what makes Eberron different

[BryonD]

I don't mean to nitpick, since your ultimate conclusion--which I agree with--was that the setting is well done.

Certainly. And the Bee Gees do disco very well also.

But I have to say, I disagree strongly with this. The whole post-WWI feel, the sorts of adventures the history and current politics encourage, the general mood of the world... I think it very much encourages the adventure/pulp style of play, rather than merely dimming the light on other styles. The fact that you can make FR pulp doesn't mean Eberron isn't focused on pulp. I can run horror in Forgotten Realms, but I don't think anyone would argue that Ravenloft is more geared towards it. I feel the same applies here. Yes, you can run pulp in other worlds, and you can run non-pulp in Eberron, and you can do both very well. But Eberron does feel, to me, as though it's actively geared in that direction, without truly removing any of the other options.

OK. First, I don't think you can claim that Ravenloft had the same level of success as FR. Which is a large part of my point. Niche sub-genres will certainly have an appeal and some success on that basis. But the blank slates will have the largest base.

But we will just disagree. To me the houses, and dragonmarks and focus on group dynamics and many many other elements all point to an assumed plot and theme approach. As I already said, you CAN do most anything you want, I never claimed they were "removed". But the first half of your last sentence is correct, it is "actively geared in that direction." And if you want to go in a different direction, you will be working against those gears.

 

[Mouseferatu]

OK. First, I don't think you can claim that Ravenloft had the same level of success as FR. Which is a large part of my point. Niche sub-genres will certainly have an appeal and some success on that basis. But the blank slates will have the largest base.

Didn't mean to imply that RL was anywhere near as successful as FR. Just that it was more geared towards horror, as a part of another point I was making. Sorry if that was unclear.

But we will just disagree. To me the houses, and dragonmarks and focus on group dynamics and many many other elements all point to an assumed plot and theme approach. As I already said, you CAN do most anything you want, I never claimed they were "removed". But the first half of your last sentence is correct, it is "actively geared in that direction." And if you want to go in a different direction, you will be working against those gears.

Hmm... I think you think I was disagreeing with you on a different point than I was actually disagreeing with you.

(Follow that okay? I think I made myself dizzy.)

I won't argue that Eberron is actively geared toward pulp adventure in many respects, and that that niche will indeed turn some people off it, despite the fact that it can handle far more than that. The specific aspect I was disagreeing with was the first sentence in the portion of your post I quoted; that is, your contention that "But I do not see it as enhancing pulp play so much as making other types of play be against the grain."

(Well, obviously I'm not disagreeing that you see it that way. Just saying I see it differently.)

I think Eberron does a very good job keeping the spotlight on everything else at the standard level of lighting (if I may stretch the metaphor), while shining a particularly bright spotlight on the pulp option. It's the difference between punching one option without decreasing the others (as I feel it does), and decreasing all others to leave only one (as I believe you feel it does).

That, and that alone, was the basis of my disagreement. Hope I was clearer this time.

 

[teitan]

Did we need a new setting? No, do we really need ANY settings, even FR or Dark Sun or whatever your choice is... no we do not. But Eberron is EVERYTHING I wanted and more. I would almost say that Hellcow was looking over my shoulder when I developed the world I submitted to WOTC actually because they are so similar: recovering from a war, goblinoids are more accepted, massive destruction to a kingdom, less meddling from the gods, PCs as stars, and, after seeing the Kalashtar, I had a similar concept in mine as well. In mine a necromancer had struck an alliance with a group of rogue githyanki to help him forge an empire. When the yanks betrayed their queen they were cut off from the astral plane, their home dimension. Kind of like the Kalashtar right down to the psionic bent... very cool...

Oh and the Bee Gees are good at more than just disco man, they around before disco and they had hits after disco... Bee Gees rock man, they simply rock.

