This is what I get for staying off the boards for too long. I know the conversation is old, but to address a few points...
And why the heck are the Dragonmark houses the only ones with the monopolies? I mean, in theory anyone could be making money off magic item creation, or messages, or trains.
This relies on a few basic assumptions.
1. The granted ability of the dragonmarks - the Cannith power to perform repair light damage once per day - is a trivial part of the mark's true economic power. The more important piece is the ability to use dragonmark focus items, such as speaking stones, wheels of wind and water, creation forges, and the like. The fact that the gnome can cast Whispering Wind once per day is not important, but it lets him use a speaking stone.
2. Eberron is based on the idea that magic functions like science. By the RULES, a caster can create any spell or item (with DM approval). By the flavor of the world, creating a magic item that's never been created before is an act of innovation that requires genius. Why hasn't someone created a speaking stone that DOESN'T require the Mark of Scribing? Because no one's figured out how to do it. Amplifying the power of a dragonmark is simpler than creating a power from scratch.
3. Regarding the "They obviously have a 15th level caster, why not a 17th" - others have hit the mark on this. Eldritch machines break the rules. Cannith forgeholds have systems allowing multiple low-level marked individuals to combine power over time to accomplish things that would normally require a higher level caster.
4. In 4E, I change the way rituals and marks interact. I should post this properly on my website, but the short form is that I say that there are a number of critical rituals that can only be performed by people with the appropriate mark. Other rituals have been created in emulation of the marks; but some things simply don't exist in ritual book form.
5. ... Yet. As others have said, the point of Eberron is that Player Characters are exceptional. YOUR artificer can be Tesla or Edison. YOU may be the one who comes up with a Sending Stone anyone can use, an Airship anyone can fly, or a teleport ritual anyone can use. But that's because YOU ARE AWESOME. It's then up to the DM to decide what the houses will do, and up to you to figure out how to overcome those challenges. The houses are powerful and have stayed in power by crushing opposition. But YOU might be able to change that.
Why are gnomes in charge of messages, while elves are in charge of illusions/shadow?
Because gnomes have the Mark of Scribing and elves have the Mark of Shadow. If the question is "Why didn't gnomes get the Mark of Shadow?", it's because the dragonmarks aren't about reinforcing stereotypes from other settings; rather, the dragonmarks are their own separate thing that shape the cultures of this world.
With that said, the gnomish talent for illusion and prestidigitation plays a significant role in their culture, from the Zil Waterhouses to the subtle machinations of the Trust. It's just not their dragonmark, because the races didn't pick the marks.
Why are there evil clerics in good religions when there's a plethora of low-level detect alignment spells? (ooh, that's a good one) Especially since the Silver Flame is all about rooting out evil? What, they're unaware of the idea of alignment when they have spells for this stuff?
First, check out the
Silver Flame dragonshards (the link goes to part one, but both are very relevant to this topic).
Others have hit the major points. A quick quote from the article itself:
The Church does not define evil as "that which can be detected with detect evil"; as noted earlier, someone with an evil alignment may serve the greater good. Furthermore, a cleric of a good deity always possesses a good aura, regardless of her personal alignment. Rank within the church hierarchy is another complication: a pilgrim can't kill a cardinal and expect to get away with it because "he was evil." She will need proof of actions that went against church doctrine and harmed the innocent. Thus, a paladin's ability to detect evil allows her to judge the character of those around her -- but it's in no way a license to kill.
I've highlighted a key phrase. In Eberron, alignment is less black and white. First you've got the fact that "evil" covers the beer-watering innkeeper and the murderer. Both are putting their own selfish desires ahead of the needs of others. Observation will tell you the difference; magic won't. Second you have the common example of evil peacemonger King Kaius and good warmonger Queen Aurala. How can Aurala be good and want war? In this case, alignment speaks to what they are willing to do to acheive their goals. Kaius' end goal is arguably a nobler goal - but he will do whatever it takes to acheive it. Murder, torture, massacres: he will do all of them, secure in the conviction that his actions serve the greater good. Aurala, on the other hand, believes that the land will prosper united under her rule - that people NEED her to take the throne. Obviously there will be death in war. But she would NEVER personally order torture, massacres, or similar evil acts.
Essentially, both Kaius and Aurala believe their goals are good. For Kaius, the ends justify the means, and his evil alignment tells you he will take evil acts to acheive his noble ends. For Aurala, the ends DON'T justify the means. She believes war is necessary, but she believes war CAN be just if fought with honor. Is this naive? Sure. But she's not on the battlefield - and she won't personally order or condone things she sees as evil.
Beyond this, paladins and spellcasting clerics are rare. Detect alignment is thus rare. The most common source of paladins is the church of the Silver Flame. And as noted in the Dragonshard, when it comes to human evil, the goal of the church is not to punish the evildoer but to redeem him. If the paladin recognizes someone as evil, the first question is what that means; the second is if he can be drawn back from this path. A paladin who recognizes an evil priest will undoubtedly be concerned; but again, what does it MEAN?
The example I always think of for the paladin is Yoda in
The Empire Strikes Back, looking at Luke and saying "There is much anger in him." He sees the POTENTIAL to do terrible things. But is he doing them? Will he? Can he be turned back?
Beyond this, people brought up the example of good priests of "evil" religions. The power source of the Blood of Vol is evil, thus its clerics detect as evil regardless of alignment. However, the Blood of Vol places an emphasis on community and preserving life (death is the enemy of us all). The inner circle of the faith is evil, and THEY are the corrupt ones; most people who follow the tenets of the faith are unaligned/neutral or good. Again, when people speak of corrupt priests, Erandis Vol is in my mind the most dramatic example of this, because she has no devotion to the faith of her family. She is using the faith of others as a tool to achieve her purposes. By contrast, many evil priests of the Silver Flame firmly believe in the principles of the Flame, but have let zealotry blind them to the fact that the faith is built on charity and compassion - the zealous crusader who hunts down shifters in the name of the Silver Flame would be corrupt and evil, because that's not actually following the principles behind the faith.
So yes, I think the average village priest of Vol is neutral or good; and I've had an unaligned Paladin of Vol PC in one of my 4E campaigns.
