Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hellcow" data-source="post: 4063124" data-attributes="member: 15800">Eh, what the heck. If Andy Collins can vote for UA and Mike McArtor and James Jacobs can vote for Pathfinder, I suppose I can go ahead and vote for Eberron. So with that said, looking to my reasons...As others have said, these are the things I like about Eberron (in fact, I just recently posted a whole bit about the NG warmonger on the WotC boards). Now, this doesn't mean that I expect EVERYONE to like them... but as Edymnion says, the point is that if you don't like them, the Realms offers you pretty much exactly what you're looking for. The Realms IS a setting where you can have lunch with a god, where there's a lot of epic level people for you to pal around with, and most of the key facts are laid out - to the point where a player may feel justified in telling the DM he's made a mistake. I like active gods. I grew up on Greek and Norse mythology. But FR has that. So with Eberron, I wanted religion to fill the role it does in our modern world - where faith is paramount and it's up to us flawed mortals to interpret the gods' wishes, making a level of schism, heresy, corruption, or simply misguided attempts to do good that you wouldn't expect to see in a world where the god could just pop down and say "UR doin it wrong". A cleric - or, for that matter, an angel - KNOWS his god exists, and it's this conviction that grants him access to divine power. But he could never do something so trivial as have lunch with his god, or actually fight his god, any more than a Christian or a Muslim could today. Of course, he might tell you that he DID have lunch with his god - because his god is always with him. His god is the hand that rolls the dice, bringing him fortune or testing his faith. In any case, the point to me is that it allows for a type of story you simply couldn't tell in a world of active gods. Of course, it means that you CAN'T tell the Time of Troubles or the Trojan War - but if you want that, there's many setting that DO have active gods that you can turn to. Eberron isn't supposed to be the One True Setting; it's not as if WotC stopped supporting FR when they put out Eberron. So it's there to offer something DIFFERENT - if it did things exactly the same as FR, why even have both of them? Regarding the level of detail that's left to the DM, again, that's something I can understand. It's hardly surprising that some people should feel that they've paid for a setting precisely because they don't WANT to have to develop the details of the world, and because they want to know everything about it. Meanwhile, growing up, I always made homebrews instead of using settings. So for me, Eberron provides a solid foundation while still leaving some opportunity for the DM to exercise personal creativity. Do the gods exist, or does divine power flow from Siberys? What actually caused the Mourning, and will it happen again? Are there chaos gnomes somewhere in the world? (Remember, it's not that everything in core D&D IS in Eberron - it's that there's an easy place to add it if you WANT it to be in Eberron.) I love the fact that if I go to a convention and play in a stranger's Eberron campaign, I DON'T know what he's going to do with the Lord of Blades - even though I created the setting! Again, I understand their dislike of these elements; it's all a question of what style of game you prefer. I don't DISLIKE FR because it has active gods, a highly detailed canon, and lots of epic NPCs; I just expect a different experience when I play it, and if I want a Trojan War game, I WILL play it. We aren't bound to one setting; I play Champions when I want superheroes, Over the Edge for modern suspense, and I'll play FR or Eberron based on the style of fantasy I want. So these certainly aren't flaws I'll try to correct; they are a part of the flavor of the setting, and admittedly, a reason it's not going to be to everyone's tastes. So, I guess I'll vote now. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification