Which Campaign Setting has the best fluff? Why?

[TheAuldGrump]

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.



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.

Wildly off topic - Great picture! Is that from a site on the subject of early tanks?

The Auld Grump, steampunk addict... and includes the Great War in that theme...

 

[Morpheus]

Well, putting aside all of this believablity issue of a fantasy role-playing game, there are three that have a lot of fluff that I feel deserve mentioning.

Eberron-Like it or not, the information base is getting quite extensive with all of the online support WotC is giving it. I ran a short, 5-adventure game in Eberron and we will be going back to it soon.

Conan-The Road of Kings and the other books that are coming out are fully fleshing this out. If the stories didn't do enough of that already...

Iron Kingdoms-Have you seen the Iron Kingdoms World Guide? All fluff-no crunch for 400+ pages!?! I believe this sets the standard for amount of fluff in one book...

We are currently gaming in Dawnforge and this setting is almost the antithesis of fluff. One core book. One player's supplement. One adventure. Still, it has a lot of appeal and we are making a go of it...

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Iron Kingdoms-Have you seen the Iron Kingdoms World Guide? All fluff-no crunch for 400+ pages!?! I believe this sets the standard for amount of fluff in one book...

I have ordered it, and am waiting patiently for it.

Well, sort of patiently.

A little patiently anyway...

Dang it! I want it NOW!!!!

The Auld Grump

 

[Gez]

Wildly off topic - Great picture! Is that from a site on the subject of early tanks?

The Auld Grump, steampunk addict... and includes the Great War in that theme...

More on the 14-18 war than on tanks.

If you look at their document section, you'll see old pics of tanks, but also of planes , troopers, and others. (Linguistic help: char, blindé, tank=tank; avion=plane, escadrille=squad, etc. Most words are close enough from the English (etc. infanterie=infantry) that the captions can be understood without needing to actually read French. Now, if you want to read the site's fluff rather than just look at the crunch, that'll be harder.)

 

[TheAuldGrump]

More on the 14-18 war than on tanks.

If you look at their document section, you'll see old pics of tanks, but also of planes , troopers, and others. (Linguistic help: char, blindé, tank=tank; avion=plane, escadrille=squad, etc. Most words are close enough from the English (etc. infanterie=infantry) that the captions can be understood without needing to actually read French. Now, if you want to read the site's fluff rather than just look at the crunch, that'll be harder.)

Oooohhh! Tanks!, errr, I mean Thanks!

If I need to I'll Babelfish... which will either answer any questions I have or drive me insane. I made the mistake once of reading a Babelfish translation aloud and accidently summoned Cthulhu... He's not so bad once you get to now him, just don't call him 'Chuck'... He hates that.

The Auld Grump

 

[tetsujin28]

The IK World Guide does seem to rock pretty hard. I plan on picking it up, pretty soon.

 

[Nisarg]

It's also obvious that, as Turjan said, you'll learn about Arizona's past in Arizonian schools, China's past in Chinese schools, and Europe's past in European schools. I can tell you that in my school, I learned nothing about China's past, and only rough and vague things about the Americas' past (mostly, discovery, invasion, conquest, plunder, emancipation, wars, etc. -- the interactions with "our own" past).

Yes, well that might apply if you don't actually do a degree in European history, like I did.

Or if you didn't live for a year in France, and another year in England, like I did. Trust me, I've seen my share of castles.

That's why I said you, Nisarg, would have an unreliable vision of what medieval Europe was. And you proved you had, because you said the people of Khorvaire looked, lived, and acted medieval. This irrefutably proves you are wrong.

Take a look at the art in the ECS. That's not Renaissance, baby. And its definitely not "age of enlightenment", and definitely definitely not "victorian".

On page 7, the author describes Eberron as "combines TRADITIONAL MEDIEVAL FANTASY with pulp action and dark adventure". In other words, he sets up the groundwork for the multiple personality disorder right there. They repeat the "medieval" description on the VERY NEXT PAGE, for those of us who didn't see it the first time, I suppose.

On p. 131, the author basically describes Eberron as having a serf-based rural economy, and a feudal system of government ("in some lands, farmers are serfs indentured to lords who control their lands... Galifar was a feudal monarchy, as are most kingdoms that have formed after the great war").
On the very next page, however, the author claims that there is a universal right to education in all of the five nations.

These factors in combination are pretty well impossible for anything other than a society on the verge of a massive revolution, and yet the author makes it sound like neither the feudalism nor the universal education are new.

The evidence is right there in the book, unless you elect to ignore the inconsistencies.

Nisarg

 

[hong]

The evidence is right there in the book, unless you elect to ignore the inconsistencies.

You say that like it's a negative thing.

 

[Henry]

"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in." -- Michael Corleone

Take a look at the art in the ECS. That's not Renaissance, baby. And its definitely not "age of enlightenment", and definitely definitely not "victorian".

It's not medieval, either. It's an amalgam of styles, not pervasively any - the same way that D&D is an amalgam of such.

On page 7, the author describes Eberron as "combines TRADITIONAL MEDIEVAL FANTASY with pulp action and dark adventure". In other words, he sets up the groundwork for the multiple personality disorder right there.

