Is Eberron a dead world yet?

[Mr Samedi]

I'm so glad Eberron has brought something new to the table other than kewl powerz racez for PCs

*giggle**snort* BWAHAHAHAHAHA*cough**wheeze*

You're obiviously talking about those darn "overpowered robots" you hate so much.

Yeah about that. I just recieved a call from a Mr.Frankenstein's montser, Mr.Golem and Mr.Tinman. They would like to talk to you about your veiws on intelligent constructs in fantasy.

 

[rounser]

*giggle**snort* BWAHAHAHAHAHA*cough**wheeze*

You're obiviously talking about those darn "overpowered robots" you hate so much.

No. I'm not, and I never said I considered them overpowered. I don't like them for flavour reasons unrelated to the "Eberron is pulp" stuff just as I don't like Eberron's industrial magic for unrelated reasons. I'm actually genuinely surprised just how much the setting grates in a whole range of unrelated areas, even down to using the re-use of the "Sharn" name, the houses, dragon-this-that-and-the-other, the half-assed implementation of anachronistic technology, a race of psionic types, the "attitude" writing style used in the introduction, auteuristic references to pulp etc. I'm genuinely surprised how well received this setting has been, it feels like an emperor's new clothes kind of scenario. Maybe it's a case of it being all that's on offer after quite a long setting drought for 3E.

Yeah about that. I just recieved a call from a Mr.Frankenstein's montser, Mr.Golem and Mr.Tinman. They would like to talk to you about your veiws on intelligent constructs in fantasy.

You've only just tuned into this thread, haven't you? Go read a page back, then eat some crow.

EDIT: I'm mistaken, go see the other Eberron thread, my mutterings on intelligent constructs in that. My apologies.

 

[shilsen]

If they were jaded with D&D and yearning for something to simulate their favourite movies, WOTC should have played a few games of Adventure! to get it out of their systems, IMO. D&D can do something in the spirit of Indiana Jones and Pirates of the Carribbean already, without the 1930s allusions. D&D has it's own thing going on, it doesn't have to go anachronistic.

Personally, I've always thought that the argument about anachronism in D&D is really silly, leave alone anachronism in Eberron. By definition, with the existence of all the things that the D&D rules bring in their wake, a world governed by those rules and societies in such a world would have little resemblance to our own world and it's history. And I think that's been true of D&D in any edition. When I first began playing D&D (only in 1999), the pseudo-medieval world that was gestured at in the core books always seemed significantly out of whack to me, because it just didn't fit with the rules.

One of the many things I love about Eberron is that it's a lot closer (though it isn't quite there yet) to depicting a world and society that fits the D&D rules. It makes a lot more sense for me that in a world where magic exists and apparently always has done so one would see its effects in and on society, than the weird mix of pseudo-medieval world and superheroic individuals running around in it that one encountered in most previous settings.

 

[rounser]

One of the many things I love about Eberron is that it's a lot closer (though it isn't quite there yet) to depicting a world and society that fits the D&D rules. It makes a lot more sense for me that in a world where magic exists and apparently always has done so one would see its effects in and on society, than the weird mix of pseudo-medieval world and superheroic individuals running around in it that one encountered in most previous settings.

This is another place where the design went off the rails IMO. D&D was originally modelling something like sword and sorcery fantasy - coming full circle and exploring the logical outcomes of the weaknesses of that model is completely missing the point of what D&D is about in the first place, and highlighting the weaknesses and limitations of the simulation. When thought of in those terms, Eberron is in fact D&D Bizarro World - the simulation is now defining what is simulated. It must be something of interest at WOTC, because Primal is also based on that idea from what I gather.

Secondly, claiming to be a logical exploration of the effects of magic on a D&D society is nonsense. Even a cursory examination of a single spell such as invisibility or fireball on an urban environment would completely turn society upside down, such that it would be alien to anything we know far beyond Eberron's industrial magic lip service, let alone monsters wandering around or any of a dozen other D&Disms. Although folks like you seem to admire it, I see it as a step down a path with a big Here Be Stupid sign next to it. I'm surprised that others can't see the sign, and accept the few token gestures as "realistic consequences of D&D magic" when they don't even scratch the surface.

 

[shilsen]

This is another place where the design went off the rails IMO. D&D was originally modelling something like sword and sorcery fantasy - coming full circle and exploring the logical outcomes of the weaknesses of that model is completely missing the point of what D&D is about in the first place, and highlighting the weaknesses and limitations of the simulation. When thought of in those terms, Eberron is in fact D&D Bizarro World - the simulation is now defining what is simulated. It must be something of interest at WOTC, because Primal is also based on that idea from what I gather.

More precisely, Eberron is to you D&D Bizarro World. The "in fact" is a little presumptuous. And, IMNSHO, D&D has never successfully modelled sword and sorcery fantasy in the sense of the sword and sorcery fantasy that one finds in literature. D&D has always modeled itself, while trying to use societies that fit with S&S fantasy literature. I never played D&D expecting it to model anything other than itself, which may explain why I was never disappointed with what it provides. And for me, Eberron, as a setting, just models what D&D provides.

