Have you been disillusioned by Eberron?

[Desdichado]

· How do you feel about the setting now that it's been out for about a year, and why do you feel that way?

· Are you as happy with it as you are Greyhawk and the Realms, the other two supported settings?

· Are you as happy with it as you used to be? Alternately, are you as unhappy with it as you used to be?

In your same order:

• I like it as much as ever. It's still a fun setting, that has lots of aspects I like. The only thing that's potentially curbed my enthusiasm for Eberron are other 3^rd party settings like Dark Legacies or Iron Kingdoms. But even then, those settings seem like very different experiences to me; like a d20 Fantasy game that's not strictly D&D, while Eberron is very strictly D&D still.
• Much more than Greyhawk and the Realms. Then again, I've been bored and/or disillusioned about Greyhawk and the Realms for years.
• Yes, I think so. And for the same reasons.

 

[Belen]

Most Homebrews suck.
Most of the worlds are boring and derivative, and most of the games run in them are harmed by the fact that they are located in a homebrew.

Generally people who homebrew are finicky people who have difficulty sharing the storytelling for their players and need to make up lots of extra rules to deny access to options and assert their control.

Really!? I never knew that they sucked. All the homebrews I have experienced have been great. So much for you anecdotal evidence. Mine differs.

I am sorry if you have had bad experience with homebrews, but I find it funny that you say "most" when I doubt that you have had experience with more than 10 different homebrews in your entire gaming career.

Every homebrew that I have participated in have been great. The DM is able to bring a much greater depth to the world and the characters than from using a published setting.

My experience with DMs using out of the box campaigns has never been positive. Those games have always been very cookie cutter and harmed from artificial boundaries placed on the DM and players by the publisher.

As I said before, your mileage may vary. However, I'd stake a bet on their being more people who play in a homebrew than Eberron any day of the week.

 

[fuindordm]

Not at all disillusioned.

I've heard complaints about warforged/artificer, and they always come down to either not understanding the rules (warforged slams do not count as adamantine weapons) or lazy DMing (allowing PCs to stack class abilities and feats from multiple sources with no surveillance). I've run 7 sessions of my campaign so far, and have had no problems with either warforged or artificer.

I loved the flavor of the setting when it first came out, and I still love it. It's kitchen-sinky and wacky, but it still feels coherent, and I'm really enjoying playing with the new options and plot opportunities.

It is, however, true that the stuff Keith Baker writes is an order of magnitude or more above the stuff that anyone else writes. The first module by KB was great--good variety of challenges, the plot and characters made sense, etc. The second (not by KB) was absolutely awful, and I didn't bother buying the third.

City of Towers (by KB) was a competent first novel and a very enjoyable read. I haven't heard a single good thing about the other novels.

Sharn had very heavy KB input, and was a great resource for the setting.

Races of Eberron; the Kalashtar section was KB, and the others were not--and it really shows. The book is still a good one overall, however.

Five Nations has no KB input, and is getting mixed reviews. I haven't decided whether to get it yet.

To sum up, I have faith in Eberron and Keith Baker. Not so much in WotC staff writers, but so far they haven't diverged too much from KB's vision.

Ben

 

[Desdichado]

So? I never said that you could not like the book. I mentioned the target audience of the setting. The target audience is 10-15 year old kids. I am sorry if you disagree, but telling the truth in no way tarnishes your enjoyment of a setting.

That's not "the truth" and it is insulting to say. Plus, I seriously doubt that you have anything with which to back up that outrageous claim.

If they made a setting for the 30-40 year old crowd, then I can guarantee you that it would be different. It would have a lot more sword and sorcery elements at the very least.

Oh? What's the string of logic that says 30-40 year olds prefer sword and sorcery?

Dragonmarks, shifters (mutants), warforged (robots/androids), and lightning rails does not evoke the same themes as traditional D&D. It does have a lot in common with the current anime cartoons though.

Haven't we already had this discussion about your shifter/mutant not making any sense? If I recall, I disagreed then, pointed to the shifter/classic werewolf ties, and then you kinda didn't address the issue anymore. I'll grant that warforged and lightning rails are not very traditional D&D (and I'll even grant that there are some obvious parallels between warforged and some classic SF robot themes, although warforged as a construct race are a natural "next step" from regular D&D, IMO) but I don't see how that's necessarily a problem. Are you saying that 30-40 year olds only want conventional, firmly in-the-box D&D with no innovations? It seems to me like your argument amounts to little more than "people between 30 and 40 are old fuddy-duddies, so if they were the target audience, Eberron would be another Greyhawk/FR clone." Our group--5 folks in their thirties and one in his very late 20s--all liked Eberron. We all liked the new, unique aspects of Eberron as a matter of fact.

You coming here and claiming things like you have as fact is a nonsensical position from a logical argument standpoint. You're tossing up your own personal preferences and tastes, and using them as "evidence" about Eberron's target audience. It's really fairly silly.

