Why are you looking forward (or not looking forward) to Eberron?

[Ashrem Bayle]

On a side note, is magic-as-technology really that revolutionary of an idea?

Of course not. 100% originality is near impossible at this point. The beauty of Eberron is how well it mixes everything and it's freshness is in the mixing.

hmm... typing that makes me hungry.

 

[2d6]

Of course not. 100% originality is near impossible at this point. The beauty of Eberron is how well it mixes everything and it's freshness is in the mixing.

hmm... typing that makes me hungry.

nice analogy

So what are the other ingredients?

 

[Henry]

nice analogy

So what are the other ingredients?

Take fresh vine-ripened cosmology, add a dash of new races/creatures/prestige classes and crunchy-stuff, sprinkle new roles for old races (hobgoblins and giants and druids for instance), don't forget to let simmer with logical extensions to typical D&D magics, and bake for 350 degrees in the fertile and infernal minds of Keith Baker, James Wyatt, and various artists.

Other ingredients have yet to be identified, however.

 

[Frostmarrow]

The fact is, the Forgotten Realsm and Greyhawk settings really don't work well within the framework of the Core Rules. Eberron was designed with the rules in mind from the ground up.

The designers of the core rules kind of missed their target, then?

 

[Painfully]

It doesn't help that what works in Eberron might not work for most D&D games. Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms have enough in common with standard D&D that it doesn't need much adjustment, if any, to use with my D&D game. Eberron doesn't appear to be nearly so suitable.

It won't help if Dragon Magazine begins to try to build it's fanbase using Eberron. If Eberron articles become too prevalent in the magazine, then I will have lost another few pages each month to something I cannot use in my D&D game.

*edit*
Then again, that's my impression thus far. However wrong that impression may be, it is mine.

Somebody said in an earlier post that WotC has done a bad job of promoting Eberron until recently. So, what exactly am I supposed to read that gives a more honest overview of Eberron?

 

[rounser]

The designers of the core rules kind of missed their target, then?

Part of the philosophy behind this setting appears to be that by applying logic to fantasy idiosyncracies and nonsenses by trying to extend them to their logical conclusions, they'd make them make sense and they'd aid suspension of disbelief. I think that in doing so, they've lost sight of the purpose of why the nonsenses and idiosyncracies were included in the first place.

Or in short, the simulation is now defining what is simulated. Sword & sorcery's suspension of disbelief shortcomings are being exploded and put on a pedestal rather than discreetly brushed under the carpet, handwaved, or ignored, as per normal.

Teh mind boggles.

 

[Numion]

Part of the philosophy behind this setting appears to be that by applying logic to fantasy idiosyncracies and nonsenses by trying to extend them to their logical conclusions, they'd make them make sense and they'd aid suspension of disbelief. I think that in doing so, they've lost sight of the purpose of why the nonsenses and idiosyncracies were included in the first place.

Or in short, the simulation is now defining what is simulated. Sword & sorcery's suspension of disbelief shortcomings are being exploded and put on a pedestal rather than discreetly brushed under the carpet, handwaved, or ignored, as per normal.

Teh mind boggles.

D&D 1 - Sword & Sorcery 0



Kidding aside, why do you think D&D's differences compared to classical fantasy have become more pronounced as new editions have rolled out? A bitter answer would be that 'because the WotC bastards did so!', but the real answer is closer to 'because it sells'. People want to play D&D, not simulate the middle-age with fantastic elements.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to want to market a campaign setting based on that. So it's not actually simulator defining whats simulated, but giving in to what the consumers want.

Personally I find the fantastic feel to Eberron quite fresh, but I'm not deciding either way just yet. To all the smarty-pants who said that "Sky-pirates? I could've thought of that!" "Dinosaurs - nothing new either!" I'll say this: then why didn't you? You're 100K$ poorer for that

 

[rounser]

Kidding aside, why do you think D&D's differences compared to classical fantasy have become more pronounced as new editions have rolled out?

