with. Or Breland, since that’s where both of these locations are. There would be minimal details for the other nations at first.</p><p></p><p>Old players would know about these, and be able to play their Aundairian or Adaran characters without changing anything, but they’d get many more developped ideas about Breland, enticing the to buy the product. The Swords of Liberty would be developed, rules for social interaction at the Tain gala would be introduced, House Tarkanan would be gotten into into more depth (based on the Thorn of Breland novels, without necessarily adopting all the changes that happen throughout the book), and so forth.</p><p></p><p>New players would get an introduction to Eberron in an area which has regions as diverse as Sharn, Black Pit and New Cyre, with intrigue (Cannith South, Swords of Liberty, the Citadel), the lightning rail, everyday magic in the big cities of the industrial moloch that is Breland, and small tidbits about what lies beyond the frontiers. </p><p></p><p>The disadvantage is that the travelling element, the famous red lines on the map of the Indiana Jones movies, would only be possible for veterans of the setting; but I believe that is an minor problem easily gotten around with new material and even errated/updated reprints.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I do like the idea of a timeline <em>retreat</em>. It risks confusing new players, though; the ones that don’t know about the Mourning because it hasn’t happened yet. Or those who wonder how peace happened, and what’s so mysterious about the King of Karrnath who has not come of age yet. Essentially, a historical campaign requires some explanation why it is historical, and thus, what will – in the absence of player interference – occur. Which again means rehashing the material. Naturally, the focus would lie elsewhere, and it would be great to know more about Cyre-as-was, something that’s sorely lacking at the moment. It would help hammer home the idea of total war, with all resources dedicated to the war effort and taken away from everday life. But this would need a lot of thought to avoid aforementioned confusion between new and old players.</p><p></p><p>There are plenty of opportunities, of course. The ability to meet Kaius I before he replaced his own great-grandson, maybe even help him stage his comeback (or prevent it), to be in Cyre on the Day of Mourning (and maybe prevent, or trigger it), and so forth are great ideas. Going back even further, the Lycanthropic Purge, the Xoriat Invasion, the Elf-Giant Wars, the Sundering of Sarlona, the Lhazaar Exodus, etc, are all great opportunities, but I do not think they work as an introduction for the setting. A <em>Historical Campaign</em> supplement would be great, however.</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>That’s something that would work for most of my characters. The ones I’m most attached to are:</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A half-nymph heir of Vadalis, chosen by the Silver Flame to prevent a sneak attack from the Demon Wastes; after moving to Thrane, she got into trouble with the puritans in Thaliost (she’s actually chaotic, rather naive, and, to the extremists of the Flame, if not to the mainstream, ‘tainted’. There’s plenty of pre-998 YK things to play out, but anything that advances the timeline will severely affect many points of her background, since she'd have to grow older and lose much of her naivete.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A Drow scorpion-wraith out to recover some ancient artifacts removed from a temple her tribe was guarding, and needed to keep a rakshasa bound. In her case, it doesn’t matter whether it’s 998, 908, or 1008 YK, as she does not know anything about the war, anyway.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A Karrn boneknight who generally approves of the peace, but lost a daughter in the Rekkenmark Raid; it might be interesting to play him during the raid or in the immediate aftermath. Move things to far ahead, and he’ll be too old, but anything between the Rekkenmark Raid and 998 YK is fine.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A Phiarlan who turned into a Shade by using her Mark of Shadow to escape into the Plane of Shadow at the exact moment the Mourning hit; she might be interesting to use immediately after the Mourning as she gets to know her powers, and works to prevent sabotage of the Thronehold Treaty.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A lycanthropic Vadalis who escaped to Thelanis during the Purge, and has now returned – thanks to the time being different on Thelanis, this should work out. During the Purge, she was under the influence of the Feral Hand, but eventually broke through the hold to escape. She could return at any time.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A Valenar elf who decided that, rather than provoking someone into attacking Valenar so the elves can play defenders of their race, his ancestor wants him to oppose slavery, and who is know waging a terror campaign in Darguun. Obviously, Darguun needs to exist for this, so anything post rebellion is possible; not sure how the death of Lhesh Haruuc and the events of <em>Heirs of Dhakaan </em>would influence him.</li> </ul><p>.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There are some other ways to create a different focus from what has gone before.</p><p></p><p>Using not Khorvaire, but Xen’drik as a base might draw in the DDO crowd. Unfortunately, it would eliminate a lot of the elements that make Eberron what it is: everyday/industrial technology is hardly prevalent in the Xen’drik jungle, and it is different to turn this into a colonial game. The Madness of Crowds will soon put an end to any concerted colonisation effort; and building a lightning rail through the jungle whilst fighting off local tribes (or fighting off Orien’s lumberjacks who destroy your forest) might be interesting, but where is the lightning rail running to? Stormreach to Middle of Nowhere? Besides, the Traveler’s Curse will play havoc with the timetables. Still, a Xen’drik Colonisation setting might work as a start into the setting, especially if we emphasise colonial rivalries between the nations who just got out of war and are racing towards the resources of the new continent (ignoring for the moment that there’s enough place on the old one, and that of the Five Nations only Breland has the proper seaports to get to Xen’drik). Also, with <em>Secrets of Xen’drik</em> and <em>City of Stormreach</em>, rehash is inevitable.</p><p></p><p>Equally, focusing on a completely different culture would be a different game. Say, ignoring Khorvaire and Xen’drik entirely to create a campaign setting which initially focuses on the Empires beneath the Waves. Sahuagin, Aventuus, aboleths, and so forth. Occasionally, some landborn creatures sail a ship through the territory, but that’s all there is to know about the continents. Interesting, but this might as well be a different campaign setting – a connected one, but different still, unless people are familiar with what happens on dry land. As to how many people you could interested in an underwater campaign, it would probably be rather a niche audience. Great for an expansion or supplement, but not for an introduction.</p><p></p><p>Overall, I think a focus on the pulp/noir <em>flavour</em> or on a central, well developed and specific region like <em>Breland</em> are most likely to work for everyone... short of getting WotC to change the publication method from their current model to subcontracting settings to smaller groups or individuals.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:</strong></p><p></p><p>First of all, I completely agree with Syltorian's idea about the core dndnext Eberron book providing rules <em>and </em>role playing suggestions concerning pulp <em>and </em>noir games. For instance, the book could indicate how criminal investigations by inquisitives can be played, or how diplomatic intrigue can be handled, similary to how 4e Eberron books offer advice on how to include Eberron elements in other settings. That being said, the fact that dndnext follows a modular approach is perfect for this, because Eberron can offer not only a whole setting but also elements of those two factors (noir and pulp), that can become modules on its own rights. For those who think that Forgotten Realms groups offer those elements, I disagree, because they are more adventuring group oriented rather than pure espionage, diplomacy, etc.</p><p>Regarding the different possible approaches Keith suggests, in my opinion they are compatible and not exclusive. In this sense, first of all I think that edition neutral books can be released <em>after</em> the publication of a (in my opinion necessary for WotC) dndnext specific campaign setting Eberron book, offering rules (e.g. action points, etc.), races, monsters and classes (artificers, etc.) in a modular approach. Furthermore, it can indicate how other dndnext modules work in Eberron, as for instance mass combat and kingdom management rules, which in my opinion perfectly fit Eberron, especially concerning diplomacy and a next war that will likely take place.</p><p>That being said, I for one would not like at all that the book is set before the current timeline. This is because the mourning, the Cannith schisms, and other elements are only present now. I would actually prefer a future timeline than a past one. For instance, a possibility would be to set the book in the present timeline and offer a "draconic prophecies" chapter, indicating possible future events: e.g. Lesh Haruuc will die if PCs don't do anything, magical technology will be much more evolved in the future and fighters will usually use magical wands (as Keith suggested in an interview), etc., in the understanding that the prophecies are alive and prone to misinterpretations, as the Eberron novels suggest.</p><p>Moreover, once a core setting book is published, it is more likely that new material will be published, to justify the work and because previously covered lands, etc. will likely be sold in pdf format in dndnclassics.com. Additionally, I would love dndnext support not only to see Eberron grow, but also because I dislike 3.5's rules complexity and 4e combat heavy and miniatures requirements features, and like rules light games that the core of dndnext will support. I would be able to at last play Eberron fully </p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Syltorian:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree. The question, though, was how to convince WotC to publish that campaign setting in the first place, without making a loss as only parts of the market can be targeted. The market is divided as follows in this case:</p><p></p><p>(a) People primarily interested in D&D Next, but not interested in Eberron. </p><p>(b) People primarily interested D&D Next, who want to have a look at Eberron. </p><p>(c) People primarily interested in Eberron, who want to move on to D&D Next.