Is it time for a new setting?

[jeffhartsell]

heh I am an Eberron fanboi and I'm a grognard. I use to dig FR, but the setting fluff was more into advancing setting story lines about uber-NPCs than helping players be a part of the setting.

The beauty of Eberron is you can use whatever fluff you like to make the setting "yours". I have a homebrew that my players liked, but my homebrew was mostly about mapping out geography, governements, and cultures.

Eberron was similiar enough to my concept plus all of the additional details about the planes, underdark (Kyber), dragonmarks, magi-tech, psionics, dragons, blah blah ... that it made it much easier to simply use the ECS and source books.

For those that like FR or your setting of choice, there is no reason to want to use Eberron or even like it. That is why WOTC is cutting back of setting books. I never bought anything for FR in 3e other than the FRCS. But I bought lots of EB stuff.

Change the types of books and I end up getting all of the setting books PLUS the core source books that add crunch to campaign of choice. I loved that each MM started having setting material in them.

I wager that DDI will offer cool crunch and fluff for each setting.

I really like the idea of converting the old settings and then rolling out a new one later.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Tyr-Tymora-Helm debacle.

Stupid BS? Or stupidest BS imaginable?

because he's not adamantly neutral in the realms? He was the god of the sun and the letter of the law. His clerics were very well practiced in both reading and writing loopholes in contracts where there probably may not need to be. From my understanding of Amaunator, that's how he even got the sun portfolio was a loophole in an exchange with the then-current god of the sun. Am I way off base here?

Amaunator was VERY lawful neutral. Lathander, on the other hand, was adamantly NOT lawful, while never delving into chaos. And Lathander is as good as he can get, while also being a bit naive over it.

I cannot see one becoming the second, at all. It makes almost as little sense as the god of goodness and loyalty incarnate deciding to kill the god of unwaivering trustworthiness and lawfulness.

...Seriously, who was on crack when they wrote that, and HOW MANY OTHERS were on crack to let that through? Couldn't they just say "Yeah, we're not keeping Forgotten Realms" instead of gutting it, taking it against its will, and then leaving it to bleed to death in a gutter?

 

[Anti-Sean]

No. You do not get to insult another member just because you don't like them. There's been recent moderation that will hopefully address some of the problems you're reacting to - but you don't get to be a jerk just because you think someone else is, too. Report the post instead.

This goes for everyone, not just Sean. He just happened to have the last problematic post.

Drop me an email if you want to discuss this further. ~ Piratecat

 

[WayneLigon]

Well, feh. I was too quick on the vote button. My 'yes' should be 'no'.
I don't think they'd benefit from releasing a brand new setting right now, but later on I think it wouldn't be a bad thing. A setting doesn't need to be five hardbacks, modules, etc - ie, an entire product line. Have a hardback with four or five 'mini-settings' to choose from.

 

[Ydars]

I vote for a completely new setting for 4E that runs with the PoL concept BIGTIME!

I want something new; maybe based on a post apocalyptic world with a really nice backstory; a world recovering from a magical ice-age, created to stop the avatar of evil from ruling the world. Valleys and canyons open up in the mile high ice and reveal the civilisations that have been cut off from one another for a thousand years. Monsters caught up in the last battle defrost from the ice and come back to life; the former servants of the evil avatar, whilst the PCs are similarly re-animated heroes from another age.

Just something new that isn't based on a really cartoon vision of western history, yet is twisted enough that we don't immediately associate it with any particular place. I want drawings of dress, buildings etc; perhaps as a comic. Exalted managed this very nicely, creating a very unique world and showing it through some comics produced by UDON. WoTC should be able to do MUCH better.

Whilst I LOVE parts of FR, it is now SO big and disjointed that it is a total patchwork quilt and just doesn't feel real to me anymore in many places. I still love the northlands but really dislike the south and the whole direction the backstory is going in.

Eberron seems a really consistent setting, but is only great if you love steampunk (and I don't).

 

[Desdichado]

I just like gorram. It's cool.

Ah... no. It absolutely is not cool.

Why I don't Like Eberron

1. It's poodoo.

It's times like this that I really miss the smiley.

2. It's a melting pot of everything D&D. In unreasonable ways. It's like they tried to take every splatbook, every monster manual, and every monster and race out of those books and cram them all into one setting. Along with steamcrunk.

Compared to Forgotten Realms? Or Greyhawk? I doubt you can make that accusation stick.

3. It's disjointed. Even though it's a melting pot, it's more like a um... mixing pot where the oil and water are missing the emulsifier or whatever it is that's used to blend the elements together.

No it isn't.

4. It wasn't created to be unique or have a specific theme. It was created specifically for a silly contest. Something as important as a campaign setting should be more than just something you throw together. It should have meaning to the builder. It should make sense overall. It shouldn't feel like a patchwork quilt from different D&D sources. Unles of course it specifically is a patchwork through planar tears in the barriers between primes and other stuff...

That is completely untrue. Eberron has a much stronger theme than either Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms. The "D&D as Indiana Jones meets The Maltese Falcon" is actually a very strong, and consistent theme with Eberron.

It just irks me that it's a for profit campaign setting, rather than the creator's homebrew that was good enough to be professionally published. Sure, it's an irrational thing to dislike about Eberron, but it wouldn't be irrational if I was rational about it. I didn't even enter the thing. I knew my setting would never be chosen based on the guidelines for it.

Another moment. Of course. You have the even better campaign setting that you couldn't bear to see prostituted out by WotC because it's "your baby."

 

[Desdichado]

My answer was yes. Mostly because settings are my favorite kinds of products and I have a lot of them, not because I think we really need one, though.

That said, the "implied setting" could stand to get fleshed out into a treatment of some sort.

 

[evileeyore]

Eberron is quite frankly, the worst setting ever made, imo. It has no theme, no plausibility... just a damned marketing melting pot to sell more books.

I hate D&D and even I like the Eberron setting.

I voted yes because absolutely unlike Hobo I like reading setings and tend to get them even for systems I dislike.

What I really want is to see though is some Ravenloft and Dark Sun lovin.

 

[Jhaelen]

I voted No since I think it's too early for a completely new setting. They should start by publishing two or three old favorites first.

I'm a bit annoyed that they decided to publish FR as the first setting, though. It's definitely NOT among my favorite settings. I'd have loved if they'd started with Eberron which is a very good setting that should work well with 4E.

 

[Desdichado]

I voted yes because absolutely unlike Hobo I like reading setings and tend to get them even for systems I dislike.

So as long as by "absolutely unlike Hobo" you mean "exactly like Hobo" then I think we're good here.

Although I know how much it pains you to agree with me, so I won't press it.