Irda Ranger said:I don't think that's what he's asking, and it's certainly not what I was answering.
I see choice #4 as "I'm not a Warforged lover, but people who play Eberron can do as they wish." That's how I feel, and that's how I answered.
... Whether it's the Eberron CS or elsewhere matters not a whit. They can be in a MM for all I care.
GreatLemur said:But, really, they're pretty solidly tied to Eberron the way we understand them now, and they're definitely an important part of the setting's unique feel. So I also ain't gonna clamor for their inclusion in vanilla D&D.
I think this is a good point. The name itself carries baggage regarding both the origin of the race and the setting history. That kind of flavor thing is easy to work around, but it will still there sticking out. Rename it to something more generic and then just have then be called "warforged" in Eberron and you solve that issue.Primitive Screwhead said:Just from a poll-question generation viewpoint, I think the use of the term 'Warforged' unintentionally slants the question..
"Droid". Done.BryonD said:I think this is a good point. The name itself carries baggage regarding both the origin of the race and the setting history. That kind of flavor thing is easy to work around, but it will still there sticking out. Rename it to something more generic
lolNifft said:"Droid". Done.
Cheers, -- N
Pygon said:I guess it's up to WotC what they think is core.
They probably want to sell the 4e PHB to Eberron players.
For my non-Eberron campaigns, it would take some hefty convincing to allow a PC to choose a warforged character.
I just hope that "core" adventure material for 4e doesn't regularly include warforged opponents.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.