Eberron's Worth...

[RedFox]

I think Eberron is okay, but I'm going to play Devil's advocate and ask: arent these just tropes for the setting?

Couldn't the first be done on a runaway merchant caravan, transporting a noble that is attacked by necromancers who haave hired a band of mercenaries, some of which are barbarians who "channel the spirit of their ancestors" through their ability to rage, galloping their horses alongside the wagons or carriages. While a band of halfling brigands who have trained griffons attack from the air with boomerangs?

The second is dropping into a jungle area, enslaved by a barbaric, exiled drow house to look for a "laser weapon(not sure if this is actually an Eberron-esque trope)" that was lost being transported from Blackmoor and can level cities. Only to have it stolen from them by agents of the Scarlet Brotherhood who might be willing to use it to start a war.

Aren't these essentially the same adventures? I will admit that Eberron has it's own flavors but I'm not sure I agree if Eberron promotes "adventure" more than any other campaign setting.

You want adventure with a capital A and no boundaries, I say Planescape was actually the setting that facilitated this best. Just my oppinion

Well, Eberron has a very pulp aesthetic, which encourages a fast-paced, action-driven experience that isn't a default assumption in most fantasy settings (and certainly not stock D&D).

People may be overstating their case in Eberron's favor with regard to it being "all about adventure," in comparison to other settings. Just because a setting isn't pulp or action-oriented doesn't mean it's not as good for adventuring as Eberron.

It is true that Eberron's pulp vibe is certainly rife with action-packed adventure and exotic locales. One of its other main strengths is playing to familiar set-dressing but "modernizing" it, or simply twisting it so that's a little newer; a little fresher. That's why we've got elves and dwarves and whatnot, but they're all just a little bit different, and generally in ways that play with our expectations in a deliberate attempt to surprise us and grab our interest.

However it's plain that Eberron was designed with a canny and trained eye looking to create a setting where plot hooks and adventure dangle everywhere. I think the pulp and noir and "same but different" twists would have fallen flat if not for that core attribute. Eberron is, above all else, a gameable setting.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think Eberron is okay, but I'm going to play Devil's advocate and ask: arent these just tropes for the setting?

Couldn't the first be done on a runaway merchant caravan, transporting a noble that is attacked by necromancers who haave hired a band of mercenaries, some of which are barbarians who "channel the spirit of their ancestors" through their ability to rage, galloping their horses alongside the wagons or carriages. While a band of halfling brigands who have trained griffons attack from the air with boomerangs?

The second is dropping into a jungle area, enslaved by a barbaric, exiled drow house to look for a "laser weapon(not sure if this is actually an Eberron-esque trope)" that was lost being transported from Blackmoor and can level cities. Only to have it stolen from them by agents of the Scarlet Brotherhood who might be willing to use it to start a war.

Yeah, but the trope is part of what defines the environment and the nature of the adventure. You can't drop from the sky into the middle of a jungle much in Greyhawk, and neither can you battle atop a speeding coach, or fight halflings riding dinosaurs. The existence of a past Great War adds a level to finding a superweapon that Greyhawk doesn't give.

The tropes, in effect, make these superficially similar adventures very different in tone, timbre, and character action. In Eberron, they imply dangerous speed, sudden immersion, one miss-step away from catastrophe, with rivals who may or may not be good people. In Greyhawk, they seem to imply a hefty nobility/barbarism divide, and more about political dangers of exiled houses and sinister secret organizations.

It's a different tone, one which is more "ACTION!" and one which is more "INTRIGUE!" Both cool, but not really the same style at all.

 

[freebfrost]

... found a powerful ancient laser weapon...

...but Greyhawk simply doesn't *have* some of the things

coughExpeditiontotheBarrierPeakscough

 

[thedungeondelver]

Yeah, but the trope is part of what defines the environment and the nature of the adventure. You can't drop from the sky into the middle of a jungle much in Greyhawk, and neither can you battle atop a speeding coach, or fight halflings riding dinosaurs. The existence of a past Great War adds a level to finding a superweapon that Greyhawk doesn't give.

Yeah, because laser weapons, flying machines and the existence of a past Great War?! In GREYHAWK?! Yeah, what's that all about?

 

[JeffB]

Yeah, because laser weapons, flying machines and the existence of a past Great War?! In GREYHAWK?! Yeah, what's that all about?

Exactly what I was thinking. GH may not hit you over the head with "action" (i.e. pulp-ish) type adventures as Eberron does, but it certainly is no less workable than any other campaign setting in that regard. GH in general has never spelled out everything for the DM...whether it's Gary's original work, or the works of Sargent/Moore/Mona.

lets see here....

Lost Cities? check.

Ancient Evils? check.

Sinister Cults? check.

Vast areas of unexplored wilderness/desert/mountains/jungles? check.