Jason

 

[fanboy2000]

I'm looking at getting Eberron, but I don't really get what makes it different, flipped thru it at my LGS. It looks not that different from other settings, yes I know it's high magic and there is warforged...but really what makes the setting different? (oh and yes I have been to the website)

A couple of things make Eberron different form other WotC settings (specifically FR and Greyhawk).

1. No Heinz 57 varieties of elves. (Or dwarves, or gnomes, or halflings, or . . .) I don’t have to deal with “Meadow Elves,” “Foothill Dwarves,” or “Crow’s Feet Halflings” It’s not that I don’t like sub-races, but I feel they are over done. (And if you like them, it’s not hard to add them.)

2. The whole world is mapped out. You’re given something to go on when it comes to the world they don’t go into great detail about. (They go into some, to be sure, but that just seems to give direction to whatever you may put there.) When I read the book, I feel that if I were to go off and come up with a back story to some remote part of the world, I’d be able to integrate it with whatever WotC might come-up with a few years from now.

3. It seems light on new rules. Dragonmarks, action points (not really new), living constructs. That’s about it. They have a lot of feats, but not a lot of new spells.

4. The PrCs have flavor. They have a purpose. I like that many of the PrCs (all but one) are 5 levels or lower. They are very specific and make use of the world in a way that the core classes don’t. And, there’s only 8. I like PrCs, but I’m a little tired of them.

5. Abstract alignment. Standard D&D generally works best with more a more objective and absolute definition of good and evil. Eberron isn’t geared that way.

6. It makes the best use of the 3.5 rules I’ve seen. They keep all the core classes, all the core races, keep the psion classes, and make good use of the feat and skill system. There is something intangible about the setting that just seems to fit right. I’m not sure what it is, but this seems like a setting where you would have people with lots of feats, who are constantly testing their skills. I can imagine a session where complex skill checks are the rule, not the exception. There’s just something about it.

You can do a lot with FR, no doubt about that. But FR is already the best at being FR, why redo it? I’d rather have a setting that does something differently. I don’t think it discourages other kinds of stories. There’s a whole continent riddled with dungeons and ruins, and the setting has a built in reason while there still there, the 102 year war. Many people I know wonder why there are any un-looted dungeons in either Greyhawk or FR. Eberron seems to have an answer.

 

[Fiendish Dire Weasel]

I pretty much agree with fanboy2000. To add to that, I think it's the first game that really took into account the world-wide socio-economic impact that all this magic in the world has. I also liked the stance (both mechanicly and role-playing-wise) they took towards religion.

On top of that it was just a well written and layed out book in my opinion. Considering a lot of Wizard's latest books, this was sadly suprising.

 

[fanboy2000]

I also liked the stance (both mechanicly and role-playing-wise) they took towards religion.

I agree. Both FR and Greyhawk have overlaping pantheons. The Demi-human gods are the same in both worlds, and Eberron is a nice breakaway from that. Its not the first TSR setting to do that. (Dragonlance and Darksun come to mind?) But in Dragonlance is a lot closer to Greyhawk than it is Eberron when it comes to religion.

As someone who's only gamed a few years, mostly in 3rd, I gotta say that it's exciting to be in on the ground floor of a new setting that you know is going to see the kind of suport TSR used to give every setting. TSR/WotC hasn't thrown it's weight behind a brand new D&D setting sense the sale in 1997. Wizards has mostly played it safe with D&D on the setting front. The bigest gambles were 3rd itself and the OGL.

What makes Eberron diffrent? I'm not going to see posts about how WotC has scrwed up yet another old setting the poster loves dearly. I'm not going to read that post, nod my head in agreement, and post that, despite the changes, I still enjoy it. With Eberron, I get in on the ground floor.

And maybe in 20 years, I'll post my own message how Dragon's Eberron article totaly ruins the setting and that their update to 6th edition is totally off base, and that I'll have to cancel my subscription after 22 years. ;-)

 

[BryonD]

Didn't mean to imply that RL was anywhere near as successful as FR. Just that it was more geared towards horror, as a part of another point I was making. Sorry if that was unclear.

