Eberron Is Here Today!

Eberron: Rising from the Last War hits local gamestores today. Eberron creator Keith Baker talks on his blog about what's changed!

Eberron-title.png


So, what's changed? The Mror Dwarves, races, Dragonmarks, the Mournland, Lady Illmarrow, monsters... but not guns!

And what's new? The artificer class, group patrons, warforged colossus, and scary monsters!



Explore the lands of Eberron in this campaign sourcebook for the world’s greatest roleplaying game.


This book provides everything players and Dungeon Masters need to play Dungeons & Dragons in Eberron—a war-torn world filled with magic-fueled technology, airships and lightning trains, where noir-inspired mystery meets swashbuckling adventure. Will Eberron enter a prosperous new age, or will the shadow of war descend once again?

  • Meld magic and invention to craft objects of wonder as an artificer—the first official class to be released for fifth edition D&D since the Player’s Handbook.
  • Enter the world of Eberron in a 1st-level adventure set in Sharn, the City of Towers
  • Dive straight into your pulp adventures with easy-to-use locations, complete with maps of train cars, battle-scarred fortresses, and fallen warforged colossi.
  • Explore Sharn, a city of skyscrapers, airships, and intrigue and a crossroads for the world’s war-ravaged peoples.
  • Flesh out your characters with a new D&D game element called a group patron—a background for your whole party.
  • Explore 16 new race/subrace options including dragonmarks, which magically transform certain members of the races in the Player’s Handbook.
  • Confront horrific monsters born from the world’s devastating wars.
  • Prepare to venture into the Mournland, a mist-cloaked, corpse-littered land twisted by magic.
 
Russ Morrissey

Comments

Parmandur

Legend
the Adventure Generators in this book are absolute golden. The best ever produced for 5E so far; maybe D&D as a whole? Other books have done adventure seeds and stuff, but these roletables and guidelines cover so many genres and factions and ideas that it is absolutely breathtaking. Makes reading the setting information almost unneeded
These are amazing: very similar to the same chapter in Ravnica, but I think they improved on the model this go around.

While I disagree about the art, and quite like it, it does strike me how different the various products this year ended up being. Certainly Descent into Avernus made a much bolded splash in the art department, being probably the most gorgeous book in 5E yet.
 

ChaosOS

Explorer
My biggest issue art-wise is the disjunction - I feel there was a real opportunity to set a bold direction to match the 1920's vibe of the book if more art pieces were the style of the dwarf.

Also, Point, while it's nice to get more spells on the list, at most levels the classes you've named don't have enough spells known to pull it off. Did a bit of looking earlier, big winners for spell lists out of the prepared casters.
  • Cleric
    • Non-nature Handling
    • Non-Forge Making
    • Non-Trickery Passage
    • Non-Trickery/Twilight Shadow
    • Non-Tempest Storm
  • Druid
    • Detection
    • Hospitality
    • Making
    • Scribing
    • Sentinel
    • Shadow
    • Warding
  • Wizard
    • Handling (Perfect +9!)
    • Healing (Perfect +9!)
 

gyor

Hero
Which is a good way to handle it.

The way I see it, if I'm running an Eberron campaign, I'd want to keep non-Orrery planar stuff out. The Eberron cosmology is great for that setting. But if I'm running a Planescape campaign, I don't really see any reason not to have an occasional clueless changeling or warforged around.
I think the way they handled cosmology in Eberron could tie into broader plans they have for D&D.
 
My biggest issue art-wise is the disjunction - I feel there was a real opportunity to set a bold direction to match the 1920's vibe of the book if more art pieces were the style of the dwarf.

Also, Point, while it's nice to get more spells on the list, at most levels the classes you've named don't have enough spells known to pull it off. Did a bit of looking earlier, big winners for spell lists out of the prepared casters.
  • Cleric
    • Non-nature Handling
    • Non-Forge Making
    • Non-Trickery Passage
    • Non-Trickery/Twilight Shadow
    • Non-Tempest Storm
  • Druid
    • Detection
    • Hospitality
    • Making
    • Scribing
    • Sentinel
    • Shadow
    • Warding
  • Wizard
    • Handling (Perfect +9!)
    • Healing (Perfect +9!)
Paladin's & artificer's being prepared casters helps quite a bit. I do agree that Rangers, Warlocks, and Sorcs do have to struggle a bit more though.
 