</p><p>(d) People primarily interested in Eberron, but willing to move to D&D Next. </p><p></p><p>Selling the book to Group A will be almost impossible. Anything labelled "Eberron" will push this part of the market away. Exclusive rules on how to run political, intrigue, noir and pulp campaigns might sway some of them, but they will still be unlikely to buy any subsequent support. In generally, I believe that they can be taken out of the equation for Keith's challenge. </p><p></p><p>Selling the book to Group B involves giving them at the very least the bare minimum of information necessary to run a campaign in Eberron. That is, they need setting information, along with the rules elements you suggest. They will not notice any changes to the setting, as they are new to it.</p><p></p><p>Selling the book to Group C involves what you are suggesting: a rules update to D&D Next of the important features of Eberron. They will notice changes, and might or might not accept them. </p><p></p><p>Selling the book to Group D involves giving them something new, setting-wise, which they do not already have, but which is not exclusively D&D Next. These are the problem-people for the Campaign Setting. New rules will be no incentive, and new elements have an risk of offending them. I'm afraid I am one of them - unsure about D&D Next as yet, but willing to support Eberron, and, as I made clear above, against certain changes, such as timeline advancement. Unfortunately, if including the <em>wrong</em> elements will lose this part of the market, not including anything new will provide equally low sales, except for those ready to buy the book merely to show support (I'd be willing to do so, but do not expect everyone else to follow suit).</p><p></p><p>This is why I am tending towards a campaign setting with an outlooked focused on a small area - Breland, most likely - as it allows to adapt the rules (pleasing Group C), gives a good sample presentation of the setting (for Group B), and enough new material (for Group D), all without requiring changes that might offend the grognards. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Kingdom management rules would be intriguing, but I wonder whether they work in Eberron. It's fairly unlikely that the PCs get to dethrone and usurp Boranel, and unlike the Forgotten Realms, there are not many unclaimed areas to forge out one's own Kingdom. I'd dearly like to see an adaptation of <em>Power of Faerun</em> to Eberron, but it's not that easy to translate to our setting. As any challenge, though, the results could be worth a lot. </p><p></p><p>That being said, I for one would not like at all that the book is set before the current timeline. This is because the mourning, the Cannith schisms, and other elements are only present now.</p><p></p><p>Agreed - except, of course, as options: I'd like to play in past epochs, but not as "Core Eberron", for reasons I outlined above and which you echo here. </p><p></p><p>I would actually prefer a future timeline than a past one. For instance, a possibility would be to set the book in the present timeline and offer a "draconic prophecies" chapter, indicating possible future events: e.g. Lesh Haruuc will die if PCs don't do anything, magical technology will be much more evolved in the future and fighters will usually use magical wands (as Keith suggested in an interview), etc., in the understanding that the prophecies are alive and prone to misinterpretations, as the Eberron novels suggest. </p><p></p><p>I like the idea to offer multiple possible timeline advancements and a Draconic Prophecies chapter. That way, people could chose them and ignore them at will. However, there still needs to be something everyone agrees on, a base line so future supplements and discussions on the boards do not become irrelevant. Lesh Haruuc's death <em>in potentia</em> is fine, but it changes the political landscape a lot. He's the hero who united the Darguuls; will they fall apart again if he disappears, as Alexander's empire did, or Attila's Huns? Also, following the events in the novels risks turning Eberron into the Forgotten Realms, if Gesh or Gaven suddenly become more important than the PCs. That too needs to be avoided: it works fine for the Forgotten Realms and is an acceptable way of playing D&D, but it's not the Eberron way.</p><p></p><p>Alternative timelines (optional, not imposed) will however draw that section of the market who want to see more radical changes, without offending those who love Eberron as it is (but who would like to see more support).</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>I agree completely. Indeed, my examples were just that. Offering alternative interesting non-inevitable future scenarios is definitely an interesting idea. It must be stressed that they are just possibilities, and that the PCs are the heroes, who will have to deal with the new scenarios and not "novels characters". In fact, it would be interesting to offer alternative future storylines not envisaged in the novels.</p><p>This may also encourage the publication of new Eberron novels, which I miss, which may address some of those potential scenarios. Being non-canon, they won't offend Eberron fans but at the same time explore interesting new intriguing plots.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Syltorian:</strong></p><p></p><p>True. </p><p></p><p>Actually, given the importance of the Prophecy to Eberron, a chapter on this might also work for a Pulp-Noir-Intrigue book. </p><p></p><p>It could go into more details on how to deal with destiny and prophecy both in general and as understood by Eberron, help DMs come up with mysterious phrases and fragments of the Prophecy (there was a section in the Favored Soul description in <em>Player's Handbook II </em>in 3.5, but that would need to be expanded). It might also give examples of previous prophecies which already came true (the start of the Lycanthropic Outbreak, the rebellion of Kaius, Wroann and Thalin against Mishann, etc). Since not every DM has the poetic gift of Nostradamus, that might be helpful too. </p><p></p><p>It could then explain how the DM could deal with everything from the casting of a simple <em>augury</em> (there is always the outside chance that the PCs do something so incredibly stupid or roll so badly that the DM, who, in spite of what Mr Chick may believe, has no occult power to predict the future, is proven wrong after he told the PCs they were in no danger) to dealing with the shifting complexity of the Draconic Prophecy, and how the PCs (or NPCs) can influence it, as well as more elaboration on how the Dragonmarked Houses fit in.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Plaguescarred1:</strong></p><p></p><p>Eberron was mention in this week's <a href="http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130701" target="_blank">Legends & Lore</a> in their approach to campaign setting for D&D Next. YAY!</p><p></p><p>Eberron, Forgotten Realms, the world of the Nentir Vale, Greyhawk, Mystara, and your own campaign setting to work with the basic assumptions we make about the planes.</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanks for the information Plaguescarred! I am glad that Eberron is being recognized for dndnext. The only thing about that phrase I am concerned about is that it hints to the idea that the planes of Eberron may follow the general design of planes in dnd and planescape. That is problematic because in its origins in 3.5 Eberron had a unique cosmology, which explained many things about the wold (manifest zones, etc.), and some Eberron fans disliked the fact that in 4e Baator from the general 4e cosmology was shoehorned In Eberron. What are your thoughts on the matter?</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Syltorian:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I share your concerns. </p><p></p><p>In some ways, Mike Mearls's suggestions work well with Eberron. The different rings of the elemental planes made me think of manifest zones: the "border plane" Mearls describes sounds like a manifest zone to Fernia, and it would be interesting to have places in Fernia which are not completely hostile - much like we know from Keith Baker's novels and other writings that Dal Quor is made up of rings, with mortal dreams at the fringes and the Dreaming Dark at the centre. </p><p></p><p>As regards virtually everything else, though, I don't think it would work for Eberron. Nor do I see why it should. </p><p></p><p>The Feywild as a border plane to the positive energy plane - that will destroy Thelanis, Lamannia and Irian, and with the latter, Aerenal and its religion. Likewise, how is the Blood of Vol going to draw on Mabar if they have to go put in a terminal change in Ravenloft first? </p><p></p><p>We already had to deal with Baator, and the destruction of the "Baker's Dozen" stystem, which is hidden but still important to Eberron, and a rather abritrary allocation if planes to Feywild, Elemental Chaos, and so forth. It will play havoc with the coterminous and remote phases of the planes, which made sure that even everyday people were influenced by the planes (rather than only high-level planewalkers) - a concept watered down into insipidity in 4E already. </p><p></p><p>A return to the Great Wheel well: great, as the <em>default</em> system. But for the Host's Sake, don't apply it to Eberron. Literally for the Host's Sake: what will happen to Eberron's take on religion if you cannot walk up to Aureon, but hey, you can visit Corellon Larethian and all the other gods on their planes! Sure, we could rewrite them all as actually top-ranking representatives of the Host, but why complicate things in the first place? Why does Eberron need Hades or Pandemonium? Use elements from these planes for Dollurh, for a canyon in the Demon Wastes, and so forth, sure. But the cosmology of Eberron is different for a reason. </p><p></p><p>Nothing against the Blood War, but why does every setting need it? It doesn't make sense for Eberron. Not even on Shavarath, which is all about war (and war does not necessarily mean one party has to be evil and one good). It doesn't add anything to Eberron, but takes a way a lot. The Lords of Dust would be diminished if focus turns on the Blood War. </p><p></p><p>What Mearls says about Spelljammer is quite right. I don't want Spelljammer spaceship equivalent in Eberron. But it's still a nice setting if that's your thing. I don't want the Great Wheel in Eberron, either. It's a nice setting, but it's not Eberron. It's one of the great things about Eberron that it turned away from that and made the planes unique. I believe that it should stay unique. The same goes for Planescape, incidentally: if the Great Wheel suddenly applies everywhere, that will also make that setting less unique. </p><p></p><p>Keep things unique. Let people chose. Offer options, not a one-size-fits-all concept that will mean that, eventually, it doesn't really matter which campaign setting you are playing, because they are all the same anyway.