Which Campaign Setting has the best fluff? Why?

[Pielorinho]

You're from Latin America, aren't you? It could explain your rather unreliable mental picture of what medieval Europe was, and how people were living, looking, and acting at this time.

I'm taking this to mean that, as someone who doesn't reside in Europe, Nisarg is not as intimately familiar with medieval Europe as Gez is (given that Gez lives in Europe). As such, it's not a racist slur.

Your points are all simply ridiculous. But still, you keep on hammering they're irrefutable and irrefuted. Everytimes someone shows you you're wrong, you play deaf. Deaf, and dumb. Definitely dumb.

This, however, is a personal insult. You know better than that, Gez.

I'll review the rest of the thread later; right now I just can't bring myself to have so much fun. Play nice, folks, and if someone's not playing nice, find someone else to play with.

Daniel

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I think they would. Germany and Austria had a good start, but in the end, things were looking grim for them. Their progress in the west were stalled by the Trench War, and it was France, not Germany, that developped the first tanks.

They were so effective that Germany made sure, in the 39-45 war, to have this time the upper technological hand.

Actually, the British developed the first tanks, but it amounts to the same thing.

I disagree that the Central Powers would have lost WW1 without the massive resources the US fielded against them. The Germans quickly developed tanks of their own, and had a significant advantage in strategic air power, so they were hardly a technological backwater. The amount of troops and energy they had to throw against Russia would have been transferred to the Western Front as soon as Russia folded and, IMO, would have been sufficient for them to punch through or at least hold steady.

More likely than not, WW1 would have dragged on several years longer than it did without US intervention, and I doubt either side would have scored a knockout victory. A more probable outcome would be the governments of both sides surviving, with Germany holding more territory than before and Austria somewhat less.

To the contrary, one of the big difference between the real world and Eberron is that Eberron did not experience an industrial revolution, magical or not.

Magic has always existed in Eberron. There have been no sudden magical breakthrough comparable to the invention of steam engines. The only magical revolution Khorvaire underwent was the apparition of dragonmarks, and the funky stuff they allowed. It was not a revolution, but a slow evolution, one that shaped the Dragonmarked houses as the powerful financial and economical forces they are. It was not a sudden invention of telephone and electric light -- not a sudden change. Not a revolution.

Interesting point, and perhaps a valid one. My understanding of Eberron was that the Last War triggered massive amounts of magical development to push the setting from Low (or Rare) Magic to D&D's standard high magic.

You're* from Latin America, aren't you? It could explain your rather unreliable mental picture of what medieval Europe was, and how people were living, looking, and acting at this time.

* Nisarg



Because people in Europe today behave in any way like they did in the middle ages?

How does any experience with modern, almost anti-medieval, Europe give one insight into medieval Europe? This sounds like a total straw-man at best. :\

Whatever Nisarg's views on medieval Europe, Eberron or anything else, I somehow doubt they're shaped much by geography. For that matter, I suspect it's his view of Eberron, not Europe, that is wildly off-base.

 

[Arnwyn]

So which setting (FR, Eberron, Dragonlance, third party, etc.) has the best flavor (or fluff)? I'm talking tone, style, geography, cultures, specific creatures and so on.

For me, it's the Forgotten Realms.

Why does your favorite setting appeal to you above all others?

While others dislike this aspect, I actually prefer the multitude of cultures and the "cobbled together" (others' words, not mine) feel of FR.

Variety is what makes my players and I tick.

 

[JoeyD473]

I have always been fond of Ravenloft. I have always felt that the designers had put a great deal of thought into everything they do with the Domains of Terror (at least until White Wolf tookit over). Evrything from how spell effects drastically change to the history of each individule Domains to the story behind characters sucha s Strahd (my 2nd Edition Characters Mortal (Immortal/Undead Whatever) enemy and Azalin and storylines such as the Grand Conjuction

 

[Nightfall]

Arn,

I have no problems with a variety in cultures. My problem stems more from the fact that it feels like everything got put into a meat grinder and out popped FR. But hey if you like it that way, more power to you. 2nd edition FR just did me in.

Chorn,

No offense man but you seriously need to see the Gazs. They did some AWESOME work on that and I feel Arthaus did an excellent job even with a few mistakes. Legacy of the Blood, the most recent RL release I felt did a great job consolodating old 2nd edition material on the various nobles and powers in the Core and put into a nice whole sale view for both players AND DMs' to enjoy. I say give 3rd edition RL a chance!

