D&D General Who else was resistant to Eberron for awhile before falling for it?

[earthsea_wizard]

When I first became aware of Eberron, I wasn't particularly interested because it felt too modern, with the lightning rail and whatnot. I wanted classic fantasy, and was busy devouring Forgotten Realms lore. Over time, my tastes broadened and when I rediscovered Eberron, I fell for it hard. I loved how it differed from the Realms and subverted the usual expectations.

Do you still use it as a setting?

 

[JConstantine]

To make it worse, things that were specifically Eberron, like artifactors are in every world.

I want to love Eberron for being diffrent and unique, but then the sameness stops me.

I kinda have the same gripe from the opposite direction. I adore Eberron, and I hate that things that originated there have been ported into other settings because it makes Eberron less distinct. Which rather goes to show that Keith Baker was ahead of the curve.

 

[JConstantine]

Do you still use it as a setting?

Eberron or Forgotten Realms? Either way, the answer is yes. Generally speaking, I use the Realms when I want to indulge in the clichés and tropes, and Eberron when I want to subvert them.

 

[DragonLancer]

I don't like magic as technology and Eberron turns that dial up to 11. That is what I don't like.

My own homebrew world has artifice and airships, and there are elements of the delayed Eberron book that will work for me. Eberron as a setting doesn't do it.

 

[earthsea_wizard]

I don't like magic as technology and Eberron turns that dial up to 11. That is what I don't like.

My own homebrew world has artifice and airships, and there are elements of the delayed Eberron book that will work for me. Eberron as a setting doesn't do it.

I thought I didn't like it, and I guess I am still neutral. What I do like is that it is done so well in the books and has created so many interesting hooks and so much flavor. Hard to read a paragraph of any one of these books (3.5 in my case) and not envision how easy it would be to run and keep fresh and exciting. And I suppose I like to challenge my preconceptions sometimes. However, I may totally find that I feel the opposite in actual play.

 

[TwoSix]

Nope. Loved the idea of Eberron when I saw some of the initial pitches, and fell in love with the setting book back in 2003. It's been my "go-to" generic setting since then.

It helps that I've always been someone who is into the magitech vibe; Final Fantasy played a much more instrumental role in the development of my preferred fantasy aesthetic than Tolkien.

 

[TwoSix]

I thought I didn't like it, and I guess I am still neutral. What I do like is that it is done so well in the books and has created so many interesting hooks and so much flavor. Hard to read a paragraph of any one of these books (3.5 in my case) and not envision how easy it would be to run and keep fresh and exciting. And I suppose I like to challenge my preconceptions sometimes. However, I may totally find that I feel the opposite in actual play.

If you haven't, you should really pick up "Exploring Eberron" on DMsGuild. It's for 5e, but mostly a lore book; IMO it's the single best book released for Eberron (and probably one of the best setting source guides ever.)

 

[earthsea_wizard]

If you haven't, you should really pick up "Exploring Eberron" on DMsGuild. It's for 5e, but mostly a lore book; IMO it's the single best book released for Eberron (and probably one of the best setting source guides ever.)

Thanks, I will look at it! I am afraid I won't like the art, I was already very luke-warm on half the art in the 3.5 books. Really love the sketched concept art linked in my OP, though! I just had a look at the new book coming out and can't say I enjoy the changing aesthetic. They seem to be doubling down on the 1920s thing when before that came through more in the lore than the aesthetic, and even then only in certain areas (Sharn, mainly).

Nope. Loved the idea of Eberron when I saw some of the initial pitches, and fell in love with the setting book back in 2003. It's been my "go-to" generic setting since then.

It helps that I've always been someone who is into the magitech vibe; Final Fantasy played a much more instrumental role in the development of my preferred fantasy aesthetic than Tolkien.

As mentioned in my OP, I also grew up playing the Final Fantasy games and just about every other JRPG that was released in the states, starting on SNES and then moving to Playstation in 1995. But I was simultaneously reading Tolkien and Dragonlance and playing Magic: the Gathering (which back then had a far more tarditional fantasy aesthetic). When D&D hit for me it connected to that half of the equation for me. And from there I really dove in to D&D history and art and so forth and it stuck. Even with the JRPG stuff, despite loving the later Final Fantasy games, Xenogears and similar, I was always pleased when a game was more fully medieval (FF1-5, Tactics and 9, Dragon Quest, Lunar, Breath of Fire and so forth). However, I am coming back around now and can see how the Chrono Trigger aesthetic, for example, is pretty great when applied to D&D (and Eberron, as they even have dinosaurs in CT!). It helps that I have always thought that the early FF and DQ games are the most old school expression of D&D outside of tabletop games. Interesting that the OSR never jumped on this with essays on their blogs. Perhaps relating D&D to a video game in any way is too unpure (much like Eberron) for that scene though

Of course, the earliest of those games were straight knockoffs. I have a Yoshitaka Amanao monster art book from the late 80s titled the monstrous manual that is all of his monster drawings for Final Fantasy I, all of which can also be found in the AD&D monster manual. The spells, items, armor etc in the early games are of course also pulled straight from AD&D, often without a name change, and the combat system is an extrapolation of how AD&D combat worked. Then of course there is the random encounters, experience and leveling system, hit points and so forth. It's all there from 1987 onward.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I am afraid I won't like the art

It doesn't have much art. What it does have is far more text than you will find in any art-stuffed WotC publication.

 

[earthsea_wizard]

It doesn't have much art. What it does have is far more text than you will find in any art-stuffed WotC publication.

Alright, I'm in.