If you call that an MPD, then 99% of all campaign settings have it. Maybe that's why you don't seem to like FR, or Eberron, or Blackmoor, etc. All campaign settings have a blend of styles to them, even Greyhawk, despite what I've seen some people claim, though Greyhawk may have it less. Tolkien was a blend of Kalevala, Norse epic, and Ivanhoe; Greyhawk is a mix of Vance's magic & superscience and Leiber's Medievalism & Howard's pre-Roman barbarism & Lovecraft's alien horror. Forgotten Realms is a mix of Tolkien PLUS every pre-1900 adventure backdrop ever written.

On p. 131, the author basically describes Eberron as having a serf-based rural economy, and a feudal system of government ("in some lands, farmers are serfs indentured to lords who control their lands... Galifar was a feudal monarchy, as are most kingdoms that have formed after the great war").
On the very next page, however, the author claims that there is a universal right to education in all of the five nations.

These factors in combination are pretty well impossible for anything other than a society on the verge of a massive revolution, and yet the author makes it sound like neither the feudalism nor the universal education are new.

I think I'm seeing now. Are you claiming that feudalism & education are exclusive - that one will stamp out the other? In our real world, that may be so, but it's not true for a D&D world! D&D worlds have something that others do not - the rulers actually ARE better than the subjects! In our real world, rulers are no better than the ruled - after thousands of years of recorded history this is something that we take as fact, as one gunshot or sword thrust makes us no better - we all die same as any other person. But in D&D, even the most "mediocre" 3rd or 5th level ruler is still physically stronger, better, and damned LUCKIER than any other commoner. Those who toil really DO recognize that there are some fit to rule better than any other, because unlike reality, it's TRUE! And unlike reality these tougher, luckier, and better jokers really DO usually care about their subjects, protect them and educate them, because smarter subjects make more creative workers. The very rules of reality mean that an educated and feudalistic populace could exist in the same body of people.

You also have something we didn't have in reality - the nature of non-human threats means that these educated peasants WILL be working closely with both the lords and those who are a cut above them, because these people keep their right to exist secure against the goblins, the ogrish, and the aberrations that roam the land. In the result of it, you still have an unwashed masses, namely the once-proud goblins themselves, who are struggling against the prejudice of the human and demi-human populace (I need a better word than "demi-human" these days) and who are poised to make life miserable or to rise again themselves. External NON-human threats means a feudal and educated populace is both viable and logical for a D&D world.

 

[Nisarg]

First, Yes, as I've said before I know that FR and other settings have this same patchwork feel; however, Eberron was touted (if no where else than on these fora) as being something better, more cohesive. And it isn't.
The fact that it was advertised that way, and the fact that some people still try to insist that it is something other than the FR on crack, is what irks me.
Again, like I said already on this thread, when it comes to this sort of thing NO effort is preferrable to a HALF-ASSED job.

"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in." -- Michael Corleone
I think I'm seeing now. Are you claiming that feudalism & education are exclusive - that one will stamp out the other? In our real world, that may be so, but it's not true for a D&D world! D&D worlds have something that others do not - the rulers actually ARE better than the subjects! In our real world, rulers are no better than the ruled - after thousands of years of recorded history this is something that we take as fact, as one gunshot or sword thrust makes us no better - we all die same as any other person. But in D&D, even the most "mediocre" 3rd or 5th level ruler is still physically stronger, better, and damned LUCKIER than any other commoner. Those who toil really DO recognize that there are some fit to rule better than any other, because unlike reality, it's TRUE! And unlike reality these tougher, luckier, and better jokers really DO usually care about their subjects, protect them and educate them, because smarter subjects make more creative workers. The very rules of reality mean that an educated and feudalistic populace could exist in the same body of people.

You also have something we didn't have in reality - the nature of non-human threats means that these educated peasants WILL be working closely with both the lords and those who are a cut above them, because these people keep their right to exist secure against the goblins, the ogrish, and the aberrations that roam the land. In the result of it, you still have an unwashed masses, namely the once-proud goblins themselves, who are struggling against the prejudice of the human and demi-human populace (I need a better word than "demi-human" these days) and who are poised to make life miserable or to rise again themselves. External NON-human threats means a feudal and educated populace is both viable and logical for a D&D world.

Yes, I suppose you can play D&D as a darwinian fantasy where the PCs and high-level NPCs really are Nazi ubermenschen, inherently superior to their social lessers. But that would only really make sense if all the PCs are from the upper classes.
As soon as the serfs start producing some kids who hit 4th or 5th level themselves, its right back to "why the am I supposed to die for this 's treasury?"

You're also apparently saying that in D&D worlds feudal lords have a vested interest in having highly educated serfs, because those serfs will be participating in combat with the goblins.. is that correct? because I don't get that point at all. In the real world peasents were regularly forced to serve in their feudal lord's armies, and it was just one more reason why you would NOT want peasants to be educated at all.
As soon as a serf is even slightly educated, they'll become more aware of how mind-numbingly crushing their existence is, and want to better it. The serfs wanting to better their existence means they won't want to be your serfs anymore.

Nisarg