Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 7869383" data-attributes="member: 93670">Easy solution, don't make hamfisted lazy fanfic level setting mashups* in setting specific books &amp; find a way to respect the lore plus baseline assumptions of both.&nbsp; The dragons presented as &quot;mere monsters&quot; in the MM represent the dragons of FR's baselines not the Dragons of Eberron.[USER=57112]@Gradine[/USER] sometimes that &quot;lore&quot; is part of what makes up the setting's baselines &amp; defines the settings.&nbsp; FR is not FR if you throw in eberron style shades grey of morality, dump the drgonmarked houses complete with their eberron role in the world into faerun, bind all the gods &amp; make it clear that they are an unprovable thing, and treat magic as a science rather than a mysterious poorly understood gift from the gods.&nbsp;&nbsp; Similar problems exist when you start shipping in lore from a setting like FR over top of eberron or dark sun's lore &amp; don't put any care into not breaking things. Even when ToA inserted the merchant princes , WotC didn't say abny rediculous nonsense like &quot;Bob is the house cannith of Faerun&quot; because there are massive differences between the merchant princes &amp; dragonmarked houses despite some vague similaritiesroughly on par with khyber &amp; the underdark... Meanwhile phrases like &quot;Khyber is the Underdark&quot; keeps getting printed in eberron sourcebooks again and again edition after edition* Baator/asmodious &amp; the like from 4e is unquestionably the high apex of these... but X exists in $settingA and Y in $settingB has some vague similarities if you ignore the huge differences so Y is $settingB's X&nbsp; is a close second.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tetrasodium, post: 7869383, member: 93670"] Easy solution, don't make hamfisted lazy fanfic level setting mashups* in setting specific books & find a way to respect the lore plus baseline assumptions of both. The dragons presented as "mere monsters" in the MM represent the dragons of FR's baselines not the Dragons of Eberron. [USER=57112]@Gradine[/USER] sometimes that "lore" is part of what makes up the setting's baselines & defines the settings. FR is not FR if you throw in eberron style shades grey of morality, dump the drgonmarked houses complete with their eberron role in the world into faerun, bind all the gods & make it clear that they are an unprovable thing, and treat magic as a science rather than a mysterious poorly understood gift from the gods. Similar problems exist when you start shipping in lore from a setting like FR over top of eberron or dark sun's lore & don't put any care into not breaking things. Even when ToA inserted the merchant princes , WotC didn't say abny rediculous nonsense like "Bob is the house cannith of Faerun" because there are massive differences between the merchant princes & dragonmarked houses despite some vague similaritiesroughly on par with khyber & the underdark... Meanwhile phrases like [I]"Khyber is the Underdark"[/I] keeps getting printed in eberron sourcebooks again and again edition after edition * Baator/asmodious & the like from 4e is unquestionably the high apex of these... but X exists in $settingA and Y in $settingB has some vague similarities if you ignore the huge differences so Y is $settingB's X is a close second. [/QUOTE]

Verification