James Wyatt + Eberron

[TwinBahamut]

This was posted on a thread in the WotC forums by James Wyatt:

(quote omitted)

I can certainly understand that perspective. But here's mine:

All the cool things I wanted to do in Eberron, I can still do. I can put "what ifs" into the ECS that suggest the cool directions I have in mind for the setting and my novels without asking you folks to accept that they've happened already—without your characters' involvement. I get to give you the tools and the inspiration—in the new ECS and in my novels—to do exciting things in your own campaign, involve your players any way you see fit, and ignore the stuff you don't like. From my perspective, this decision is really the best of both worlds.

I have to say, too, that as happy as I was to be able to break the news today, this wasn't totally my decision. Andy Collins and Chris Perkins, who both occupy manager positions just above me (Chris is my boss), apparently started asking themselves independently whether this decision was a good idea. I had been wondering about it, too, of course. Andy talked to me about it on Friday, and Chris talked to me about it yesterday. Today Chris got the approval of Bill Slavicsek, gave me the thumbs-up, and called Keith. Like just about everything else we do, this was a group decision. (Rich Baker also made some good points during my discussion with Andy.)

And the key point Andy made to me is that the job of a campaign setting is not to tell stories. The job of novels is to tell stories, and the job of you folks at your gaming tables is to tell stories. But the function of a campaign setting is to give you a place to tell your stories, a backdrop, background characters (your PCs are always the protagonists), and lots and lots of ideas for stories to tell.

We at WotC (and Keith) have lots of ideas ourselves. That's why we run Eberron campaigns and write Eberron novels. And that's why I think we're often tempted to step in and do your job for you. I might be more guilty of that than anyone, getting so caught up in the excitement of writing novels for the first time that I crossed the streams too much. But the stories you choose to tell in Eberron are yours. We shouldn't force-feed them to you or expect you to accept our stories as fact. That's what I was hearing here, and it's a very valid complaint.

(quote omitted)

It's possible that you're overestimating the changes we're making to magic in the game. Yeah, the mechanics are different, but wizards still cast spells. It's not a "new way of magic" the way, say, incarnum is—just different rules for how often you can use certain spells. I don't feel any need to explain that either way, world-wise. That wouldn't have been something I would have spent time explaining in the new ECS anyway.

It's also possible that I'm misunderstanding you, in which case I apologize, and please feel free to clarify.
__________________
James Wyatt
D&D Story Team Lead
Wizards of the Coast

I think the chain of events goes something like this:
1) Some of the 4E Eberron people get a little overexcited about the possibilities for the setting, and start creating lots of new story elements for the setting. This involves an advancement of the timeline. They are too excited to think too hard abouit whether the advancement is necessary.
2) They announce the timeline advancement.
3) There is a large group of people on various boards (both WotC and ENWorld) which does not like the announcement. This is a slap in the face to the designers.
4) This slap in the face makes the WotC designers stop and think for a moment, long enough for them to reconsider the need for the timelone advancement.
5) The WotC guys decide it is not necessary.

Again, I will say that I am really glad that this has happened. Designers post an idea, the fanbase has a negative reaction, the designers take that decision into consideration, and decide that the fanbase has the right idea.

I don't see why anyone should be complaining about this, or claiming that the designers are just obeying a vocal minority. I think there is enough evidence to show that WotC is listening to people, but is really making the choices to best improve the game. They just decided that their earlier choice was a bad once, and that not advancing the timeline is better.

 

[Rechan]

Again, I will say that I am really glad that this has happened. Designers post an idea, the fanbase has a negative reaction, the designers take that decision into consideration, and decide that the fanbase has the right idea.

I don't see why anyone should be complaining about this, or claiming that the designers are just obeying a vocal minority. I think there is enough evidence to show that WotC is listening to people, but is really making the choices to best improve the game. They just decided that their earlier choice was a bad once, and that not advancing the timeline is better.

The issue here is "just how often are they going to listen" to the gnashing of teeth?

If you look around Enworld, people are freaking out about the whole Cosmology/Demon thing. Yet if you look at conducted polls, 1 in 5 hate the demon/devil change, and only 7.4% are "resentful" about the new cosmology.

If every time WotC puts out news about 4e and then retracts it because it pisses a fraction of the people off, then nothing's going to get done because you can't please everyone.

I personally don't want WotC listening to certain people.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Did we have any polls on Eberron timelines, though?

 

[WitheringSolid]

But those two issues needn't be, and shouldn't be, conflated. They've already said, officially and numerous times, that Eberron novels aren't canon to the setting.

That fact is, and should have remained, totally separate from the "are we advancing the timeline" question.

Again, I could see objecting to a major change. But two years? I just don't see the big deal.

And I hope they're still able to introduce any of the cool ideas they wanted to add.

A two year advance in and of itself isn't a big deal, but it sets a precident that ebberons fans want to avoid. There are also many places in ebberon we do not have any scorce material on in the current time line. It's still a fresh new world.