Xenonnonex

Adventurer
"It's ok to be rude if the other person doesn't do what I say!"

Or maybe...

"If I can prove my right, I can treat the other person as horribly as I want!"
Your definition of rude and horrible is completely out of whack with normal definitions. And reading into whatever you want to read into it so you can act all defensive is also out of whack. I would say shutting down all conversations over it in an abrupt manner is "rude and "horrible". But whatever. This sidenote is completely irrelevant.
 

Space Jockey

Villager
I was surprised at the depictions of guns (yeah I know, they’re really gun shaped wands) in some of the art, as well as the eldritch cannons and lighting rail. They seem a little more “mechanical” in aesthetic than’s the norm for the artwork.

Not that this is a complaint, mind you! In my Eberron, quite a few magitek can and do look more “mechanical”, and many (but not all) implements such as staffs, wands, etc. look very much like guns, rocket launchers, etc. but they’re just not called such in-game. In the same way that raptors aren’t called raptors...but they basically are.
 

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
The same thing jumped out at me. On the one hand it seems to make sense. Guns developed the way they did to be comfortable and effective for five-fingered, bipedal humanoid. It would make some sense that devices with similar uses would develop some of the same forms even if they rely on magic more than physics.

On the other hand, if you could develop magic items that shoot magic missiles, throw fire, etc. you wouldn't need room for ammunition and you wouldn't need a trigger and hammer/pin mechanism.

For example, the magic pistol in shown in chapter one (character creation), I'm not sure why there is a trigger and hammer. You may not need a trigger at all if you can use command words, but I presume you would want a way to fire the device without saying anything. But there are so many other options for trigger design if you don't need to strike primer on a cartridge. Perhaps a real-world style trigger still makes sense because it is comfortable for firing with a finger, gives good tactile response so you can feel when it fires, and a trigger guard makes sense to avoid misfires, but there is no reason for developing a hammer. That is, unless, perhaps gunpowder weapons have been developed, so the magic versions keep the same form. Perhaps the hammer strikes some kind of reusable magical ward the makes the spell go off.

And this seems to be the case. If you look at the picture in the section on Goblinoids, you'll see a goblin holding a blunderbuss. It appears to be the mundane weapon, not magical.

But why a gun over a wand? Wands are smaller and lighter. They are far more concealable. Perhaps they are not as easy to aim. But with spells like magic missile, you don't have to aim.

Perhaps using gunpowder along with magic is more easily attainable and less expensive. The guns operate like pistols in the the real world with with some magic added to enhance the effects and protect against some of the malfunctions of purely mechanical devices. More powerful mechanical weapons like rifles, automatic weapons, and rocket launches might not be developed because at that level of expense, perhaps it is more cost effective to use higher-level magic.

I was surprised at the depictions of guns (yeah I know, they’re really gun shaped wands) in some of the art, as well as the eldritch cannons and lighting rail. They seem a little more “mechanical” in aesthetic than’s the norm for the artwork.

Not that this is a complaint, mind you! In my Eberron, quite a few magitek can and do look more “mechanical”, and many (but not all) implements such as staffs, wands, etc. look very much like guns, rocket launchers, etc. but they’re just not called such in-game. In the same way that raptors aren’t called raptors...but they basically are.
 

Mercule

Adventurer
Eberron is 100% part of The Great Wheel in 5E.
The gods are real. Make of that what you will.
Yeah... I've heard they added that. Also disappointing, IMO. D&D is a toolbox with a variety of settings, not a unified setting, in itself. Trying to say "everything connects" is a stupid mistake, IMO. It's not hard to house rule a crossover, but forcing "Star Trek and Star Wars are in the same universe" (essentially) into canon is silly.

But... I've had that conversation before. I know some folks strongly prefer D&D-as-a-setting. We're going to have to accept that we're different audiences because that's probably the top thing on my list of "it's not D&D if this happens", at least as a variant on any other "one setting becomes synonymous with D&D" scenario (whether that setting is FR, Greyhawk, Eberron, or Planescape).
 

