Khorvaire:Two Problems

[Lonely Tylenol]

Yeah, what he said!

The secondary issue here is that no world is perfect. We do not have experts in every field developing the world. While I did not set the population numbers, I would also never ever have said "The population's too low to support civilization" -- because honestly, I'm not worried enough about realism to feel the need to calculate population density. I'm too busy enjoying my fantasy world. Likewise (and this is not something to talk about here unless you want the thread closed), some people have been offended because they perceive ties between Eberron and the Book of Revelations -- ties I never noticed or considered. Tomorrow, someone will say that it's impossible and insulting that orcs and goblinoids could have evolved on the same continent. We can't make a world that will please everyone. We can't spot ever possible issue ahead of time, and we can't chase after and correct every gamer's individual concerns now it's out. You can make this work on your end if you choose to, and I hope that you do so.

Here's a question for you all. Why the heck is Eberron being raked over the coals for issues that are completely unrelated to the quality of the game and how much fun people are having with it? This is all totally ridiculous. The "Eberron = revelations" thread was a total sideshow that hijacked a thread where people were talking about their experiences with the game. This thread is another pointless argument that's dominating the discussion to no constructive ends. I would understand if Keith were getting a bit cheezed off that while everyone can have an argument over tangential (or fictional) minutia, they don't seem to be interested in having a discussion about the friggin' game he wrote!

Look, go here to see a real testimonial from someone who's actually been playing the game, rather than listening to the nitpicking of people who aren't playing it. Do yourself a favour, and try to have fun with Eberron rather than using it at yet another launching pad for a career in lawyering.

Good god, you'd think Eberron punched someone's mom in the head, considering the reception it's been given.

 

[Belen]

Here's a question for you all. Why the heck is Eberron being raked over the coals for issues that are completely unrelated to the quality of the game and how much fun people are having with it? This is all totally ridiculous. The "Eberron = revelations" thread was a total sideshow that hijacked a thread where people were talking about their experiences with the game. This thread is another pointless argument that's dominating the discussion to no constructive ends. I would understand if Keith were getting a bit cheezed off that while everyone can have an argument over tangential (or fictional) minutia, they don't seem to be interested in having a discussion about the friggin' game he wrote!

Look, go here to see a real testimonial from someone who's actually been playing the game, rather than listening to the nitpicking of people who aren't playing it. Do yourself a favour, and try to have fun with Eberron rather than using it at yet another launching pad for a career in lawyering.

Good god, you'd think Eberron punched someone's mom in the head, considering the reception it's been given.

Well, I will qualify this by saying that I have not read the entire thread, and I have purchased the book and found it wanting.

Basically, you're saying that people have no right to a negative opinion on Eberron. At first, the fans of the setting said that we had to wait to read it before making a decision, now you're saying that we have to play it before we have a decision.

Well, I have read it and decided that I do not want to play it.

Also, Eberron is being touted as THE setting. WOTC is using it for DnD online and seems to be supporting it much more than previous settings. I believe this is cause enough to speak out about any problems that people may have with the setting.

No one is saying that you cannot enjoy the setting, but you're saying that we have to like or that we will like it if we play it. That is a bit of a double standard.

Just some thoughts.

 

[jgbrowning]

Yep, I realize substantial differences exist between the early USA and Europe, but my the point I was more interested in was that you could have a country where the population is highly concentrated (early US with 90%+ of the population near the Atlantic Ocean), there are large tracts of "wild" lands, and hence the overall population is low. The other data point I thought was interesting was the it took the USA until 1950 to achieve a population density that is representative of what some have argued as a minimal sustainable density.

That's a very good point. I'm not so sold on the minimal sustainable density. I think it can get lower than some have speculated (I think though that 20 per sq. mile is probably about a low as you'd want to go.) But even then, what's probably going on is that certain areas are more dense than others so we're talking again about a situation such as you describe. Instead of saying that the wilds are part of the kingdom, I'd rather have a map that more adequately describes the reality of the situation while mentioning that "America" has claims on a bunch of land that it really has no control over.

There is a definite minimum population needed to sustain a feudal or quasi-feudal europeanesque system with it's layers of dependency and authority. There are even, I believe, more layers needed to sustain any highly commercial organization (say Venice levels) as there has to be a significant amount of surplus making it's way up the chain to a large enough group of people willing will frit it away on silk shirts.

One thing that I just thought of is that density would probably be a little greater than historical, not just because of magic weather/crop control, but because in a world where there really are monsters out there, weaker peasant will band together. Old man Green who lives by himself a mile outta town better be one tough fighter..

Personally, I prefer having a world that has lots of empty places - it gives me room to place adventures and interest locales. It I had a world with population densities representative of 14th century France or England, just where are the mysterious unexplored regions?

Dwilgar

That what I was talking about with the standard D&D tropes. I think that the standard ops for D&D would usually only occur on "the borderlands." However, the borderlands are probably the least likely area to have enough time to create the dungeons, ruins, temples and all the other settings typical of D&D. This leads to lots of lost civilizations and or "we were once there, but now we're not" situations.