Secondly, claiming to be a logical exploration of the effects of magic on a D&D society is nonsense. Even a cursory examination of a single spell such as invisibility or fireball on an urban environment would completely turn society upside down, such that it would be alien to anything we know far beyond Eberron's industrial magic lip service, let alone monsters wandering around or any of a dozen other D&Disms. Although folks like you seem to admire it, I see it as a step down a path with a big Here Be Stupid sign next to it. I'm surprised that others can't see the sign, and accept the few token gestures as "realistic consequences of D&D magic" when they don't even scratch the surface.

And I'm amused that you're surprised others can't "see the sign." Is it really that surprising that people don't agree with you? Maybe it's just me, but my liking for Eberron in no way predisposes me to think that other people should like it, and it doesn't surprise me in the least that many, such as yourself, dislike it. I'm glad that Eberron is successful and hope it continues to be, but even if it crashed and burned, I'd still be playing it. Chances are you'd be a lot less excited (of course, maybe you aren't, but the tenor of your posts comes across as such) about it if you accepted the possibility that people might disagree with you and that it's okay if they do.

 

[drothgery]

3) There are shades of gray in alignment: No, alignment hasn't been eliminated (sticking to the D&D rules was part of the contest rules). However, there are a lot of things that make alignment a much trickier situation in Eberron compared to the standard D&D campaign setting. Consider that even the most chaotic evil priest of the Silver Flame will detect as lawful and good, not as chaotic and evil as one example of this.

Nitpickery: The alignment rules for clerics in Eberron are looser than in standard D&D, but they aren't that loose. You can have a Lawful Evil priest of the Flame or a Chaotic Good one, but Chaotic Evil is a bridge too far.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Rounser: Not everyone is going to agree with you, please stop stating your opinions as facts.
Everyone defending Eberron: Rounser is never going to agree with you, please stop arguing with him, and get on with talking about Eberron rather than defending it.

For me it is a less generic setting than either FR or GH - I have seen both done to death. I am not saying that they are bad, just that they are what many people expect when reading Generic Fantasy Novel #12 - while not my cuppa tea these days the basic tropes are what I started with many years ago. These settings are easy to create stuff for, the building blocks are all there.

Eberron is not as different from mainstream D&D as some of the settings that came out for 2nd ed., which is both its strength and its weakness. For all its myriad flaws 2nd ed. had some of the coolest settings.

It does try to take a look at how the common magic of a D&D world might shape society - transportation and communication are the two biggest needs for a commercial culture, and since the demand was there someone supplied it. A modern society is rising, old values changing, and the world is becoming a faster paced place.

Like the stories of the 1930s a brutal war is recent history, its conflicts unresolved. People have been displaced, both by the war and by the change in society.

The warforged are both a reminder of the war, and its survivors, heroes, and victims. They find themselves on the outside of the society that created them, blamed by some for the horrors that were unleashed. They have only recently gone from being property, slaves, to being free citizens and subjects, and are as confused as everyone else by the direction the world is taking. How long before they start wondering about philosophy? Mathematics? Physics?

Myself, I like Eberron, I like it that you can no longer go 'it's an orc! Kill it!' and know that you have somehow done a good deed. (I actually started doing that around 1980, nice to see it in an official setting. ) It has the feel of a technological society, while there are still places of mystery, including a lost continent. It is, in a way, 1930s fantasy - Indiana Jones would be at home, as would Sam Spade. Casablanca is another good place to start, Rick would know the ropes.

The Auld Grump

 

[Glyfair]

Nitpickery: The alignment rules for clerics in Eberron are looser than in standard D&D, but they aren't that loose. You can have a Lawful Evil priest of the Flame or a Chaotic Good one, but Chaotic Evil is a bridge too far.

Where is that? The only reference to the rule I can find in the book is "a cleric's alignment need not remain within one step of her deity's alignment." I don't see any limits to alignment at all.

 

[Vocenoctum]

3) There are shades of gray in alignment: No, alignment hasn't been eliminated (sticking to the D&D rules was part of the contest rules). However, there are a lot of things that make alignment a much trickier situation in Eberron compared to the standard D&D campaign setting. Consider that even the most chaotic evil priest of the Silver Flame will detect as lawful and good, not as chaotic and evil as one example of this.

One minor thing, but though Keith Baker has suggested that he uses that as a houserule, the game in no way says that clerics only radiate the one aura. If you Detect Good on such a cleric, he'll radiate as a cleric of good. If you Detect Evil, he'll radiate as an evil person. Even in core D&D, a CN priest of Kord will still radiate as a cleric of "good aligned deity" for instance.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Myself, I like Eberron, I like it that you can no longer go 'it's an orc! Kill it!' and know that you have somehow done a good deed. (I actually started doing that around 1980, nice to see it in an official setting. )

D&D's finally caught up with Tunnels & Trolls.