I understood that. I was just pointing out that you example of being geared toward one aspect was not supportive of the idea that this leads to great success. Does not mean Eberron will not be, but I am not aware of any setting that pushed the flavor a certain way doing as well as FR (or Greyhawk, the other blank slate, for that matter).

Hmm... I think you think I was disagreeing with you on a different point than I was actually disagreeing with you.

(Follow that okay? I think I made myself dizzy.)

I won't argue that Eberron is actively geared toward pulp adventure in many respects, and that that niche will indeed turn some people off it, despite the fact that it can handle far more than that. The specific aspect I was disagreeing with was the first sentence in the portion of your post I quoted; that is, your contention that "But I do not see it as enhancing pulp play so much as making other types of play be against the grain."

(Well, obviously I'm not disagreeing that you see it that way. Just saying I see it differently.)

I think Eberron does a very good job keeping the spotlight on everything else at the standard level of lighting (if I may stretch the metaphor), while shining a particularly bright spotlight on the pulp option. It's the difference between punching one option without decreasing the others (as I feel it does), and decreasing all others to leave only one (as I believe you feel it does).

That, and that alone, was the basis of my disagreement. Hope I was clearer this time.

OK, I disagree.

I can sit and list examples, and you can shoot them down one at a time.
But that does not mean that the list does not add up to little hinderances to playing other types of games. I don't remotely claim that those little hinderances are a prevention. But given a choice between having those hinderances and not, I'll take not.
In Eberron, everything (used loosely) has its place in the world. And on a case by case basis you can ignore anything you need to in order to push a different plot element into Eberron. But on a case by case basis you can ignore whatever you need to place non-horror games in Ravenloft.

When Ravenloft came out it was very popular and received a lot of positive feedback. It was all of D&D AND it had horror built in. But for the majority of gamers, they eventually wanted to do something other than horror and they found that it was more rewarding to simply go to FR or a Homebrew than to do the non-horror stuff in the horror setting. (Yes, there are exceptions)

I see that same thing here. I'll use Eberron in a similar manner to how I would use Ravenloft, for one offs or mini-campaigns where the focus lines up with the grain of the setting.

Like I said before, it may be that this is what the market wants. And if so, then good for them. I'm very open with my opinions, but I'm not one to get bent out of shape if the market disagrees with me. But Ravenloft was a big deal when it came out. Dark Sun was a big deal when it came out. Birthright was a big deal when it came out (relative to the overall downward state of D&D at that time). We will have to wait and see if Eberron gets a book when 4E comes out, or if it gets an issue of Dragon.

 

[~Johnny~]

Sorry to open up this little debate again, but I can't resist! Gundark, to me, Eberron is about its wealth of details and twists rather than one major paradigm shift. Rather than try to explain those details, I'll incorporate them into the rest of this post. (BTW, given your forum name, I'll mention that one of the things I love about Eberron is that it seems to have very much the adventurous spirit of the Star Wars universe, but at the same time it's classic sword-and-sorcery D&D.)

So, I don't know if the anti-"Eberron is magic-tech" people were ill-informed about Eberron or about what magic-tech is. But, seeing the book for myself, it is beyond question that they were the ones who were ill-informed.

As one of the people who thought the pre-release cries of "magitech! magitech!" where overdone, I have a few explanations for this.

The first is that Eberron's approach to widespread low-level magic doesn't act like any "magitech" I've seen in other games or works of fiction. Most times I've seen magitech, it has taken the form of complex machines with lots of gears and moving parts powered by magic rather than steam or electricity. Simply put, Eberron does not feature any magically-enhanced complex mechanical devices. Inside warforged, you'll find sinuous, animated wood rather than gears. Airships don't have propellors or hot-air balloons; they're boats with rings of bound elemental power. The Lighting Rail is the closes to traditional magitech, but it's a bunch of floating compartments suspended over crystals, none of which required post-medieval technology to develop. I won't argue that Eberron has "magic-tech," but it's not a Final Fantasy or Arcanum clone. It's more like a less silly Ringworld (though again, not to that extent).