 

[Klaus]

Exactly! Why advance the timeline when there are HUUUUGE parts of Eberron that haven't been touched at all (like Argonessen, Demon Wastes, Valenar, Talenta Plains, Lhazaar Principalities, Seren, Q'barra, Droaam...).

As it is, the world has more than enough room to include anything that comes up in 4e without the need to have some sort of world-changing event that would warrant an advance in the timeline.

 

[BadMojo]

I like both the Realms and Eberron (is that allowed?) and I'm a bit disappointed that the timeline isn't advancing. Still, it sounds like we'll still get all the interesting stuff that James Wyatt was talking about, in one form or another (sidebars???).

Even though there are large parts of the world that aren't fleshed out (Talenta Plains, etc.) I kind of liked the idea of advancing things a bit in the areas where *most* groups spend the majority of their time playing.

As an FR fan since the old Grey Boxed Set, I'm interested in seeing how they tear down and rebuild the Realms. It seems like it's time to have a big change and not just the old deity/ divine portfolio shuffle.

 

[Rechan]

Exactly! Why advance the timeline when there are HUUUUGE parts of Eberron that haven't been touched at all (like Argonessen, Demon Wastes, Valenar, Talenta Plains, Lhazaar Principalities, Seren, Q'barra, Droaam...).

As it is, the world has more than enough room to include anything that comes up in 4e without the need to have some sort of world-changing event that would warrant an advance in the timeline.

For one, so that they don't have to just re-print all the stuff in the ECS for the 4e ECS. With an advancement in time, you get a little new information about everything.

Two, the point was also to introduce some elements of 4e's classes and such without saying "OH, well it was always there. You didn't notice?"

 

[TwinBahamut]

The issue here is "just how often are they going to listen" to the gnashing of teeth?

If you look around Enworld, people are freaking out about the whole Cosmology/Demon thing. Yet if you look at conducted polls, 1 in 5 hate the demon/devil change, and only 7.4% are "resentful" about the new cosmology.

If every time WotC puts out news about 4e and then retracts it because it pisses a fraction of the people off, then nothing's going to get done because you can't please everyone.

I personally don't want WotC listening to certain people.

My point was that WotC has shown no sign that they are going to listen to the "gnashing of teeth" over demons/devils or cosmology. The guys at WotC are putting a lot of faith in their own vision of 4E and the abilities of the designers and developers. The change to eberron is as much connected to the latter as it is to any fan complaints. All fan complaints can do is make designers question themselves, and if that questioning leads to a better end-product, then I am all for it.

Besides, as far as I can tell, it was far more than just a vocal minority in the case of Eberron. It seems closer to being a majority of the dedicated fanbase, and isn't just a case of the same small group of people constantly complaining. The lack of discussion of it here on ENWorld might simply be a product of the overall lack of love this board has for Eberron, and the large proportion of older Realms, Greyhawk, and Planescape fans.

For one, so that they don't have to just re-print all the stuff in the ECS for the 4e ECS. With an advancement in time, you get a little new information about everything.

Two, the point was also to introduce some elements of 4e's classes and such without saying "OH, well it was always there. You didn't notice?"

I disagree with the necessity of having a timeline advance to provide an interesting 4E ECS. After all, they could just summerize or revise all the various material in the supplements released since the original ECS, as well as just make up new stuff that takes place in year 998. Besides, I don't really care about getting new stuff in the 4E ECS. The ECS should cover the basics, not expand the setting.

Also, I don't think timeline advancement (especially a very small 2-year jump) helps explain anything of an edition change. I also don't agree that such an explanation is necessary. Does Eberron[/i, the setting based on the premise of a Last War, really need an explanation for having a class called a Warlord? Did they have to do a timeline jump to explain having Warlocks from Complete Arcane or Bo9S stuff in Eberron? Do such things need explanation at all? I don't think DMs or Players need WotC to use drastic measures the describe the setting for a new edition, and Eberron is certainly open and flexible enough to accept change to the mechanics without a change to the setting.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'm really hoping we can retire "slap in the face" as an Internetism in 2007. Most folks who use it never seem to have actually been really slapped in the face -- it's a lot more severe than it's used as being, most of the time.

 

[Glyfair]

The lack of discussion of it here on ENWorld might simply be a product of the overall lack of love this board has for Eberron, and the large proportion of older Realms, Greyhawk, and Planescape fans.

Looking at the last few setting polls, I think Eberron has a lot of love here. There is even a "Living Eberron" forum that's pretty popular. That's not why it isn't discussed here.

As I guess, I'll say because this forum isn't particularly friendly to any sort of setting specific discussion. You don't see a lot of FR threads here, either. Occasionally you see a some Scarred Lands threads. You see a lot of Greyhawk threads, but they aren't really discussing it, they are complaining about how WotC is handling it.

Threads on settings tend to get put in General Discussion (or d20 for some settings) and soon disappear. You get them, but you really don't get much of a community discussion a specific setting unless someone really pushes the setting (Nightfall and Scarred Lands, for example).

Also, a lot of people here play in many settings and don't focus too much one one.