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Hellcow:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Personally, I'm not terribly concerned about it. What I read in this is that they are trying to be considerate to the fans of as many settings as possible - not a statement that they are going to release Eberron material that is specifically tied to this new cosmology. Consider that this statement mentions Eberron, Mystara, Nentir Vale, Greyhawk, Planescape, Spelljammer, and Ravenloft. I cannot imagine that WotC itself is going to produce significant material for ALL OF THE SETTINGS in a single year. So how I read this is them saying "We've tried to come up with something that we feel could be <em>relatively </em>easy to adapt to any of these settings - so if you are playing in (whichever setting), you can still make use of the setting-neutral material we create." </p><p></p><p>Faced with this, I would simply create a conversion chart for Eberron: material set in the "border plane of fire" is in Fernia; depending on its flavor, the Feywild can be adapted to Lamannia or Thelanis, while material set in the Border Plane of Earth might also be Lamannia. My point is that I won't be changing Eberron to conform to their cosmology; I will change their cosmology as necessary to conform to Eberron. </p><p></p><p>The only reason this would be an issue is if they actually published something like a Planes of Eberron book that incorporates this new cosmology, and I really don't get the sense that this is what's being discussed here. This shows an awareness of the fact that there are fans of many settings and a desire to have a core component that is easily accessible to as many of them as possible - but I wouldn't take it as a promise of a Mystara campaign guide next year. </p><p></p><p>With that said, the fact that they <em>are </em>seeking to appeal to fans of all of these settings leads me to hope that they might be open to licensing. Again, simply because there's a limit to what WotC can produce in a year I can't see them supporting all of these settings themselves; but given that they recognize that all of these settings have followers, they might take steps to make sure those followers can get new material. So I see this as a very positive message.</p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Syltorian:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well said. I hope that is the way this is going to work, and that an Eberron Campaign Setting for DDN is not going to try and force the Great Wheel on Eberron. Using the Great Weel as <em>default</em> is fine, but Eberron is anything but default. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>True, it's positive to see that Eberron got mentioned. And a conversion guide would be nice. Actually, many of the elements in the Planar Manuals and Fiendish Codexes of 3.5 are not too difficult to adopt to Eberron either - between the planes, Khyber, Xen'drik, Manifest Zones and the Demon Wastes, there's enough space to put in all those places.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That would be great!</p><p></p><p>Incidentally, before I read Hellcow's post, I posted the following comment on the article page. I'm not sure where they will be more likely to read reactions. It's a false alarm anyway, if Hellcow's interpretations are correct. </p><p></p><p>"I concur. Eberron has a unique way of treating the planes - had, in 3.5 at any rate. The very first part of the article might work - the outer layer of the planes sounds like a manifest zone. The rest of the article would be disastrous to a large part of the setting, though: </p><p></p><p>In Eberron, planes are tied in with the ever-recurring number 13, and thus also to the Dragonmarks; this was already destroyed with the inclusion of Baator in 4E. </p><p></p><p>The planes have coterminous and remote phases, which makes them important to normal people, not just high-level Planewalkers. That's another important part of Eberron: planes may be mysterious, but they still influence the world. A plane of Irian separated from the world by the Feywild will make its manifest zones and coterminous phases, and hence Aereni culture nearly impossible. </p><p></p><p>Likewise, it is one of the important aspect of Eberron that the gods are unknown and unknowable. It's an important aspect of the Great Wheel that the gods have domains on these planes. </p><p></p><p>Also, Eberron's unique planes do not readily fit into the Great Wheel. Okay, Fernia is the Plane of Fire. But where is Dal Quor on the Great Wheel... and yet, it's vital to Eberron's history. Where is Syrania - and if you eliminate it, Sharn will come crumbling down. Literally. Why would you need to go to so much trouble to seal of Xoriat, if it's the Far Realm, actually? </p><p></p><p>Now, this is not saying that the Great Wheel is bad. It isn't. It just doesn't work for Eberron. The article says, quite rightly, that not everyone wants Spelljammer "spaceships" in their campaign, but fails to take the next step, that not everyone wants the Great Wheel either. </p><p></p><p>Please don't try a "one size fits all" approach. Taking away from the uniqueness of settings will just mean that in the end, it doesn't matter which one you are playing anymore. Variety is the spice of life, as they say, so I hope we can get our D&D Next hot!"</p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Hellcow:</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Personally, I think that IS what they are doing here. As I see it, what they are saying is "We want the default, setting-neutral material we create to be easy to adapt to whatever setting you happen to use" - not "We are going to create new setting-specific material that is forced to conform to our new design."</p><p></p><p>Take the mention of the Blood War. I don't feel that this is saying I have to use the Blood War in Eberron; I see it as saying "We will be making the Blood War part of our default setting, which means that if you are using a setting that incorporates the Blood War you will have new material." </p><p></p><p>So clarifying what I was saying above, I feel no need to map Fernia to any of the Elemental planes they have described. If they create an adventure that I want to use and it's set in the Border Plane of Fire, it will be up to me to decide whether when I place that adventure in Eberron if I put it in Fernia, in a manifest zone to Fernia, or in a demiplane of Khyber. </p><p></p><p>In short: I don't personally see this as a threat that there will be a new Eberron Campaign Setting book that destroys the existing cosmology; I see it as an effort to create a general cosmology for the <em>default</em>, setting-neutral material that is relatively easy for people to use regardless of the setting they play in. Essentially, my guess is that this will be less intrusive than adding Baator to 4E Eberron because that actually altered Eberron's personal planar map. I don't see this as being a promise of providing a new planar map for each setting; it's trying to find a single default that they hope will be easy for YOU to adapt to whatever you are using - which means the final decision as to what you do with it should stay in your hands. </p><p></p><p>Again, my main takeaway is that they are at least thinking about Eberron players and acknowledging that there are people out there who plan to continue Eberron and who they'd like to be playing D&D Next - not a threat of destroying the setting to fit this new vision... at least, that's what I HOPE they are saying. </p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Originally posted by Syltorian:</strong></p><p></p><p>I hope you are correct, Hellcow! <img src="http://community.wizards.com/tools/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/img/smiley-smile.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RealAlHazred, post: 6750808, member: 25818"] [b]Originally posted by Ogiwan:[/b] Amen, brutha. [b]Originally posted by Elton74:[/b] Yes, I was trying to extrapolate what can be done with Backgrounds and Themes. [IMG]http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/smile.gif[/IMG] Thats what we have so far with the playtest. However, as my players have me running Shadowruns, I can rest my creative muscles in this area. [IMG]http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/smile.gif[/IMG] I can rest for a wait and see. I've been immersing myself into the Sixth World again. It was good to think along those lines, even though it didn't seem perfect as a theory, a failed hypothesis. Perhaps after resting and looking at future of the playtest packet, I can get some great ideas on how to recreate Eberron on 5e. [IMG]http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/smile.gif[/IMG] [b]Originally posted by Plaguescarred1:[/b] Background and Themes are areas where i think Eberron and other Setting could really shine, by having all sorts of elements defined therein. Also I hope Warforged, Artificers etc...return in a future Eberron Campaign Book.... [b]Originally posted by StormReaper:[/b] Apart from improved game mechanics in 5e which could describe Eberron more in line to the vision of it's creators, [b]I would like to see an advancement in the timeline of the setting.