Coroc

Adventurer
The same thing jumped out at me. On the one hand it seems to make sense. Guns developed the way they did to be comfortable and effective for five-fingered, bipedal humanoid. It would make some sense that devices with similar uses would develop some of the same forms even if they rely on magic more than physics.

On the other hand, if you could develop magic items that shoot magic missiles, throw fire, etc. you wouldn't need room for ammunition and you wouldn't need a trigger and hammer/pin mechanism.

For example, the magic pistol in shown in chapter one (character creation), I'm not sure why there is a trigger and hammer. You may not need a trigger at all if you can use command words, but I presume you would want a way to fire the device without saying anything. But there are so many other options for trigger design if you don't need to strike primer on a cartridge. Perhaps a real-world style trigger still makes sense because it is comfortable for firing with a finger, gives good tactile response so you can feel when it fires, and a trigger guard makes sense to avoid misfires, but there is no reason for developing a hammer. That is, unless, perhaps gunpowder weapons have been developed, so the magic versions keep the same form. Perhaps the hammer strikes some kind of reusable magical ward the makes the spell go off.

And this seems to be the case. If you look at the picture in the section on Goblinoids, you'll see a goblin holding a blunderbuss. It appears to be the mundane weapon, not magical.

But why a gun over a wand? Wands are smaller and lighter. They are far more concealable. Perhaps they are not as easy to aim. But with spells like magic missile, you don't have to aim.

Perhaps using gunpowder along with magic is more easily attainable and less expensive. The guns operate like pistols in the the real world with with some magic added to enhance the effects and protect against some of the malfunctions of purely mechanical devices. More powerful mechanical weapons like rifles, automatic weapons, and rocket launches might not be developed because at that level of expense, perhaps it is more cost effective to use higher-level magic.
Maybe it is a tinkergnome (Krynn) device :p
 

hbarsquared

Quantum Chronomancer
I'm a huge fan of Eberron, and very happy this book was published. With that said, I'm disappointed.

Of course, it's great having the mechanics for races and dragonmarks, for example, though uninspired. It would have been nice if they had pushed the envelope creatively a little bit further, but oh well.

Sad that over half the art is recycled, the best pieces in the book are usually the recycled ones, and they didn't even use the best Eberron pieces!

And the typos! And I'm not just talking about a stray misplaced "c." There's the glaring "your" instead of you're," as well as striaght up incorrect statements like, "Goodberry wine takes the place of House Vadalis healing.". There are many errors in the lore itself throughout the book that would be extremely confusing for first-timers.

Plus the formatting and editing. Each area of the gazetteer has a section titled "Interesting Things About X" that takes up two lines. Couldn't they have come up with a more succinct headline, and gaining another two lines of text? Just a waste.

And so much text is needlessly repeated. I pove the patrons, but you see the same text in the introduction, the patron description, "build your group," examples, and other patrons, sometimes word for word. Very frustrating.

I feel sad that the book could have been so much more.
 

Hellcow

Adventurer
I posted this on a different thread, but seeing the "Eberron is 100% part of the Great Wheel. The Gods are real" comment, I figure I'll share it here too. (For anyone who doesn't know, I'm Keith Baker, one of the designers on Rising From The Last War. Howdy!)

Eberron has always been tied to the multiverse. Page 92 of the original Eberron Campaign Setting says "Eberron spins within its own Material Plane, enfolded by three coexistent transitive planes: the Astral Plane, the Ethereal Plane, and the Plane of Shadow, just as in the core D&D cosmology (see Chapter 5 of the Dungeon Master’s Guide)." WotC stated long ago that it was officially possible for people to travel to Eberron from other settings by using those transitive planes. You may not have noticed, because it's the default assumption of the setting that no one ever does... just as page 232 of Rising From The Last War establishes that the default assumption of the book is that "contact between the worlds and planes beyond its cosmology is impossible."

The idea is there that it COULD be possible, but it has absolutely ALWAYS been there: from the very beginning, Eberron had its own unique cosmology, but that entire cosmology was still part of the broader system of astral/ethereal/shadow. This simply calls that out more clearly, in part because it allows us to clearly say "This book is based on the assumption that contact with other settings is impossible." Again, the NEW aspect of this is to clarify that if you want it to be an aspect of your campaign, you're changing the default assumptions.

Likewise, the fact that this means that Cyric and Bane exist somewhere in the universe is utterly meaningless in Eberron. This doesn't mean that "Gods definitively exist," because as others have pointed out, the people of Eberron wouldn't identify the "gods" of FR as gods. The Vassals of the Sovereign Host believe that their deities are omniscient and omnipresent. The idea of one of them taking a physical form is pointlessly limiting; that's not a GOD, it's a powerful angel or an overlord. They would view the worship of such beings as a Cult of the Dragon Below; note that the Cults do worship coherent entities such as the overlords and daelkyr. And that's the point: the overlords have always been presented as beings that have the POWER of gods in other settings (literally using the rules for Divine Rank) but the answer of the masses wasn't to worship them, it was to bind them in spiritual chains. So yes, Rising acknowledges that the multiverse exists (as Eberron always has) and that therefore the gods of other settings exists; this doesn't change the critical facts:
  • Those beings have no ability to influence Eberron unless you, the DM, choose to change that.
  • As the default assumption is that they cannot and have never influenced the setting, they are absolutely and entirely unknown to the people of the setting.
  • Those beings don't qualify as "gods" by the definitions used in Eberron, and the gods worshipped on Eberron do not follow their model. Eberron has always had beings that use the same rules as gods of other settings: those beings are the overlords, and rather than being worshipped, they were imprisoned.
Rising presents a clearer explanation of the principle presented on page 92 of the first Eberron book: Eberron COULD be connected to other settings if you want it to be, but the default assumption is that it's not. Beyond this, one of the core principles of Eberron is that canon is merely a starting point and that YOU decide what's true in your campaign. Ultimately, each DM decides if the Sovereigns are real, and each DM decides if Eberron is connected to the multiverse.

The only thing that I feel IS overstated is the statement that the Progenitors DID create the creatures of Eberron being presented as absolute fact. The rest of the book presents the idea that the Progenitors may have been metaphorical, and that is still the default assumption. The primary point of the section was to concretely say that despite default 5E stating "All orcs are tied to Gruumsh" and "All Elves are children of Corellon" that this does NOT apply to Eberron—that the elves and orcs of Eberron are part of EBERRON and have no ties to the multiverse beyond it. As others have called out, Rising does point out that the drow of Eberron were created by the GIANTS, not by Lolth OR the Progenitors. As with the Sovereigns, it's up to the DM to decide if the Progenitors truly existed, and if so, what they actually were. What's important is—just as has always been the case—Eberron is a part of the multiverse, but it is an isolated part that has its own cosmology and that has no contact with the rest of the Multiverse unless you, the DM, choose to change that.
 

pukunui

Adventurer
And the typos! And I'm not just talking about a stray misplaced "c." There's the glaring "your" instead of you're," as well as striaght up incorrect statements like, "Goodberry wine takes the place of House Vadalis healing.".
Agreed. As much as I am enjoying reading this book, it has got to be the worst edited/proofread book in the whole 5e line so far. Barely a page goes by without some glaring error.

One example that comes to mind is how often the Mark of Storm is referred to as the Mark of Storms throughout the book. A simple find and replace search would’ve fixed things like that quickly.

Also, I’ve never been a WAR fan, but his art looks especially bad mixed in with all the fantastic new pieces. I know WAR was a big part of the original Eberron look but I think it would’ve been better not to recycle his stuff.
 

Zardnaar

Hero
WAR art doesn't age well. Outside Eberron I didn't even like it that much back in the day.

For cover art alt cover, 3.5 for the best, 4E campaign guide the worst and a tossup between 4E players guide and 5E normal version for the next ones.

3.5 cover has aged ok, 4E and 5E covers weren't very good to begin with.
 
Last edited:

In Our Store!

Advertisement

Advertisement

Top