 

[Turjan]

Because people in Europe today behave in any way like they did in the middle ages?

How does any experience with modern, almost anti-medieval, Europe give one insight into medieval Europe? This sounds like a total straw-man at best. :\

I can only guess, but I suppose Gez is referring to what you are told in the educational system. I can only compare the schools in Arizona and those in my European hometown, and whereas at home everybody had to learn quite a lot about the medieval society and history, there is taught absolutely nothing over here in Arizona. This may also explain one of my pet peeves: fantasy maps. I suppose it makes a difference if you have your medieval city centre in front of your eyes; otherwise there is absolutely no explanation how someone could come up with a map like that for, e.g., Freeport.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I can only guess, but I suppose Gez is referring to what you are told in the educational system. I can only compare the schools in Arizona and those in my European hometown, and whereas at home everybody had to learn quite a lot about the medieval society and history, there is taught absolutely nothing over here in Arizona. This may also explain one of my pet peeves: fantasy maps. I suppose it makes a difference if you have your medieval city centre in front of your eyes; otherwise there is absolutely no explanation how someone could come up with a map like that for, e.g., Freeport.

Interesting point.

I'm so used to associating actual knowledge with private interest that the idea of an educational establishment having anything to do with it never occured to me.

 

[Nisarg]

I can only guess, but I suppose Gez is referring to what you are told in the educational system. I can only compare the schools in Arizona and those in my European hometown, and whereas at home everybody had to learn quite a lot about the medieval society and history, there is taught absolutely nothing over here in Arizona. This may also explain one of my pet peeves: fantasy maps. I suppose it makes a difference if you have your medieval city centre in front of your eyes; otherwise there is absolutely no explanation how someone could come up with a map like that for, e.g., Freeport.

Yes, well, I have a history degree, specializing in early modern europe (by which I mean 16th-18th century). So I'm fairly educated on the topic of what is or is not medievalism.

And of course you can point out a lot of things in Eberron that aren't medievalism, but that's the point: its a patchwork quilt, of advances that are not predated by or followed up by nescessary advances.

Its like someone inventing the laptop without first inventing the microchip.

The biggest problem, also, is that the medievalism is the forced part, forced by whoever is in charge of Eberron and wanted it to be "Medieval fantasy" enough to be bog-standard for D&D. Keith (or who ever wrote that part) basically admits as much in the "Tone of Eberron" section at the start of the ECS. The art plays a big part in this too, it just doesn't fit what should be happening socially in that setting.

That's what's disappointing. Eberron could have been something special. Instead it is only (as someone else put it) "FR on crack".

Nisarg

 

[Turjan]

I'm so used to associating actual knowledge with private interest that the idea of an educational establishment having anything to do with it never occured to me.

Well, even educational establishment means in this case not more than that you have a chance to know something about it. In the end, students are the same everywhere . Nevertheless, I can still take my 'historical atlas' from school and look up a detailed map of, let's say, population and economy of central Europe in the year 1500, or a political map around the year 1000, or a map of medieval Bruges, if I want. It's nice that we didn't have to give this one back .

 

[Turjan]

Yes, well, I have a history degree, specializing in early modern europe (by which I mean 16th-18th century). So I'm fairly educated on the topic of what is or is not medievalism.

And of course you can point out a lot of things in Eberron that aren't medievalism, but that's the point: its a patchwork quilt, of advances that are not predated by or followed up by nescessary advances.

Aren't all so-called 'medieval' settings patchwork? Just take the Forgotten Realms. Is there anything medieval about them except the use of swords (and even this point is debatable)?. The society with its moral standards can be set somewhere in the 1970's or later (the last incarnation: much later ). The villages remind me of pre-WW II structures (maybe a bit earlier for the U.S.). Cities have often late 19th century maps (although TSR/WOTC is slightly better in this regard than what can be found in many d20 products). Actually, the FR have no medieval feeling to them, whatsoever. YMMV. Oh, yes, I forgot the nobility. That one fits better the period of your expertise than the Middle Ages.

The biggest problem, also, is that the medievalism is the forced part, forced by whoever is in charge of Eberron and wanted it to be "Medieval fantasy" enough to be bog-standard for D&D. Keith (or who ever wrote that part) basically admits as much in the "Tone of Eberron" section at the start of the ECS. The art plays a big part in this too, it just doesn't fit what should be happening socially in that setting.

I cannot really comment on this one. I don't know enough about Eberron . No interest .