[/b] Really the 'fluff' and non-mechanical stuff is what draws you to a setting, and if nothing ('fluff') has changed, there would be little reason to buy any sourcebooks, when one can look up all the mechanical stuff in the online databases, and the setting has been descriped very well in 3.5. So my biggest item on the 'wishlist' is that Keith et al. update the 'story' of the setting for 5e. [b]Originally posted by AvonRekaes:[/b] This. This with the fury of a thousand exploding suns. [b]Originally posted by Hellcow:[/b] I'm curious to hear what people have to say about this. We originally planned a timeline advancement for 4E, but decided against it for a number of reasons. I know what *I* think on the matter, but I'd like to here what YOU think, since at the end of the day that's more important. [URL=http://bossythecow.com/hdwt/2012/06/eberron-discussion-do-you-want-the-timeline-advanced/]I've started a thread on HDWT[/URL], and if people want to comment there, I'd love to get your feedback. [b]Originally posted by DoctorBadWolf:[/b] I wouldn't mind a time advance, but only enough of one that it's still essentially europe in between the great wars. Maybe a handful of years, at most. No 50 year jump. [b]Originally posted by areleth:[/b] Since I still have all the old books, it wouldn't bother me to see it advanced a bit. What would any of you guys want to see changed if it did get advanced? Like that Droaam/Breland war or Haruuc being killed? I wouldn't mind Breland being at war with Droaam, since I'm always looking for an excuse to kill Sora Maenya in every game, but I like Haruuc and I'd prefer him alive. Maybe the Inspired could be building a monolith in Q'barra, or the Valenar have moved from raiding the Talenta Plains into an open invasion in hopes of forcing Karrnath to act, or something is rumbling deep in Xen'drik that has mages across Eberron concerned, or Aurala has water accidentally splashed on her at a party and melts, throwing Aundair into its own mini-succession-crisis. As long as the situation remains a boiling point that hasn't spilled over into a new war yet, then I think the themes of Eberron remain intact, but we'll have even more information to play around with. [b]Originally posted by AvonRekaes:[/b] I agree. I think not advancing the timeline in 4e may have been... well, I don't want to call it a mistake, but maybe just misguided? I do indeed have all the 3e material, and the 4e books. Perhaps 5e can advance the timeline some. I agree it shouldn't be much. Maybe just to the year 1000 YK and capture some of the "Millenium Fever" that we experienced during the early 2000s. Having no huge history of metaplot was one of the big draws of Eberron. I think we can continue this by advancing the story in discreet ways. We don't need any "Realms Shaking Events" for Eberron. We don't need a Spellplague. We certaintly don't need the Gods being banished to the material world and walking among mortals. But I have no issue with advancing the political and social intruige a few years and seeing where things are. [b]Originally posted by DoctorBadWolf:[/b] I think most of the existing power balance should remain intact. No new outbreaks of violence or anything like that. What I'd like to see is some new developments in Xendrik. The drow need a Carthage, IMO. They need a great center of civilization that the rest of the world is just finding out about, because of a sudden opening of trade with Stormreach. New power struggles in Xendrik, while leaving the bulk of the continent unexplored and wild, is what I'd like. Good aligned (or just normal shades of morality), surface dwelling, civilized drow [i]society? [/i]Yes please. [b]Originally posted by Elton74:[/b] Advancing the timeline? As long as there is an option to continue to play after the Last War, and other Eras of Eberron's History, I have no problem with this. Perhaps a ten to 20 year jump. Not too much that there is a build up of weapons for a new war on the horizon, but enough to bring new players up to date. [b]Originally posted by Hellcow:[/b] The Sulatar aren't GOOD, but I don't see them as culturally evil in the same way that the Lolth-worshipping drow are. If you adjust their current isolationist beliefs so they have reason to trade or interact with other cultures, you have a surface-dwelling, sophisticated drow culture waiting to be explored. And hey, I'm sure Cannith would love to learn more about their elemental binding techniques! [b]Originally posted by Madfox11:[/b] I am not a big fan of a timeline advance. A good campaign setting thrives on unresolved potential conflicts in which the PCs can have an impact. Eberron shines in this regards, especially since none of these potential conflicts are welll defined let alone guaranteed. A DM has the arguments to let one come to the fore, or die a silent death. If you advance the timeline that would mean resolving some of the current conflicts, and adding new ones. Considering the outcry of fans for FR where it happened two times, I doubt the majority of fans really want it. You could stick with little changes, but some of them can have a huge impact (e.g. replacement of the Lhesh as in the novels with a new human-friendly one means that the current potential of conflict with Darguun is lessened a lot) and if not why bother? You are just making it harder to use older material since now you have to keep a close eye on the details. [b]Originally posted by Ogiwan:[/b] [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthago_delenda_est]Carthage must be destroyed[/URL]! I would prefer to have the timeline stay as it is. Now, the last chapter of the DM book, though, could have a few scenarios depecting Eberron 2, 5, 10, and 20 years into the future. Preferably with drastically different events (+2 years may feature Haruuc assassinated, whereas in +5 years, he's still alive and kicking). That way, the core of the setting is unchanged, but people who want to experiment have some foundation to work on. [b]Originally posted by areleth:[/b] Alexandria then. I'm fine with the timeline advancing if it could mean better sales for Eberron. I buy everything that says Eberron on the cover on principle, and I'm happy with the timeline as it stands, but if it gets more exposure for Eberron then lets do it. [b]Originally posted by DoctorBadWolf:[/b] That's what I was thinking. [b]Originally posted by jim11735:[/b] Collected Eberron books in 3rd but never played (pretty much always hombrews), loved the setting. Got to play in 4e on a 10 level Paragon run, and whatever 4e changes didn't directly come out of the DMs mouth I disregarded. TTRPGs are great that way. Please, don't advance the timeline! Eberron, imo, is that world at that moment. DMs and adventure writers are free to move forward and back in time to tell their stories, but as a published campaign world I don't think the timing should change. But feel free to change lots of the little details or big chunks as necessary. I'd rather an overhaul of Xen'drik than an advancement of the timeline. I agree that Eberron was 3rd edition, so many of it's ideas were mechanics and mechanics were ideas. The translation to 4e was handled as best as it could. Mandates, sounds pretty much how it read. My hope would be 5th Eberron would again be written for that ruleset. I think changes in the campaign world that highlight the new edition mechanics would make it worth buying the campaign again. Dis/Advantage and the like. I still think Warforged should be presented solely in the Eberron campaign. But my guess is that 5th will be less campaign specific, compared to 4e, which will lend itself to a 5th edition of Eberron. I could see Eberron, purely on the Modular framework, have a distinct feel to D&D in general. Heavier emphasis on exploration and interaction, for example. Or subsystems that cover new ground. [b]Originally posted by Edymnion:[/b] It would be nice to use the modular system to revamp the Dragonmarks into their own fully developed little side system. [b]Originally posted by Edymnion:[/b] So far I'm liking what I'm seeing in the latest 5e playtest package. There is definitely a lot of potential for setting specific alterations and refinements. Eberron Next is looking a little brighter. [b]Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:[/b] The latest wandering monsters article discusses some Eberron creatures, as dinosaurs and rats. This may indicate that Eberron may get at least some support in dndnext. The link is: [URL=http://wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4wand/20130625]wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4wand...[/URL] [b]Originally posted by DoctorNecrotic:[/b] I know I'm not supplying much to the conversation, but... [IMG]http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/woot.gif[/IMG][IMG]http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/dancin.gif[/IMG][IMG]http://community.wizards.com/sites/all/modules/custom/forest_site/smileys/wizards/soexcited.gif[/IMG] HAPPY DAY! Back on track, so far the references to Eberron in the polls have been very popular, if that brings even more hope. [b]Originally posted by Syltorian:[/b] Thanks! Eberron is actually mentioned, and when I voted, given as a reason why dinosaurs need to be in the game. A good omen from the Sovereigns! Also, the article is written by James Wyatt, someone who has put a lot of work into Eberron, and who has been able to accomodate fans by not advancing the timeline (despite his and Bassingwaithe's books, which were laying the groundwork for just that; so being able to put the fans before their own ideas takes a lot of strength). That too is a good sign. [b]Originally posted by IAmSylar:[/b] I'm planning on switching to Pathfinder for all my Eberron needs. I don't think 5E will do a good job with Eberron, at least IMO. The system is just to flat and simplistic to support the setting. [b]Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:[/b] I am actually looking forward to Eberron support in dndnext. In fact, I prefer rules light systems, as the core of dndnext will likely be. Yet, the modularity approach will likely permit adding more complexity if that is what you like. Furthermore, support in dndnext implies new products covering additional places, groups, etc. [b]Originally posted by Syltorian:[/b] Still, no matter the edition, new [i]fluff[/i] written for Eberron would be welcome. I've had and I have no interest in 4E either, but most of what came out for Eberron was worth it. I do hope WotC can be encouraged to continue support for the setting; if that means doing some additional work of converting the rules to 3.5 or PF - should I dislike 5E - I'm still going to purchase Eberron material. That is provided said fluff does not involve a changing the setting (advancing the timeline, unleashing a spell-plague, or deciding to add five more dragonmarked houses for fun - I'll trust they learned from the Forgotten Realms, which I gather lost quite a few fans with the transition to 4E). [b]Originally posted by Hellcow:[/b] Actually, this isn't necessarily true. Consider Eberron support for 4E, which [i]primarily [/i]covers the existing places and groups, with a few new things and clarifications of old things. Unfortunately, there's a logical foundation for this, which raises the question of what you'd like to see for the future. An Eberron guide designed for DDN needs to, first and foremost, support DDN players. WotC presumably hopes that their market will continue to