Oh, and I'm not much of an anime defender; in fact, I'm often the guy anime defenders are arguing against, but your comment about Eberron matching current anime is absurd. What current anime, might I ask?

I never said that you were wrong in liking the setting. I am sorry that you took it that way, but there is no reason to get defensive because I dislike something that you like.

Yeah, but you don't just dislike Eberron; in the earlier part of your post you attempted (poorly, IMO) to slander it; stating as if it were fact that the target audience is juvenile, and the themes and elements that are unique to it come from "outside."

 

[Belen]

You've fallen victim to the single greatest misconception about Eberron.

The selling point was never "Everything ever produced for D&D can and must be used with this world!"

No I have not fallen victim to anything. There is an implied permissiveness to the setting that turns me away from it. And while it may have some great RP enhancing rules, it also delivers a ton of power ups and "kewl" powers that make it less fun for me.

I prefer a setting where magic has not yet reached a technology stage and where it can still be somewhat rare and wonderous. Eberron is a very "modern" setting. It is made to handle more contemporary themes and attitudes. If I want contemporary or even Indiana Jones style 1920s and 1930s, then I will play d20 modern and have actual technology with a little bit of relic style magic thrown in.

In Eberron, I keep expecting a druid to run around saying "Fiendish Dire Weasel, I choose you!"

Eberron is very over the top for me. It feels like an anime or a comic book and that is not what I want from my gaming experience.

However, I am glad that a lot of people enjoy it. It is great that they do, but it is not my style.

 

[Belen]

That's not "the truth" and it is insulting to say. Plus, I seriously doubt that you have anything with which to back up that outrageous claim.

It is not insulting to comment on the target audience of the game. Normal D&D is targeted at a younger audience, so are the miniatures, and games such as Magic. There is no insult in saying that Wizards targets a younger audience or that they are wrong to do so.

Finally, if you want proof, then read that editorial from Dragon. I think that Matt Sernett (sp?) wrote it and it was about a year or so ago. He explicitly states that the currents themes are being taken from popular books (Harry Potter), video games, and cartoons such as pokemon, and that there target audience are people who grew up watching those shows and playing those games.

Oh? What's the string of logic that says 30-40 year olds prefer sword and sorcery?

Common/shared history. The books that were read and the shows that were watched are different for the demographic. Sword and Sorcery was much more prevalent for that group of people. Computers were in there infancy and japanese anime had not made many inroads as yet. It is much more likely that people in their 30s and 40s will gravitate toward different themes than people in their tweens, teens and 20s.

Haven't we already had this discussion about your shifter/mutant not making any sense? If I recall, I disagreed then, pointed to the shifter/classic werewolf ties, and then you kinda didn't address the issue anymore.

As I have said before. The shifters and changelings are humans that have a special gene or trait that gives them special powers. The shifter is not just based on the werewolf theme. You can have wererat, werebear or weretiger in your blood. Humans that have special powers do to a special gene are mutants. Shifters remind me more of Wolverine than a werewolf.

You coming here and claiming things like you have as fact is a nonsensical position from a logical argument standpoint. You're tossing up your own personal preferences and tastes, and using them as "evidence" about Eberron's target audience. It's really fairly silly.

You poor guy. I commented in a thread that specifically asked about personal preference and you get angry because you do not like my personal preference.

Yeah, but you don't just dislike Eberron; in the earlier part of your post you attempted (poorly, IMO) to slander it; stating as if it were fact that the target audience is juvenile, and the themes and elements that are unique to it come from "outside."

No. I spoke about my personal preferences and the feelings that running and playing in Eberron evoked. It is not "slander" to discuss what you do not like about a setting or to comment on how you perceive a setting. I never said that people who enjoy Eberron are wrong, stupid or juvenile. I only commented on my own dislikes regarding the setting. You may want to investigate why you feel the need to attack me based on my perceptions or personal beliefs.

As for the target audience being 10-15 year olds. I stand by the assertion. There is no shame in it. That they created a setting that appeals to people across a wide age range is great. However, Eberron was created with an eye torwards current pop trends that appeal to a younger crowd. And that is great because we need younger players.

 

[cmanos]

I loved Eberron in the beginning and I love it more as more comes out. Great stuff. Lots of political intrigue as well as high adventure.

 

[Desdichado]

It is not insulting to comment on the target audience of the game. Normal D&D is targeted at a younger audience, so are the miniatures, and games such as Magic. There is no insult in saying that Wizards targets a younger audience or that they are wrong to do so.

It wouldn't be insulting if it were documented, and not just an attempt for you to justify your own dislike of the setting by saying that the target market is juvenile.

Finally, if you want proof, then read that editorial from Dragon. I think that Matt Sernett (sp?) wrote it and it was about a year or so ago. He explicitly states that the currents themes are being taken from popular books (Harry Potter), video games, and cartoons such as pokemon, and that there target audience are people who grew up watching those shows and playing those games.

