Will 4E Eberron be as bad as FR?

[Imaro]

I'd like to point out that 3 books is not really much support for a setting. That's just one more than the Wheel of Time had, and who here considers that setting supported?

Yeah, I've been thinking about this too. You see I think with the limited campaign setting book run, I feel like WotC tried to adapt to a more White Wolf (Changeling the Lost, Promethean, Hunter the Vigil and Geist the Sin Eaters) type of model. But I honestly feel, now that I've gotten a chance to actually see their model that they have messed up in a few ways.

1. Not enough books. Seriously even WW realized with this model the point is to have enough books to have a complete setting yet not force people to jump on a continuous treadmill of supplements. It's suppose to cause the books to become more focused, better written and of better value because of the limited space. WotC with only two real books worth of setting information, IMHO, fails at delivering a satisfying amount of information for a fully fleshed out setting (I mean even Promethean had a total of five books). You see in the WW model those who just want the skeleton buy the corebook and drape their own on it... but those who want depth can purchase the rest of the limited line.

2. Promoting DDI. This I think is another mistake. WotC wants you to buy into DDI to get the rest of the information for your setting, and I think many gamers (will eventually) take issue with this. First the biggest advantage of WW's limited games is that you are off the supplement treadmill at a certain point... yet with the DDI model, you're not really ever getting off of it (until 4e ends), unless you want to possibly miss information on your setting. In other words the treadmill just becomes digital and subscription based instead of limited. This feeds into many gamers desire to collect. Honestly it feels good to know you have a complete game, and this again is a big draw to the WW limited games... I can actually have a complete RPG without having thousands upon thousands of books, or paying continuously.

3. Finally, IMO, the third disadvatage to this model is that a subscription to DDI is not going to give you information solely focused on your campaign... you will be paying for information that may or may not be focused on the Realms setting. Now I know people will say that you can convert it or find other ways to use it... well you can do this with the nWoD as well, but it feels good to know that if I have no interest in Vampires, or Werewolves, I can buy just my Changeling focused supplements ... DDI in no way allows this option.

 

[Nymrohd]

I think another issue is that they don't have enough to fill their release schedule. They seem to be going through all the basic options for books fast and there is only so much you can publish before you have to come up with completely new concepts every month. The setting books covered a lot of publishing space.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

*Mumbles about wanting more Promethean books. Since well its Promethean!* (I have said this before but well it is my favourite RPG so much love for Promethean from me).

As for the settings for 4e. I am fairly alright with 3 books. Though this may be because I am mainly a homebrewer so I just drag and drop what I want. However, one should remember that WoTC said if there was enough interest they would consider doing more books for a setting. So there is always the possibility of new books.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

As for the settings for 4e. I am fairly alright with 3 books. Though this may be because I am mainly a homebrewer so I just drag and drop what I want. However, one should remember that WoTC said if there was enough interest they would consider doing more books for a setting. So there is always the possibility of new books.

I'm alright with it to, but mostly because my games aren't about the setting, they are about the adventure. The setting is simply a backdrop for the adventure. It might determine a couple of small details, but a D&D adventure should be portable to nearly any setting with little change.

For instance, the last Eberron adventure I ran was using a published Eberron adventure. Other than some place names, some people names, and some group names, the adventure could have been run in Greyhawk or FR with no problems.

To me, this is a great strength. Only a couple of the people I play with can be bothered to involve themselves in a campaign setting beyond what I explain to them WHILE playing the game. They won't read through a campaign setting or novels. When I run an Eberron game and I say, "A bunch of Emerald Claw soldiers attack", they ask, "Who are the Emerald Claw?" I like being able to say, "They are an evil organization that has been disowned by the country they used to protect." And move onward with the game. Heck, I was trying to remember a better description of them and I realized that I can't even remember what the Emerald Claw stands for right now. Because it wasn't important to any of the games I ran.

Adventures in FR were getting so bogged down in the details of the setting that they were no longer understandable to people who didn't know the setting. It was all about: These are followers of Bane, who died during the Time of Troubles when Cyric took over. The followers of Bane are trying to bring him back, but they are at odds with the followers of Cyric who wants to keep his power. A number of Banites have infiltrated the clergy of Cyric, however. The followers of Mystra often oppose both of them, due to the grudge between Cyric and Mystra also dating back to the Time of Troubles. Now that you know that you might be able to understand why the plot of the adventure involved followers of Cyric that appeared to be attempting to bring back Bane, why that follower of Mystra showed up at the last minute to help you, and why there appeared to be a civil war between followers of Cyric.

And it made it very difficult to explain to those who didn't already know the history behind it.

Eberron has a couple of quirks that you need to understand to get really into the setting, but the setting can be run in "generic D&D mode" with no problem at all. I have a feeling that 4e will deemphasize those portions. Which will cause a lot of people to also complain about the setting being ruined. I find it easy to explain the simple parts of the setting: There was a big war that they built warforged for, when it ended they became free. One country became a wasteland. There is a continent of psionic people called Kalashtar. There are trains called Lightning Rail that were built a long time ago that quickly get you from place to place, but they are expensive. There are airships, but they are expensive and rare.

And I think that makes a good summary of the setting. However, some of the complicated parts of the setting are a little more difficult to, say, explain to a 14 year old who has just joined your D&D group. And we have a number of 10 through 16 year old kids who show up for our Living Forgotten Realms games days at our local gaming store. They are able to play the games, understand what is going on, and have fun. None of them have read the Realms books.