grow, which means that there will be people buying this book who have never encountered Eberron before; they can't rely on a new customer having read a 3.5 sourcebook. There's a few ways to handle this. [b]Retread old ground[/b]. This is what happened with 4E. The 4E ECG stands alone, bringing in a lot of little details from many different 3.5 sourcebooks. It sheds a little more light on some old subjects - more details on the Lords of Dust and House Tarkanan, more details about the impact of the Last War - and it adds a few new groups like the Mournland Magebred, the Feyspires, and the Fading Dream. But it is designed so that someone who has never heard of Eberron before can pick it up and run the setting with just this book. This is good for the new player, but means that it has relatively little to offer the player who knows the setting and owns all the previous books. A DDN ECG needs to accomplish the same purpose: to make the setting accessible to someone who knows nothing about this... which means relatively little space for new material or additional detail on old topics. A book like [i]Planes of Eberron [/i]is a great product for people familiar with the world who want to know about this obscure element of it; it's a terrible product for people who have never even heard of the setting before. [b]Timeline Adjustment. [/b]The point of doing a timeline adjustment is to make the world new for the old players. By doing this, you [i]theoretically [/i]get a product that's good for everyone. Entirely new players get a guide that provides them with everything they need to play in the setting. While old players get a lot of new material because [i]everything has changed[/i]. So even if the book goes over the Five Nations again, they aren't the Five Nations you remember, so see what they look like now! With that said, [i]theoretically [/i]it's a good book for everyone; in practice, there's the danger that people who liked the original setting don't want to have that original setting warped into something new. And yet, would they want to see the same old thing all over again? From a business perspective, it's not an easy question to answer. [b]System Neutral Support. [/b]While this doesn't seem like a route WotC would take, it's worth putting out there. In my opinion, the most likely way you'd see a book that explore things that have never been covered before while staying in 998 YK is if that book is actually setting neutral. Rather than being aimed directly at DDN players who may know nothing about Eberron, it's aimed at Eberron players regardless of what system they are playing in. In this sort of scenario, what you'd likely see is minimal system support for the setting in DDN - conversions for races, classes, dragonmarks, etc - but not a full ECG for DDN. Essentially, rather than bringing new people to the world, it would be an effort to make sure that the old players[i] [/i]have what they need to convert, and then create material than any existing Eberron player can use. Frankly, this seems like an unlikely scenario, but it seems like the most logical way that you would get deeper coverage of obscure elements of the existing setting. If these are the three options, what would you prefer to see? Can you think of a different option that hasn't occured to me? [b]Originally posted by Syltorian:[/b] I fall into the category of people who don’t want “the original setting warped into something new”. Strongly. Iunderstand the business reasons for doing it, but it will make the setting a lot less attractive to me. Even advancing it by only a few years will destroy the immediacy of the Peace Treaty and the Mourning. Nations will have recovered, and either a new war has broken out or the peace has been stabilised, and the fate of the world does not hang quite so much in the balance anymore. Unless the timeline advancement has brought with it a new war, an extended Mourning, or a spellplague, in which the world doesn't hang in the balane either, because the balance has crashed. There is no more suspense. Cannith will either have split completely or found a new baron everyone agrees on (since, if we go by J. Wyatt’s novels, at least one of them will be out of the count!). Time heals many wounds, and it is those wounds (hurt national pride or the Mourning) which make the setting interesting. From a far more personal point of view, it will dramatically alter a lot of the characters I have played, or wanted to play and did not get a chance yet, since many of their back-stories rely on the war just being over. I’d put in my veto on a timeline advancement if I somehow manage to get that right in the first place. Now, how to reconcile this with the need for something new, rather than ending up with Eberron products not selling because it’s more of the same? First, I found the new material in the 4E ECS quite useful - despite owning all the 3.5 Eberron books and never having been interested in 4E. Naturally, with each iteration, it will be more difficult to find new stuff, but with 4E ECS, they found the right combination - for me. It would be possible to produce a book offering multiple timelines – though this might confuse new players, as well as authors of future support books and novels. Pre-Mourning Cyre could be shown, however, as it will aid both character backgrounds for the current timeline, as well as flashback campaigns. Say, presenting Galifar at the height of its power, or the war just before the Mourning. But as said, this will be difficult, and end up requiring more material than an introductory book can handle. I was thinking whether we should not rethink where the focus of Eberron lies. The 4E ECS took a step in that direction by dedicating a large part of its pages to Sharn. So, perhaps, a DDN ECS could go another step further and focus exclusively on a small part of Khorvaire. You’d still get the main elements – immediate post-war uncertainty, cold war, intrigue, pulp action – and the chance to expand these so they become attractive to old players as well. In this scenario, everything outside the Five Nations would be stuff for further articles and books. Further information would then come in the form of supplements, Dragon articles, website posts, and so forth. The ECS would give the framework for a World of Intrigue and Adventure, with a few base cities (Sharn, Flamekeep, Fairhaven, New Cyre, and either Atur or Korth) and a few adventure sites (more akin to the Explorer’s Handbook), which will then be expanded upon elsewhere. Alternatively, the book could work from the perspective that what makes Eberron so great is not Aundair and Breland, but the pulp-noir mixture. So it could focus on that. It would rehash a necessary minimum some old materials needed to get the world going, but focus on how to run intrigue campaigns (which are difficult to pull off) and pulp elements. The first book would thus be more of an exploration of what the “spirit” of Eberron is, rather than trying to fit every thorp in. The DM could be given special methods to use gang-warfare (Dhaask vs. Boromars), covert ops (keeping covers, managing assets, industrial espionage as well as political one, etc), crime-solving adventures, a criminal underworld (reaching up into the top-levels of society), political manoeuvring (Parliamentarians against Royalists), as well as ideas as to how magic is integrated into everday life. That would be something that’s very much communicating the Eberron-feeling, sure to attract other players without offending old fans, and will actually be useful to old fans too. Further supplements would then flesh out the world, once that framework is set, and people can extend these principles to the druid factions of the Eldeen, to the warring tribes of Xen'drik Drow, and the underwater Empires of the Sahuagin. That’s be my favourite. I see a glimpse of a hope in WotC’s desire not to fragment the market further. They are already republishing 3.5 material, despite the fact that they are gearing up for DDN. Separating the Settings from the Systems might work in their favour, since they could draw on the people who prefer other systems, but are drawn to Eberron as a system. With some additional work, books could come with web-enhancements (free, payable, or through codes in the books) to get the crunch for your edition of choice. The [i]Multi-System Support. [/i]Some companies already manage to publish their material for a few systems, so why not WotC? It might mean going electronic copy rather than printed, to save on costs as each alternative version will reach too small a market, but the overall sum of copies sold might exceed what a book focused on a single edition might achieve. Plus, they get to sell more of their newly printed old stuff, too. A way to let this happen is to sell or lease a license. WotC would still get a piece of the income and keep the intellectual property rights; if they are afraid of companies “going rogue” and becoming a concurrence, as happened with the OGL, they probably have lawyers to figure out how to close those loopholes without eliminating the possibility that it could be subcontracted. Another way would be to put up new books on kickstarter. So, if enough people want a [i]Planes on Eberron[/i], they'll have at least part of their costs covered before they contract it. Anyway, I hope those thoughts, compiled at 2 a.m. with my body screeming to go to rest and my head yelling it still has matters to do, make sense despite the circumstances under which they were composed. [b]Originally posted by Hellcow:[/b] Same here. I'm just trying to help people see how these decisions get made. WotC is a big company that answers to an even bigger company, so they don't have the luxury of doing things just because they want to; they have to a limited number of slots and have to make a case for each product that fills one of them. A setting-neutral book has the potential to appeal to everyone who plays the game. A setting-specific book innately pushes away a segment of the audience who dislikes that setting. If it's furthermore either inaccessible to new players (because it requires advanced knowledge of the setting) or something that won't appeal to the existing fans (because it provides little that's new) that's a serious blow against it. If I had the license, I might make a [i]Planes of Eberron [/i]book knowing it's a smaller market because it's a big enough market for me and I want to do it; WotC can't do that. So essentially, my challenge here is [i]if you don't want to see a timeline advance and you don't want to see the same stuff all over again, come up with a product you think WotC could sell. [/i] Excellent idea. A sourcebook that focuses on the [i]flavor [/i]of Eberron and concrete systems for running those different styles of campaigns could provide mechanical systems that could appeal to people who don't plan on using the setting, provide some interesting depth on things like the gangs, the intelligence services, etc, and provide enough hooks for a new DM to run a small-scope campaign without reprinting all the existing information on the world. If that book was successful, it would then help justify further support for the setting. As opposed to a timeline [i]advance[/i], one thing I could see as a possibility would be to step BACK a few years, and focus on the Last War. As with what you describe, a focused book that doesn't encompass the entire world, but instead focuses specifically on the war and the role of adventurers in and around the war. You could bring in systems for intrigue and mass conflict, and take a deeper look at the role of magic in the war. Players could either take part in the conflict - be it in a [i]Three Musketeers [/i]style or something more akin to [i]300[/i] - or simply be going about their normal adventuring lives in the midst of it. Personally, I would be prepared to have events of the campaign contradict canon - so it remains a mystery to the players as [i]will the Mourning happen, or is it something we can avert?