What editorial from Dragon? When?

Common/shared history. The books that were read and the shows that were watched are different for the demographic. Sword and Sorcery was much more prevalent for that group of people. Computers were in there infancy and japanese anime had not made many inroads as yet. It is much more likely that people in their 30s and 40s will gravitate toward different themes than people in their tweens, teens and 20s.

I don't know if that's true. I grew up watching shows like Speed Racer, Thundarr the Barbarian, Superfriends, the old Flash Gordon cartoon from Filmation, Star Wars, etc. In fact, I don't recall much (if any) Sword & Sorcery in my childhood in the 70s and earlier 80s on TV or in the movies, with the exception the Conan movie, and a bunch of books that were mostly already 15-20 years old or more (but which I read anyway.) Oddly enough, I think younger folks than us are probably more exposed (generally, especially outside the fantasy fan base) to something more like S&S because of more recent shows like Xena.

As I have said before. The shifters and changelings are humans that have a special gene or trait that gives them special powers. The shifter is not just based on the werewolf theme. You can have wererat, werebear or weretiger in your blood. Humans that have special powers do to a special gene are mutants. Shifters remind me more of Wolverine than a werewolf.

You convenently deal in generalities to support your viewpoint, but then fall back on a technical detail to refute mine. And as I said before, your viewpoint is also flawed because it ignores all the planetouched races, and for that matter, all of the races in general. They're all essentially human with a special gene or trait that gives them special powers. Even if I grant you that elves and dwarves and whatnot have a cultural history that's different than that, half elves, half orcs, drow, most of the new races from the Races books and all of the planetouched races also fall into this same category, yet you conveniently don't include them, because bashing Eberron for it is your agenda and bashing FR--haven for many of those races--for for the same thing is not. And then you say that shifters aren't just werewolves because hey! they could have weretiger ancestry, didn't you notice? while conveniently ignoring that despite that, the shifters are very much like a classic picture of a werewolf, yet modified to be usable as a player character race.

You poor guy. I commented in a thread that specifically asked about personal preference and you get angry because you do not like my personal preference.

I'm not angry. And if I was, it wouldn't be because I don't like your personal preference. I might get angry if the only way you have of expressing your personal preference is to insult the preference of others, but then again, probably not.

No. I spoke about my personal preferences and the feelings that running and playing in Eberron evoked. It is not "slander" to discuss what you do not like about a setting or to comment on how you perceive a setting. I never said that people who enjoy Eberron are wrong, stupid or juvenile. I only commented on my own dislikes regarding the setting. You may want to investigate why you feel the need to attack me based on my perceptions or personal beliefs.

I didn't attack you--IMO you did post slander about Eberron! And yes, I guess technically it's not slander, because it's only slander if it's about a person, but I think otherwise you've clearly come under the umbrella of the definition of slander "utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another's reputation." All of your posts about why you don't like Eberron aren't just, "I don't like the new races; they seem too sci-fi/superhero to me" or "the themes and tone of Eberron aren't classic S&S, and round these here parts, that means that gamers in their 30s don't like it," or what have you--you use hyperbole to misrepresent the setting, and then make up reasons to "prove" that the setting is juvenile when you're really just using anecdotal evidence and your own tastes. I could just as easily point to my group where--as I said--we're all in our mid thirties (with one exception) and we all love Eberron. Or I can point to the shows I watched as a kid to show that they aren't really classic S&S anyway, and Eberron is a closer match for them than standard D&D in most respects. Or I can point out that the noir genre that Eberron is trying to match is older than S&S, or at least just as old, and therefore just as mature, and more likely to attract mature gamers.

But I won't. Those are all silly and beside the point, and don't prove anything anyway.

As for the target audience being 10-15 year olds. I stand by the assertion. There is no shame in it. That they created a setting that appeals to people across a wide age range is great. However, Eberron was created with an eye torwards current pop trends that appeal to a younger crowd. And that is great because we need younger players.

Then we'll continue to disagree, I suppose. And I still don't like your implication that only juvenile people would like Eberron, but since you didn't say that outright, I'm sure you'll deny that you implied any such thing. I still think it's pretty obviously right there between the lines, though.

 

[ForceUser]

I voted "no, not disillusioned." I own the ECS and Sharn, and I find them to be fine, imaginative products. I don't use everything from them for my homebrew, but I do use large chunks. Unforuntately, my main player group doesn't find the Eberron elements as interesting as I do, and tend to eschew those elements of my setting in favor of more traditional fantasy tropes. Luckily, I like that stuff too.

 

[The_Gneech]

Well, I'm sorta anti-disillusioned, if such a thing is possible. I was less-than-impressed when it came out, but "Fallen Angel" in Dungeon caught my interest, and I'm generally more amicably-minded toward the setting now.

It is definitely a "do this for something different" type of game for me rather than the kind of thing I'll always want to run/play, but that's perfectly cool.

-The Gneech