The second is the negative connotation aspect that Gargoyle explained.

The third is that people are used to campaign settings that are essentially one-horse ponies. When they saw the first images of Eberron, they were convinced that "magic as technology" was the core of the setting. It's not. It's one of several major themes, including cold war politics, ancient ruins, dragon prophecies, new frontiers, and the cycling planes. So you saw people like Keith, me, Stone Dog and others trying to get people to stop thinking of it as "the magitech world."

Eberron is a tiny bit easier to do one style of plot than FR, and FR is notably easier to do just about every OTHER kind.

I'm really unclear what you mean by this. When I look at Eberron, I see places for every kind of plot I've ever wanted to play. The book practically throws dungeon-crawling opportunities at you, with the ruins of Xen'drik, the Labyrinth of the Demon Wastes, the ruins of Last War fortresses everywhere, and the Mournland right in the middle of the continent. Your reasons for entering dungeons can range from fighting evil monsters to retrieving artifacts for world-spanning organizations. Political intrigue is similarly everywhere, with opportunities for participating in it described in every region summary. Kidnappings, natural disasters, planar incursions... all these plots are available and -- in my opinion -- more conducive to dramatic set-pieces and realistic motivations than in previous D&D settings. If you want an epic war, it's brewing on every set of borders. If you want to slay monsters, head to Droaam or Xen'drik. Piracy? Lhazaar welcomes you, as do the southern seas near Sharn. Horror? There are opportunities in the Mournland, in Karrnath, and in any manifest zone linked to Mabar, the plane of endless night. Prefer to frolic in the forest with fairies? Head to the Eldeen Reaches. I could go on.

What type of fantasy adventure do you think is missing or discouraged?

Your definition of pulp seems a bit limited, and I'm not sure what Eberron's emphasis on organizations has to do with it. "Pulp" is an approach, one that basically started as a synonym for "sensational, action-packed, and a little trashy." It's not a confining genre like Horror, Intrigue, Post-Apocalptic, Sci-fi, or Kung-Fu.

I think Eberron's as welcoming of different play styles as Forgotten Realms. So what is the difference? This is merely my opinion, but I'd say that just as FR was a little less vanilla than Greyhawk, Eberron's a bit less vanilla than FR. All three settings are great, and Eberron doesn't have the history/nostalgia factor of the other two, but I like my gameplay as flavorful as possible.

 

[Mouseferatu]

"Pulp" is an approach, one that basically started as a synonym for "sensational, action-packed, and a little trashy." It's not a confining genre like Horror, Intrigue, Post-Apocalptic, Sci-fi, or Kung-Fu.

You know, I was coming back to clarify just that. (Not as relates to my disagreement with ByronD--I think he and I have more or less agreed to disagree at this point--just as a general refinement of my opinion on Eberon as a whole.) I'm glad someone else did it for me.

A lot of us--and I include myself in the guilty party--have been throwing around "pulp" while talking about Eberron, without necessarily specifying what we meant. I usually use "pulp" to mean "pulp action adventure." But pulp also includes horror, mystery, sci-fi, noir... Heck, Conan is pulp; it just happens to be pulp fantasy. Pulp, as Johnny so well put it, is an approach, rather than a genre. Rather than looking at Eberron as a setting that encourages any specific type of game, it might be better to look at it as a lens through which you can look at any sort of game, and it'll look a bit different than it does in other settings.

 

[Plane Sailing]

For me, the thing that really makes it different is integration.

Unlike all the other campaign settings I've seen there seems to be a pretty logical place for everything, and the ramifications of magic availability seem to have been considered far more than is usually the case. Greyhawk and FR always seemed to be a bit of a hodgepodge to me, and this certainly doesn't.

This is my opinion.