[/i] If your 998 YK characters were veterans, remake them and consider this a flashback of their previous career.[i] [/i]The main thing here is that additional information on, say, Zil elemental weapons, the military of Droaam, the Royal Eyes, or what have you could all be adapted to a 998 YK campaign... because it's in the near past as opposed to the future, it's a matter of telling you more about things that are already there as opposed to making up new things. What other ideas can people come up with? What's a product you'd like to have that could make sense for WotC to do? [b]Originally posted by Syltorian:[/b] It’s a pity this is the way things are, but regret won’t change them. Blaming WotC neither; their people have families to feed, after all, and the market is not forgiving. As said, I do believe that WotC is currently trying to re-united the market by appealing to as many parts of it as possible. Republishing older editions points into that direction. Publishing flavor-only material might push away those who do not like Eberron, but if it is edition-neutral or multi-edition, that could be, in part or entirely, balanced out by reaching people still playing 3.5, Pathfinder, and 4E, instead of creating yet another divide with DDN. The challenge could also be to [i]find a way to get Keith Baker the license/subcontract for Eberron[/i]. A subscription, kickstarter, or similar move might be a way to work this out. We just need to make sure WotC sees this as an opportunity, not a concurrence. As for the original challenge: Thanks! An Eberron Campaign Manual (rather than Setting) with a focus on intrigue, noir and pulp adventure would certainly appeal. Setting material would be introduced to support these rules and suggestions, so this would be a cross between [i]Heroes of Horror[/i] (or [i]Crime and Punishment[/i])[i] [/i]and the [i]Eberron[/i] [i]Campaign Setting[/i]. I believe this would be a great way to go ahead with this, appealing to both parts of the market. If, in addition, WotC reprints the original 3.5 books, updated with some errata and conversion notes, their production costs would also be fairly small (most of the writing and editing being done already), and continuity would be safeguarded. It would then be possible for new people to acquire the material already on the market without going through second-hand markets or illegal downloads, and writers could focus on new elements, such as [i]Planes of Eberron[/i], [i]Conspiracies of Eberron[/i], [i]Empires under the Waves[/i], etc. As said in my previous post, I could also see a very focused approach on only a few sites. An inside-out design, essentially: You get some highly developed locales – Sharn and New Cyre, for instance – to start with. Or Breland, since that’s where both of these locations are. There would be minimal details for the other nations at first. Old players would know about these, and be able to play their Aundairian or Adaran characters without changing anything, but they’d get many more developped ideas about Breland, enticing the to buy the product. The Swords of Liberty would be developed, rules for social interaction at the Tain gala would be introduced, House Tarkanan would be gotten into into more depth (based on the Thorn of Breland novels, without necessarily adopting all the changes that happen throughout the book), and so forth. New players would get an introduction to Eberron in an area which has regions as diverse as Sharn, Black Pit and New Cyre, with intrigue (Cannith South, Swords of Liberty, the Citadel), the lightning rail, everyday magic in the big cities of the industrial moloch that is Breland, and small tidbits about what lies beyond the frontiers. The disadvantage is that the travelling element, the famous red lines on the map of the Indiana Jones movies, would only be possible for veterans of the setting; but I believe that is an minor problem easily gotten around with new material and even errated/updated reprints. I do like the idea of a timeline [i]retreat[/i]. It risks confusing new players, though; the ones that don’t know about the Mourning because it hasn’t happened yet. Or those who wonder how peace happened, and what’s so mysterious about the King of Karrnath who has not come of age yet. Essentially, a historical campaign requires some explanation why it is historical, and thus, what will – in the absence of player interference – occur. Which again means rehashing the material. Naturally, the focus would lie elsewhere, and it would be great to know more about Cyre-as-was, something that’s sorely lacking at the moment. It would help hammer home the idea of total war, with all resources dedicated to the war effort and taken away from everday life. But this would need a lot of thought to avoid aforementioned confusion between new and old players. There are plenty of opportunities, of course. The ability to meet Kaius I before he replaced his own great-grandson, maybe even help him stage his comeback (or prevent it), to be in Cyre on the Day of Mourning (and maybe prevent, or trigger it), and so forth are great ideas. Going back even further, the Lycanthropic Purge, the Xoriat Invasion, the Elf-Giant Wars, the Sundering of Sarlona, the Lhazaar Exodus, etc, are all great opportunities, but I do not think they work as an introduction for the setting. A [i]Historical Campaign[/i] supplement would be great, however. That’s something that would work for most of my characters. The ones I’m most attached to are: [LIST][*]A half-nymph heir of Vadalis, chosen by the Silver Flame to prevent a sneak attack from the Demon Wastes; after moving to Thrane, she got into trouble with the puritans in Thaliost (she’s actually chaotic, rather naive, and, to the extremists of the Flame, if not to the mainstream, ‘tainted’. There’s plenty of pre-998 YK things to play out, but anything that advances the timeline will severely affect many points of her background, since she'd have to grow older and lose much of her naivete. [*]A Drow scorpion-wraith out to recover some ancient artifacts removed from a temple her tribe was guarding, and needed to keep a rakshasa bound. In her case, it doesn’t matter whether it’s 998, 908, or 1008 YK, as she does not know anything about the war, anyway. [*]A Karrn boneknight who generally approves of the peace, but lost a daughter in the Rekkenmark Raid; it might be interesting to play him during the raid or in the immediate aftermath. Move things to far ahead, and he’ll be too old, but anything between the Rekkenmark Raid and 998 YK is fine. [*]A Phiarlan who turned into a Shade by using her Mark of Shadow to escape into the Plane of Shadow at the exact moment the Mourning hit; she might be interesting to use immediately after the Mourning as she gets to know her powers, and works to prevent sabotage of the Thronehold Treaty. [*]A lycanthropic Vadalis who escaped to Thelanis during the Purge, and has now returned – thanks to the time being different on Thelanis, this should work out. During the Purge, she was under the influence of the Feral Hand, but eventually broke through the hold to escape. She could return at any time. [*]A Valenar elf who decided that, rather than provoking someone into attacking Valenar so the elves can play defenders of their race, his ancestor wants him to oppose slavery, and who is know waging a terror campaign in Darguun. Obviously, Darguun needs to exist for this, so anything post rebellion is possible; not sure how the death of Lhesh Haruuc and the events of [i]Heirs of Dhakaan [/i]would influence him. [/LIST] . There are some other ways to create a different focus from what has gone before. Using not Khorvaire, but Xen’drik as a base might draw in the DDO crowd. Unfortunately, it would eliminate a lot of the elements that make Eberron what it is: everyday/industrial technology is hardly prevalent in the Xen’drik jungle, and it is different to turn this into a colonial game. The Madness of Crowds will soon put an end to any concerted colonisation effort; and building a lightning rail through the jungle whilst fighting off local tribes (or fighting off Orien’s lumberjacks who destroy your forest) might be interesting, but where is the lightning rail running to? Stormreach to Middle of Nowhere? Besides, the Traveler’s Curse will play havoc with the timetables. Still, a Xen’drik Colonisation setting might work as a start into the setting, especially if we emphasise colonial rivalries between the nations who just got out of war and are racing towards the resources of the new continent (ignoring for the moment that there’s enough place on the old one, and that of the Five Nations only Breland has the proper seaports to get to Xen’drik). Also, with [i]Secrets of Xen’drik[/i] and [i]City of Stormreach[/i], rehash is inevitable. Equally, focusing on a completely different culture would be a different game. Say, ignoring Khorvaire and Xen’drik entirely to create a campaign setting which initially focuses on the Empires beneath the Waves. Sahuagin, Aventuus, aboleths, and so forth. Occasionally, some landborn creatures sail a ship through the territory, but that’s all there is to know about the continents. Interesting, but this might as well be a different campaign setting – a connected one, but different still, unless people are familiar with what happens on dry land. As to how many people you could interested in an underwater campaign, it would probably be rather a