Political intrigue? check.

Magically devastated areas of mystery? check.

Whodunnits? check.

Lasers, robots, aliens? check.

Nations/People bent on world domination? check.

GH (regardless of CY).....or even the Known World and The Realms are no worse (nor better) than Eberron when it comes to running such "pulp-ish action". The base is there and has been since their inceptions.... If one cannot find it in those settings, you really haven't looked.

 

[Imaro]

Well, Eberron has a very pulp aesthetic, which encourages a fast-paced, action-driven experience that isn't a default assumption in most fantasy settings (and certainly not stock D&D).

People may be overstating their case in Eberron's favor with regard to it being "all about adventure," in comparison to other settings. Just because a setting isn't pulp or action-oriented doesn't mean it's not as good for adventuring as Eberron.

It is true that Eberron's pulp vibe is certainly rife with action-packed adventure and exotic locales. One of its other main strengths is playing to familiar set-dressing but "modernizing" it, or simply twisting it so that's a little newer; a little fresher. That's why we've got elves and dwarves and whatnot, but they're all just a little bit different, and generally in ways that play with our expectations in a deliberate attempt to surprise us and grab our interest.

However it's plain that Eberron was designed with a canny and trained eye looking to create a setting where plot hooks and adventure dangle everywhere. I think the pulp and noir and "same but different" twists would have fallen flat if not for that core attribute. Eberron is, above all else, a gameable setting.

Yeah, but the trope is part of what defines the environment and the nature of the adventure. You can't drop from the sky into the middle of a jungle much in Greyhawk, and neither can you battle atop a speeding coach, or fight halflings riding dinosaurs. The existence of a past Great War adds a level to finding a superweapon that Greyhawk doesn't give.

The tropes, in effect, make these superficially similar adventures very different in tone, timbre, and character action. In Eberron, they imply dangerous speed, sudden immersion, one miss-step away from catastrophe, with rivals who may or may not be good people. In Greyhawk, they seem to imply a hefty nobility/barbarism divide, and more about political dangers of exiled houses and sinister secret organizations.

It's a different tone, one which is more "ACTION!" and one which is more "INTRIGUE!" Both cool, but not really the same style at all.

I totally agree with your above statements. Once again in no way do I think it's a bad setting, just not my cup o' tea. It's funny you all think like this because in another thread me and some others debated setting design vs. adventure prep where some argued whether preping a setting was a waste of time or not. I don't believe it's so, and really believe the way a setting is designed facilitates and enhances adventure design.

I think saying Eberron promotes "adventure" over other settings is a fallacy, but I won't argue that it doesn't promote certain kinds of adventure better than other settings. I believe that's the whole purpose of a setting. I honestly don't see much noir in Eberron(in the classic...Heroes as morally questionable as villians, tragic ending, etc. type) more the hard-boiled detective(which really isn't classic noir). I also don't find it to really be dark fantasy, I think this and Pulp kind of clash. I believe you can alter or play up certain aspects to reinforce the dark fantasy, but I think Eberron is at it's heart pulp.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I think Eberron is at it's heart pulp.

I agree. It's supposed to be equal parts noir and pulp but ended up skewed much more heavily toward the latter. No bad thing, IMO. Pulp is a lot closer to traditional D&D adventuring and I'd guess most gamers would much rather fight on an airship than perpetrate an insurance scam.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yeah, because laser weapons, flying machines and the existence of a past Great War?! In GREYHAWK?! Yeah, what's that all about?

Way to kind of miss the point, man.

Or have the odds and ends at the Barrier Peaks suddenly become commonplace throughout the Free City without me knowing?

 

[JeffB]

It's not really medieval, either. In fact, medieval doesn't really work with the system assumptions.

The modernistic feel is purely a player perspective. Most D&D players aren't intimately familiar with a medieval campaign feel. They tend to look at life from a modern perspective and that perspective colors every game.

Well I was just going by other posters terminology used in the thread. pseudo-medieval...or what have you.

Regardless, I just don't see a "modernistic" bent in earlier editions of the rules for the most part. Again, a few artifacts perhaps. It's certainly closer to medieval than "modernistic".

3.x and certain campaign settings/supplements of 2E certainly added more of these modernistic ideas and I can see where that perspective may come from.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Regardless, I just don't see a "modernistic" bent in earlier editions of the rules for the most part. Again, a few artifacts perhaps. It's certainly closer to medieval than "modernistic".

The game world is assumed to be close to real world medieval, but many feel that the 'realistic' consequences of certain spells, magic items and monsters would cause the world to look much more modern.

For example would castles survive long against flying monsters and spellcasters? Would close formations of troops exist when wizards are slinging fireballs on the battlefield? Would the black death have had the effect it did, when the wealthy and powerful can receive cure disease?