I don't see it that way...the simulation has been fairly loose from the start, with D&Disms that serve the purposes of the game itself (e.g. clerics) balanced against D&Disms that serve to reinforce the pulp swords & sorcery fantasy simulation which D&D tries to be (e.g. wizards not going industrial and churning out magic items and spells all over the show even though the rules imply that there's no good reason why they shouldn't - a conceit which upholds a pulp S&S fantasy norm in an attempt to simulate it). The designing of settings that explore the implications of D&Disms has probably always been about as well, but that doesn't make it right (and for the most part they weren't published).

A bitter answer would be that 'because the WotC bastards did so!', but the real answer is closer to 'because it sells'. People want to play D&D, not simulate the middle-age with fantastic elements.

You're building on assumptions I disagree with (see above), so no comment on your drawing conclusions from a scenario I don't think is correct in the first place.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to want to market a campaign setting based on that. So it's not actually simulator defining whats simulated, but giving in to what the consumers want.

I'm still not on board with the assumptions you're buiding on. But if I were to buy into them, I also don't see how it follows that it's not the simulator defining what's simulated that we're seeing.

Personally I find the fantastic feel to Eberron quite fresh, but I'm not deciding either way just yet. To all the smarty-pants who said that "Sky-pirates? I could've thought of that!" "Dinosaurs - nothing new either!" I'll say this: then why didn't you? You're 100K$ poorer for that

At last, something I can agree with you with. They say that the true nature of genius is coming up with things that in retrospect seem obvious.

D&D 1 - Sword & Sorcery 0

This is like saying:
Tail Wagging the Dog 1 - Dog Wagging the Tail 0

 

[Belen]

I've actually spoken with Hellcow (a.k.a Keith) on the WOTC boards regarding Eberron. While I like his passion, and I am quite happy that he has 'made' it in the biz, he has failed to incite excitement in me regarding Eberron.

The world is TOO permissive. I have no desire to play in a game where everything goes. There seem to be a lack of checks and balances. The world feels written more for players than GMs, even though it will be GMs who have to run the world for the players.

There may be a rich history and story to the place.

I just do not want to game in a world that is built for the WOTC shiny of the month.

Put it this way. Everything I have heard leads me to believe that Eberron will be a mechanical world. It is crunchland to the extreme. Eberron feels like a place where crunch is the cake, lightly frosted with story.

Now, this is my opinion, AFTER talking with Keith and reading his dicussions regarding Eberron on the WOTC boards.

And this may be fine for you all, but it is not my cup of tea. I just do not like Eberron and I doubt I ever will.

If you guys like it, then fine. I am happy that you'll have a new game world to enjoy.

Just do not fall into the trap that I am an uninformed nut and if I was informed, then I would be an Eberron fanboy. The world is just not for me.

 

[WizarDru]

I don't see it that way...the simulation has been fairly loose from the start, with D&Disms that serve the purposes of the game itself (e.g. clerics) balanced against D&Disms that serve to reinforce the pulp swords & sorcery fantasy simulation which D&D tries to be (e.g. wizards not going industrial and churning out magic items and spells all over the show even though the rules imply that there's no good reason why they shouldn't - a conceit which upholds a pulp S&S fantasy norm in an attempt to simulate it).

You lost me there. How do the rules "imply that there's no good reason why they shouldn't" do anything other than churn out magic items? With the requirements of feats, gold and experience, I would say that the exact opposite is true.

Eberron would be interesting in that it will be the first official campaign world conceieved by WotC since the advent of 3e. Many elements in Greyhawk, Dark Sun and the Realms all don't quite jibe, because the meta-elements behind the game have changed the rules. Quick: how many sorcerors are members of the Sorceror's Enclave of Rel Deven? If you said "None", you get a kewpie doll.

I'm mostly curious to see how they handle the backstory, and the actual setting itself, as opposed to the actual mechanics. A tightly integrated setting has much more value to me, personally. And while Eberron is not the setting I'm anticipating the most this year, I'm still looking forward to it.