niche audience. Great for an expansion or supplement, but not for an introduction. Overall, I think a focus on the pulp/noir [i]flavour[/i] or on a central, well developed and specific region like [i]Breland[/i] are most likely to work for everyone... short of getting WotC to change the publication method from their current model to subcontracting settings to smaller groups or individuals. [b]Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:[/b] First of all, I completely agree with Syltorian's idea about the core dndnext Eberron book providing rules [i]and [/i]role playing suggestions concerning pulp [i]and [/i]noir games. For instance, the book could indicate how criminal investigations by inquisitives can be played, or how diplomatic intrigue can be handled, similary to how 4e Eberron books offer advice on how to include Eberron elements in other settings. That being said, the fact that dndnext follows a modular approach is perfect for this, because Eberron can offer not only a whole setting but also elements of those two factors (noir and pulp), that can become modules on its own rights. For those who think that Forgotten Realms groups offer those elements, I disagree, because they are more adventuring group oriented rather than pure espionage, diplomacy, etc. Regarding the different possible approaches Keith suggests, in my opinion they are compatible and not exclusive. In this sense, first of all I think that edition neutral books can be released [i]after[/i] the publication of a (in my opinion necessary for WotC) dndnext specific campaign setting Eberron book, offering rules (e.g. action points, etc.), races, monsters and classes (artificers, etc.) in a modular approach. Furthermore, it can indicate how other dndnext modules work in Eberron, as for instance mass combat and kingdom management rules, which in my opinion perfectly fit Eberron, especially concerning diplomacy and a next war that will likely take place. That being said, I for one would not like at all that the book is set before the current timeline. This is because the mourning, the Cannith schisms, and other elements are only present now. I would actually prefer a future timeline than a past one. For instance, a possibility would be to set the book in the present timeline and offer a "draconic prophecies" chapter, indicating possible future events: e.g. Lesh Haruuc will die if PCs don't do anything, magical technology will be much more evolved in the future and fighters will usually use magical wands (as Keith suggested in an interview), etc., in the understanding that the prophecies are alive and prone to misinterpretations, as the Eberron novels suggest. Moreover, once a core setting book is published, it is more likely that new material will be published, to justify the work and because previously covered lands, etc. will likely be sold in pdf format in dndnclassics.com. Additionally, I would love dndnext support not only to see Eberron grow, but also because I dislike 3.5's rules complexity and 4e combat heavy and miniatures requirements features, and like rules light games that the core of dndnext will support. I would be able to at last play Eberron fully [b]Originally posted by Syltorian:[/b] I agree. The question, though, was how to convince WotC to publish that campaign setting in the first place, without making a loss as only parts of the market can be targeted. The market is divided as follows in this case: (a) People primarily interested in D&D Next, but not interested in Eberron. (b) People primarily interested D&D Next, who want to have a look at Eberron. (c) People primarily interested in Eberron, who want to move on to D&D Next. (d) People primarily interested in Eberron, but willing to move to D&D Next. Selling the book to Group A will be almost impossible. Anything labelled "Eberron" will push this part of the market away. Exclusive rules on how to run political, intrigue, noir and pulp campaigns might sway some of them, but they will still be unlikely to buy any subsequent support. In generally, I believe that they can be taken out of the equation for Keith's challenge. Selling the book to Group B involves giving them at the very least the bare minimum of information necessary to run a campaign in Eberron. That is, they need setting information, along with the rules elements you suggest. They will not notice any changes to the setting, as they are new to it. Selling the book to Group C involves what you are suggesting: a rules update to D&D Next of the important features of Eberron. They will notice changes, and might or might not accept them. Selling the book to Group D involves giving them something new, setting-wise, which they do not already have, but which is not exclusively D&D Next. These are the problem-people for the Campaign Setting. New rules will be no incentive, and new elements have an risk of offending them. I'm afraid I am one of them - unsure about D&D Next as yet, but willing to support Eberron, and, as I made clear above, against certain changes, such as timeline advancement. Unfortunately, if including the [i]wrong[/i] elements will lose this part of the market, not including anything new will provide equally low sales, except for those ready to buy the book merely to show support (I'd be willing to do so, but do not expect everyone else to follow suit). This is why I am tending towards a campaign setting with an outlooked focused on a small area - Breland, most likely - as it allows to adapt the rules (pleasing Group C), gives a good sample presentation of the setting (for Group B), and enough new material (for Group D), all without requiring changes that might offend the grognards. Kingdom management rules would be intriguing, but I wonder whether they work in Eberron. It's fairly unlikely that the PCs get to dethrone and usurp Boranel, and unlike the Forgotten Realms, there are not many unclaimed areas to forge out one's own Kingdom. I'd dearly like to see an adaptation of [i]Power of Faerun[/i] to Eberron, but it's not that easy to translate to our setting. As any challenge, though, the results could be worth a lot. That being said, I for one would not like at all that the book is set before the current timeline. This is because the mourning, the Cannith schisms, and other elements are only present now. Agreed - except, of course, as options: I'd like to play in past epochs, but not as "Core Eberron", for reasons I outlined above and which you echo here. I would actually prefer a future timeline than a past one. For instance, a possibility would be to set the book in the present timeline and offer a "draconic prophecies" chapter, indicating possible future events: e.g. Lesh Haruuc will die if PCs don't do anything, magical technology will be much more evolved in the future and fighters will usually use magical wands (as Keith suggested in an interview), etc., in the understanding that the prophecies are alive and prone to misinterpretations, as the Eberron novels suggest. I like the idea to offer multiple possible timeline advancements and a Draconic Prophecies chapter. That way, people could chose them and ignore them at will. However, there still needs to be something everyone agrees on, a base line so future supplements and discussions on the boards do not become irrelevant. Lesh Haruuc's death [i]in potentia[/i] is fine, but it changes the political landscape a lot. He's the hero who united the Darguuls; will they fall apart again if he disappears, as Alexander's empire did, or Attila's Huns? Also, following the events in the novels risks turning Eberron into the Forgotten Realms, if Gesh or Gaven suddenly become more important than the PCs. That too needs to be avoided: it works fine for the Forgotten Realms and is an acceptable way of playing D&D, but it's not the Eberron way. Alternative timelines (optional, not imposed) will however draw that section of the market who want to see more radical changes, without offending those who love Eberron as it is (but who would like to see more support). [b]Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:[/b] I agree completely. Indeed, my examples were just that. Offering alternative interesting non-inevitable future scenarios is definitely an interesting idea. It must be stressed that they are just possibilities, and that the PCs are the heroes, who will have to deal with the new scenarios and not "novels characters". In fact, it would be interesting to offer alternative future storylines not envisaged in the novels. This may also encourage the publication of new Eberron novels, which I miss, which may address some of those potential scenarios. Being non-canon, they won't offend Eberron fans but at the same time explore interesting new intriguing plots. [b]Originally posted by Syltorian:[/b] True. Actually, given the importance of the Prophecy to Eberron, a chapter on this might also work for a Pulp-Noir-Intrigue book. It could go into more details on how to deal with destiny and prophecy both in general and as understood by Eberron, help DMs come up with mysterious phrases and fragments of the Prophecy (there was a section in the Favored Soul description in [i]Player's Handbook II [/i]in 3.5, but that would need to be expanded). It might also give examples of previous prophecies which already came true (the start of the Lycanthropic Outbreak, the rebellion of Kaius, Wroann and Thalin against Mishann, etc). Since not every DM has the poetic gift of Nostradamus, that might be helpful too. It could then explain how the DM could deal with everything from the casting of a simple [i]augury[/i] (there is always the outside chance that the PCs do something so incredibly stupid or roll so badly that the DM, who, in spite of what Mr Chick may believe, has no occult power to predict the future, is proven wrong after he told the PCs they were in no danger) to dealing with the shifting complexity of the Draconic Prophecy, and how the PCs (or NPCs) can influence it, as well as more elaboration on how the Dragonmarked Houses fit in. [b]Originally posted by Plaguescarred1:[/b] Eberron was mention in this week's [URL=http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20130701]Legends & Lore[/URL] in their approach to campaign setting for D&D Next. YAY! Eberron, Forgotten Realms, the world of the Nentir Vale, Greyhawk, Mystara, and your own campaign setting to work with the basic assumptions we make about the planes. [b]Originally posted by PaladinNicolas:[/b] Thanks for the information Plaguescarred! I am glad that Eberron is being recognized for dndnext. The only thing about that phrase I am concerned about is that it hints to the idea that the planes of Eberron may follow the general design of planes in dnd and planescape. That