And that, to me, is what is key about a setting.

 

[Scars Unseen]

Adventures in FR were getting so bogged down in the details of the setting that they were no longer understandable to people who didn't know the setting. It was all about: These are followers of Bane, who died during the Time of Troubles when Cyric took over. The followers of Bane are trying to bring him back, but they are at odds with the followers of Cyric who wants to keep his power. A number of Banites have infiltrated the clergy of Cyric, however. The followers of Mystra often oppose both of them, due to the grudge between Cyric and Mystra also dating back to the Time of Troubles. Now that you know that you might be able to understand why the plot of the adventure involved followers of Cyric that appeared to be attempting to bring back Bane, why that follower of Mystra showed up at the last minute to help you, and why there appeared to be a civil war between followers of Cyric.

I don't see this as a weakness. Merely a difference. I'll grant you that it isn't nearly as portable as what you described before, but I'm not always looking for a shallow game that you can quickly explain away with no knowledge of the setting(please note that I'm not referring to your gaming experience as shallow, merely the written adventure). I like back story. I like build up.

That said, I never saw the Realms as difficult to get into. I played in FR games for 5 years before I ever picked up a novel or read through a fluff book. The DM told us what was going on and we acted on it. Period. The game wasn't dense, and I can only guess that the people whining that it was dense were the sort that can't tell a treasure trove of options from a required reading list. I have now been playing/DMing the Realms for 15 years, and I couldn't even begin to give you more than a brief summary of many regions of the Realms because it has never been relevant to my game. If it actually becomes relevant I'll look over the fluff for that region. Until then I don't care. Doesn't mean I'm not miffed when WotC tries to tell me that the fluff doesn't exist anymore.

Oh well, the good thing about fluff is that it never becomes obsolete, merely outdated.

 

[Scribble]

I really do once again think that 4e was designed for me. (Or people like me.)

It's wide open, with not a huge amount of detail, has a good amount of unfinished story ideas, and is easy to mine for ideas.

That's pretty much what I like. Scarred Lands was my campaign setting of choice for 3e for these reasons. Even then I didn't use it as written... I moddified it like crazy. I don't play in the FRCS currently, but I pull stuff out of it for my own setting constantly.

I don't care that they changed backstory, or revised the setting details. I didn't buy the 3e campaign set because it felt to me like it was simply giving all the flavor I already had 3e stats. Wasn't worth it to me. Give me new ideas, even if they're based on old ones, or just old ones used in new ways. New ideas inspire me.

 

[webrunner]

3.5's rules were very well suited for a semi-simulationist deep/high fantasy game, with wizards in their towers etc. etc. etc.
4's rules are well suited for pulp fantasy, with swinging on the chandeliers and cutting a swath through hordes of enemies.,

Forgotten Realms was a deephigh fantasy setting.
Eberron was a pulp fantasy setting.

in 3.5, Forgotten REalms was basically a core extension,
Eberron had a feeling of being shoehorned in.. adding Action Points and places where it just felt like conceits to the 3.5 rules.

In 4e, Forgotten Realms has a lot of shoehorning into the 4E rules. It's just not a Tolkien-esque ruleset.
But a lot of the things that make Eberron Eberrony are 4e core.

 

[CardinalXimenes]

I bought the gray box way back when, and I also shelled out for some 2e FR products. By 3e, however, FR had just gotten too fiddly, too archmagey, and too pantheon-crowded to interest me any more. Sure, I could ignore all that stuff and fill in my own blanks as needed, but if I'm going to do that then why should I buy books? 4e FR was certainly a success with regards me in in that I actually bought FR product again for the first time in 15 years.

By the same token, I can confidently say that 4e Eberron will be a success with me as well, in that I'm actually going to buy Eberron product- something I never did for 3.X.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Then you haven't been looking very hard at the reception it received.

Let's look at the Amazon reviews (by this point they've taken out the initial blind praise and on the opposite end of the spectrum the kneejerk rejection for the 4e one by now so a comparison would seem to be an honest one at this time).

4e FRCG - 65 reviews. 2.5 star avg.

3e FRCS - 70 reviews. 4.5 star avg.

That's a pretty stark comparison there to how the public reception of the book was.

Amazon does have a problem with "reviewers" who never actually bought the product in question, however - so I'd take Amazon reviews with a grain of salt.

 

[Mournblade94]

The forgotten realms campaign guide as it stands now in the aftermath is a fine product... just not for Forgotten Realms. It fits well within the 4e paradigm but has become a new thing entirely.

Eberron will work well with 4e. Eberron is not my style, but it fits well with the 4e. I think Dark Sun will as well.

Forgotten Realms obviously did not.

In the 3rd edition days, people could decide to play forgotten realms or not. They could look at the richness of lore and decide that it IS or IS NOT for them. That is fine. However, wanting to play in the realms so bad that they will complain to WOTC about how hard it is, demonstrated intellectual laziness.

The realms could be played with knowing minimal lore, or enriched the play experience by learning the setting. The current incarnation of the realms was made in response to this intellectual laziness.

Note this does not mean the current realms is 'stupid'. It is fine for any campaign setting other than the forgotten realms. The changes made to the forgotten realms were made in response to intellectual laziness. I think 4e will sell well, but I think compared to the previous editions of the realms, this incarnation will prove to disappoint.

I like spice in my food, not just bread.