I think many D&D worlds would probably be similiar to the roman period in which safty was very strong at the center (not very many monsters, only those that can disguise or hide well enough) of any inhabited area and more typically D&D on the outskirts.

joe b.

 

[jgbrowning]

Good god, you'd think Eberron punched someone's mom in the head, considering the reception it's been given.

Yes, it would seem that this criticism about Eberron does punch your mom on the head at least.

Just because some of us enjoy this type of stuff, doesn't mean that we're pointless, stupid, missing the bigger picture, or even for that matter dislike Eberron. If you don't like this thread, don't read it.

Keith's a professional. Any additional information he finds out about or thinks about will either be...

1. Used because it's cool.
2. Discarded because it doesn't fit what he wants to do.
3. Ridiculed in private.

It's as simple as that. I think all of us would like to be as good as we can be when world-building in order to create the most pleasurable environment for many different types of gamers. No one's going to be pleased by everything, but anything that improves quality in one manner without decreasing quality in another is, "A good thing."

joe b.

 

[WizarDru]

Well, I will qualify this by saying that I have not read the entire thread, and I have purchased the book and found it wanting.

...

No one is saying that you cannot enjoy the setting, but you're saying that we have to like or that we will like it if we play it. That is a bit of a double standard.

Just some thoughts.

Your really should read the thread.

Most of it has been a discussion of how Eberron is a seriously flawed setting because it's population density doesn't mesh with that of feudal Europe. Some folks appear to be saying that the setting is unusable based on that sole fact alone.

Taken in context of the previous five pages of dialogue, Dr. Awkard's point was, I think, that a trivial piece of information, that can be easily changed by the DM on the fly, if anyone bothers asking (which virtually never happens) and has no practical effect on actual gameplay. The idea that the number of people/sq. mile is too low being an actual impediment to gameplay seems somewhat silly, to me. It may be a factual inconsistency, but as Keith points out: it wasn't his focus, and it doesn't really bother him. He's more concerned with the potential for adventure in the Mror lands then dwarven reproductive histories.

You've got every right to dislike Eberron, whether you spent money on it or not. You can label it as failed or wanting. Everyone clearly doesn't agree, and that's Ok, too.

 

[reanjr]

Too few people. Too few countries. Multiplying both by five would help a lot.

Discuss.

You're playing the wrong campaign setting. Eberron's strength isn't in its consistency or in being well though-out. As a setting it isn't designed to make sense (or at lease it doesn't make sense), it's designed to be a fun place to adventure with lots of exciting larger-than-life ideas and cultures.

As has been stated, the population's waaaaay too low, the countries way too large, the geography of the map makes absolutely no sense, the cultures are archetypes not real cultures with history, the list goes on. But none of these really makes too much of a difference to the average gamer when they go to find the X of Y that will grant P, but first must get past the M minions of B by getting to L and seeking the help of N (wonder what percentage of published adventures that formula works for).

If you want consistency and plausible fantasy, there are alot more options out there. Eberron is for a totally different (not necessarily lesser) type of campaign.

 

[Buzzardo]

I am writing a villian for Khorvaire right now. I have picked out the perfect name for him.

Ralph Nader.

 

[DonAdam]

Yes, the population's too low.*

No, it doesn't make you a nitpicker to point that out. These statements have yet to run over anybody's dog.

Mostly, it doesn't matter much to the gaming experience.

But it does affect it in one way, and that's using the community building guidelines in the DMG. You can't just increase the population and stick to those numbers; it'll throw off one of the dynamics of the setting, namely the paucity of high level npc's. And while, especially for small communities, I can make that stuff up off of the top of my head, its better for versimilitude to have access to the relatively consistent numbers for the sake of versimilitude.

*Incidentally, while I think it is low, it probably need not be as high as medieval Europe. It's too low because there's simply not enough there for the division of labor that would be required to sustain the level of technology and consumption implied in the setting. It's not way too low because, as of yet in my reading, I have not found anything suggesting price controls, something that consistently caused problems for medieval Europe. I could be wrong about that last point, though, and I'll know when I finish reading the setting.

 

[Pseudonym]

I am writing a villian for Khorvaire right now. I have picked out the perfect name for him.

Ralph Nader.

I'll eagerly await the broadsheet: The Lightning Rail - Unsafe at any speed.

 

[ragboy]

Hellcow: There Aren't Enough Trees!

I just wanted to chime in and let Keith know that he also didn't include enough trees for even the sparse population of Khorvaire. If you consider that the average tree puts out about 100x10^1000 cubic centimeters of oxygen per minute, then it's obvious that no one in Sharn would be able to breathe for more than a few minutes, once you "turned the lights on" in this setting.

I'll start a new thread about the distinct lack of bushes on the campaign map. My rogue can't find a place to take a leak.