Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kenmarable" data-source="post: 3439931" data-attributes="member: 40359">Uh, &quot;b&quot; is just a TAD bit loaded there. I wholeheartedly agree that there's plenty of &quot;a&quot;, but my experience with &quot;b&quot; is more that many people really enjoy Tolkeinesque (as well as some people who enjoy other varieties of fantasy) and Eberron just isn't their thing.Horror movies and campaigns aren't my thing.Mint chocolate chip ice cream isn't my thing.I got nothing against them or people who like them, their just not my thing. I think it's pretty safe to say that there are people who are informed enough on Eberron to realize it's not their thing either without being &quot;bitter grognards&quot;. Personally, I *heart* Eberron for most of the reasons others have mentioned - especially the new takes on old aspects of D&amp;D, and that those new takes are cool! I think it benefited a great deal from not having several decades and rule editions of background to work with. That can add a lot of history and flavor to a setting, but it can also rule out a lot of good design choices.On the flip side, Greyhawk, I'm sorry to say, has never really done it for me. It's not a &quot;tired fantasy cliche&quot;, just not my thing. Got nothing against it or those who love it, but Greyhawk is mint chocolate chip ice cream to me. Not my favorite flavor.If the Eberron-lovers side of the debate wants other people to be open-minded, maybe we should sorta, you know, be open-minded, too? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Otherwise you're making us look bad in front of the Greyhawk crowd, and that's just disrespectful.qft</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kenmarable, post: 3439931, member: 40359"] Uh, "b" is just a TAD bit loaded there. I wholeheartedly agree that there's plenty of "a", but my experience with "b" is more that many people really enjoy Tolkeinesque (as well as some people who enjoy other varieties of fantasy) and Eberron just isn't their thing. Horror movies and campaigns aren't my thing. Mint chocolate chip ice cream isn't my thing. I got nothing against them or people who like them, their just not my thing. I think it's pretty safe to say that there are people who are informed enough on Eberron to realize it's not their thing either without being "bitter grognards". Personally, I *heart* Eberron for most of the reasons others have mentioned - especially the new takes on old aspects of D&D, and that those new takes are cool! I think it benefited a great deal from not having several decades and rule editions of background to work with. That can add a lot of history and flavor to a setting, but it can also rule out a lot of good design choices. On the flip side, Greyhawk, I'm sorry to say, has never really done it for me. It's not a "tired fantasy cliche", just not my thing. Got nothing against it or those who love it, but Greyhawk is mint chocolate chip ice cream to me. Not my favorite flavor. If the Eberron-lovers side of the debate wants other people to be open-minded, maybe we should sorta, you know, be open-minded, too? :) Otherwise you're making us look bad in front of the Greyhawk crowd, and that's just disrespectful. qft [/QUOTE]

Verification