Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hellcow" data-source="post: 1324347" data-attributes="member: 15800">I'd like to say "both." Yes, one of the goals was to use the creatures provided in the MM, because it *is* a core book. But there are a few factors in this:* Just because "Everything has a logical place in the world" does not mean "everything is automatically present in the world." Taking yuan-ti as an example: they are not even mentioned in the Campaign Setting Book, but I could tell you immediately where I could logically add a yuan-ti civilization if I wanted one, without creating questions of the impact it had on the rest of the setting -- and I'd expect anyone else familiar with the setting to be able to do the same.* We have tried to provide unique twists for the iconic creatures that are mentioned. They aren't just present because they are in the MM -- they have interesting roles to play. * We've tried to develop a few creatures that are in the MM but don't usually receive much attention or explanation -- dinosaurs, sure, but also things like rakshasa (as hinted at in the current WotC web article) -- creatures that have interesting potential but aren't used as often. If The Complete Guide to Beholders PDF is still on sale for $1, check that out, and you can see the sort of thing I like to do with traditional creatures (even if there obviously isn't enough room for that level of detail on each creature in the campaign setting). * There are also new creatures unique to the campaign setting. Some of these are tied to existing creatures -- creature A fills this place in Eberron, and as a result, creature B has evolved from it. The same does go for magic. The magic used by society is the magic in the PHB, with a few new spells -- not blanket magitech counterparts for every modern convenience. Thus, it's not the case that advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology -- it's still definitely magic. Yes, it is defined by the D&D tropes; the goal was to extrapolate from D&D in an interesting manner, making use of the material in the corebooks, not to reinvent the wheel.  I honestly couldn't tell you. My work on the core book was done quite some time ago -- I've worked on two more Eberron projects since then -- but I don't know the final status of the core book. I know playtesting and balancing is still going on, so certainly nothing seen in the previews is set in stone. I am curious what people think about the artificer. My favorite things are the weapon and armor augmentations -- personal weapon augmentation makes an artificer with a crossbow a very versatile ranged combatant at low levels. Obviously the full text of the augmentations hasn't been released, but you can still get the basic idea from the briefs listed in the article. So far, I've found it to be a fun character to have in a game, but as always, your mileage may vary.</blockquote>

Verification