is problematic because in its origins in 3.5 Eberron had a unique cosmology, which explained many things about the wold (manifest zones, etc.), and some Eberron fans disliked the fact that in 4e Baator from the general 4e cosmology was shoehorned In Eberron. What are your thoughts on the matter? [b]Originally posted by Syltorian:[/b] I share your concerns. In some ways, Mike Mearls's suggestions work well with Eberron. The different rings of the elemental planes made me think of manifest zones: the "border plane" Mearls describes sounds like a manifest zone to Fernia, and it would be interesting to have places in Fernia which are not completely hostile - much like we know from Keith Baker's novels and other writings that Dal Quor is made up of rings, with mortal dreams at the fringes and the Dreaming Dark at the centre. As regards virtually everything else, though, I don't think it would work for Eberron. Nor do I see why it should. The Feywild as a border plane to the positive energy plane - that will destroy Thelanis, Lamannia and Irian, and with the latter, Aerenal and its religion. Likewise, how is the Blood of Vol going to draw on Mabar if they have to go put in a terminal change in Ravenloft first? We already had to deal with Baator, and the destruction of the "Baker's Dozen" stystem, which is hidden but still important to Eberron, and a rather abritrary allocation if planes to Feywild, Elemental Chaos, and so forth. It will play havoc with the coterminous and remote phases of the planes, which made sure that even everyday people were influenced by the planes (rather than only high-level planewalkers) - a concept watered down into insipidity in 4E already. A return to the Great Wheel well: great, as the [i]default[/i] system. But for the Host's Sake, don't apply it to Eberron. Literally for the Host's Sake: what will happen to Eberron's take on religion if you cannot walk up to Aureon, but hey, you can visit Corellon Larethian and all the other gods on their planes! Sure, we could rewrite them all as actually top-ranking representatives of the Host, but why complicate things in the first place? Why does Eberron need Hades or Pandemonium? Use elements from these planes for Dollurh, for a canyon in the Demon Wastes, and so forth, sure. But the cosmology of Eberron is different for a reason. Nothing against the Blood War, but why does [i][/i]every setting need it? It doesn't make sense for Eberron. Not even on Shavarath, which is all about war (and war does not necessarily mean one party has to be evil and one good). It doesn't add anything to Eberron, but takes a way a lot. The Lords of Dust would be diminished if focus turns on the Blood War. What Mearls says about Spelljammer is quite right. I don't want Spelljammer spaceship equivalent in Eberron. But it's still a nice setting if that's your thing. I don't want the Great Wheel in Eberron, either. It's a nice setting, but it's not Eberron. It's one of the great things about Eberron that it turned away from that and made the planes unique. I believe that it should stay unique. The same goes for Planescape, incidentally: if the Great Wheel suddenly applies everywhere, that will also make that setting less unique. Keep things unique. Let people chose. Offer options, not a one-size-fits-all concept that will mean that, eventually, it doesn't really matter which campaign setting you are playing, because they are all the same anyway. [b]Originally posted by Hellcow:[/b] Personally, I'm not terribly concerned about it. What I read in this is that they are trying to be considerate to the fans of as many settings as possible - not a statement that they are going to release Eberron material that is specifically tied to this new cosmology. Consider that this statement mentions Eberron, Mystara, Nentir Vale, Greyhawk, Planescape, Spelljammer, and Ravenloft. I cannot imagine that WotC itself is going to produce significant material for ALL OF THE SETTINGS in a single year. So how I read this is them saying "We've tried to come up with something that we feel could be [i]relatively [/i]easy to adapt to any of these settings - so if you are playing in (whichever setting), you can still make use of the setting-neutral material we create." Faced with this, I would simply create a conversion chart for Eberron: material set in the "border plane of fire" is in Fernia; depending on its flavor, the Feywild can be adapted to Lamannia or Thelanis, while material set in the Border Plane of Earth might also be Lamannia. My point is that I won't be changing Eberron to conform to their cosmology; I will change their cosmology as necessary to conform to Eberron. The only reason this would be an issue is if they actually published something like a Planes of Eberron book that incorporates this new cosmology, and I really don't get the sense that this is what's being discussed here. This shows an awareness of the fact that there are fans of many settings and a desire to have a core component that is easily accessible to as many of them as possible - but I wouldn't take it as a promise of a Mystara campaign guide next year. With that said, the fact that they [i]are [/i]seeking to appeal to fans of all of these settings leads me to hope that they might be open to licensing. Again, simply because there's a limit to what WotC can produce in a year I can't see them supporting all of these settings themselves; but given that they recognize that all of these settings have followers, they might take steps to make sure those followers can get new material. So I see this as a very positive message. [b]Originally posted by Syltorian:[/b] Well said. I hope that is the way this is going to work, and that an Eberron Campaign Setting for DDN is not going to try and force the Great Wheel on Eberron. Using the Great Weel as [i]default[/i] is fine, but Eberron is anything but default. True, it's positive to see that Eberron got mentioned. And a conversion guide would be nice. Actually, many of the elements in the Planar Manuals and Fiendish Codexes of 3.5 are not too difficult to adopt to Eberron either - between the planes, Khyber, Xen'drik, Manifest Zones and the Demon Wastes, there's enough space to put in all those places. That would be great! Incidentally, before I read Hellcow's post, I posted the following comment on the article page. I'm not sure where they will be more likely to read reactions. It's a false alarm anyway, if Hellcow's interpretations are correct. "I concur. Eberron has a unique way of treating the planes - had, in 3.5 at any rate. The very first part of the article might work - the outer layer of the planes sounds like a manifest zone. The rest of the article would be disastrous to a large part of the setting, though: In Eberron, planes are tied in with the ever-recurring number 13, and thus also to the Dragonmarks; this was already destroyed with the inclusion of Baator in 4E. The planes have coterminous and remote phases, which makes them important to normal people, not just high-level Planewalkers. That's another important part of Eberron: planes may be mysterious, but they still influence the world. A plane of Irian separated from the world by the Feywild will make its manifest zones and coterminous phases, and hence Aereni culture nearly impossible. Likewise, it is one of the important aspect of Eberron that the gods are unknown and unknowable. It's an important aspect of the Great Wheel that the gods have domains on these planes. Also, Eberron's unique planes do not readily fit into the Great Wheel. Okay, Fernia is the Plane of Fire. But where is Dal Quor on the Great Wheel... and yet, it's vital to Eberron's history. Where is Syrania - and if you eliminate it, Sharn will come crumbling down. Literally. Why would you need to go to so much trouble to seal of Xoriat, if it's the Far Realm, actually? Now, this is not saying that the Great Wheel is bad. It isn't. It just doesn't work for Eberron. The article says, quite rightly, that not everyone wants Spelljammer "spaceships" in their campaign, but fails to take the next step, that not everyone wants the Great Wheel either. Please don't try a "one size fits all" approach. Taking away from the uniqueness of settings will just mean that in the end, it doesn't matter which one you are playing anymore. Variety is the spice of life, as they say, so I hope we can get our D&D Next hot!" [b]Originally posted by Hellcow:[/b] Personally, I think that IS what they are doing here. As I see it, what they are saying is "We want the default, setting-neutral material we create to be easy to adapt to whatever setting you happen to use" - not "We are going to create new setting-specific material that is forced to conform to our new design." Take the mention of the Blood War. I don't feel that this is saying I have to use the Blood War in Eberron; I see it as saying "We will be making the Blood War part of our default setting, which means that if you are using a setting that incorporates the Blood War you will have new material." So clarifying what I was saying above, I feel no need to map Fernia to any of the Elemental planes they have described. If they create an adventure that I want to use and it's set in the Border Plane of Fire, it will be up to me to decide whether when I place that adventure in Eberron if I put it in Fernia, in a manifest zone to Fernia, or in a demiplane of Khyber. In short: I don't personally see this as a threat that there will be a new Eberron Campaign Setting book that destroys the existing cosmology; I see it as an effort to create a general cosmology for the [i]default[/i], setting-neutral material that is relatively easy for people to use regardless of the setting they play in. Essentially, my guess is that this will be less intrusive than adding Baator to 4E Eberron because that actually altered Eberron's personal planar map. I don't see this as being a promise of providing a new planar map for each setting; it's trying to find a single default that they hope will be easy for YOU to adapt to whatever you are using - which means the final decision as to what you do with it should stay in your hands. Again, my main takeaway is that they are at least thinking about Eberron players and acknowledging that there are people out there who plan to continue Eberron and who they'd like to be playing D&D Next - not a threat of destroying the setting to fit this new vision... at least, that's what I HOPE they are saying. [i][u][/u][/i] [b]Originally posted by Syltorian:[/b] I hope you are correct, Hellcow! [IMG]http://community.wizards.com/tools/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/img/smiley-smile.gif[/IMG] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Eberron 5e
Top