WotC setting search winner - Eberron

[rounser]

But who is to say what genre is appropriate for fantasy, and which one isn't. For example, from all the fantasy that I've read (outside D&D based novels), I've never have heard of spell slinging priests. Or at least, not in the same way as D&D. So for me I've always had trouble reconciling the cleric class my assumption of a fantasy world.

Spell slinging priests go back to the Conan books, and for a more recent (if somewhat self-referential) example, the Riftwar series. The cleric class is a D&Dism based vaguely on Bishop Odo, but an easily accepted D&Dism because it slots quite easily into swords & sorcery fantasy tropes of medieval arms and armour, crusaders, priests, prayer, spirituality, healing magic, miracles and god worship.

I agree that the cleric class is a gamist thing, and a "not exactly" priest, and is somewhat uncomfortable archetype, but it's definitely not out-of-genre.

Everyone's idea of what should constitute "fantasy" is different. Some people's idea of fantasy is based on final fantasy games, or Steven King's Dark Tower series.

Swords & sorcery fantasy defaults to an amorphous set of assumptions which are tied to pulp swords & sorcery fantasy and mythology. If the reader accepts the conceits of the genre, they can be used without explanation or challenge to suspension of disbelief (such as the concept of what a wizard is, and what he or she does, and why wizards are usually associated with medieval style settings). I think that you're painting yourself into a corner if you're trying to pretend that trains are something people associate with swords & sorcery fantasy, or that there's little concensus that they don't belong there without a explicitly defined and convincing context - which we haven't been provided with yet, but may well receive.

 

[rounser]

Where you see "default assumptions about swords & sorcery fantasy technology levels and how they relate to suspension of disbelief," I see "more of the same." The truly groundbreaking settings, in my view, are the ones that do something to shake up the status quo.

As I've said before, we haven't seen the context yet. Spelljammer gave you one for kobolds in space, which made it easier for some people to swallow. My point is that Eberron will probably need one for the lightning rails too, and we haven't seen it yet, and if it doesn't provide a convincing one (complete with why magic isn't used to do B, C and D as well, because they've opened that can of worms with this creation) then I probly won't dig the concept, and forsee quite a few people seeing it the same way. That's not to say it won't have one, and a good one at that - it's just that it just can't rest on it's laurels without an explanation in the same way that FR's Halruuan flying ships can.

 

[2d6]

I wonder if Planescape, Dark Sun, and Spelljammer were complained about this much when they were first announced. Where you see "default assumptions about swords & sorcery fantasy technology levels and how they relate to suspension of disbelief," I see "more of the same." The truly groundbreaking settings, in my view, are the ones that do something to shake up the status quo.

Actually, I seem to remember several folks at a now closed hobby shop complaining about Spelljammer as a concept back in the day.

Anyway, I think this is an issue of holding a "contest" asking for one thing, then a year later releasing tidbits that seem to indicate that the product doesn't match what one would expect from the "contest". I also don't think that the comments should be construed as an attack on K. Baker's design skills, I believe that it just goes back to the "contest" and the expectation. That's the obvious.

I think that if Eberron was just announced without the whole search thing, The reception would much warmer.

Hey, gotta pad my post-count somehow right

 

[shadow]

I think that you're painting yourself into a corner if you're trying to pretend that trains are something people associate with swords & sorcery fantasy

I never said that some people associate trains with sword & sorcery . I said that everyone has a different idea of fantasy . The two words are different. Fantasy is anything that involves the supernatural or otherwise normally impossible. Hence fantasy can cover a wide base of ideas. Sword & socery is one specific sub-genre of fantasy which set in a world approximately medieval European technology. I agree that most people wouldn't associate trains with sword & sorcery, but fantasy as a genre isn't limited to sword & sorcery.

Let's see, many of the later Final Fantasy games have featured trains. In Final Fantasy 3 (6 in Japan) you had the Phantom Train, in Final Fantasy 7 you had the gloomy "train graveyard" (which made a great "dungeon", rather than the stale idea of some evil abandoned temple). Harry Potter juxtaposes magic with trains, as well as flying cars. All of the aforementioned things have been very popular. Is there anything wrong with this type of fantasy?

Although the Ebberon setting may stray somewhat from the classic D&D sword & sorcery style fantasy, this isn't the first time D&D has done this. Dark Sun featured post-apocalyptic barbarians, very little metal, and the constant risk of dehydration. Not exactly the classic medieval. Spelljammer featured spacefaring ships, aliens, and of course the Giff. Ravenloft, wasn't sword & sorcery since it borrowed featured societies and technology that were quite a bit more advanced than medieval that of medieval Europe. Nor could Al-Qadim be considered sword & sorcery for a lot of people since the culture and period it emulated was very different from what most people consider sword & sorcery. And finally the much venerated Planescape has little to do at all with sword and sorcery. The weird monsters, exotic locations, philosophy, and constant street slang make it very different from it's D&D sword & sorcery roots. Yet all of these settings have their hard core fans. They prove that the D&D rules aren't just limited to a classic sword & sorcery setting.

Anyway, I think this is an issue of holding a "contest" asking for one thing, then a year later releasing tidbits that seem to indicate that the product doesn't match what one would expect from the "contest". I also don't think that the comments should be construed as an attack on K. Baker's design skills, I believe that it just goes back to the "contest" and the expectation. That's the obvious.

I agree. I doubt there would be as much controversy if WotC released the setting without having it as the "winner" of a "contest".

 

[rounser]

I agree that most people wouldn't associate trains with sword & sorcery, but fantasy as a genre isn't limited to sword & sorcery.

However, D&D is a swords & sorcery style fantasy game. When a D&D setting deviates from the swords & sorcery fantasy assumptions, there usually has to be a compelling context in order for people to accept the deviation, such as the one Dark Sun has (dark future world, swords & sandals themes etc.), the one the Living Jungle campaign had (apply D&D to jungle tribes, lost world themes and primitive tech level) and so on and so forth. Again, we don't have the context for magical trains yet, and they'll probably need a convincing one. Harry Potter has a convincing one, for instance, in that it's superimposed fantasy themes on a contemporary setting, and contemporary settings have trains, natch.

 

[Spatula]

I wonder if Planescape, Dark Sun, and Spelljammer were complained about this much when they were first announced. Where you see "default assumptions about swords & sorcery fantasy technology levels and how they relate to suspension of disbelief," I see "more of the same." The truly groundbreaking settings, in my view, are the ones that do something to shake up the status quo.

Agreed.

 

[jokamachi]

Beat out Midnight???

Is it true that Wotc passed up Midnight for Baker's setting? I don't mean to bash the winner by asking, but I was deeply impressed with Midnight. Charges of nepotism aside, Baker's setting must really have something to it to beat out such a powerful contender. In the future, Wotc's PR folks should seriously rethink their presentation strategy; I didn't glean much of a mission statement from what they presented.

 

[William Ronald]

jokamachi,

This was already covered, and Midnight was not part of the setting search.

 

[Dismas]

Re: Beat out Midnight???

Is it true that Wotc passed up Midnight for Baker's setting? I don't mean to bash the winner by asking, but I was deeply impressed with Midnight. Charges of nepotism aside, Baker's setting must really have something to it to beat out such a powerful contender. In the future, Wotc's PR folks should seriously rethink their presentation strategy; I didn't glean much of a mission statement from what they presented.

Wow, to urban legends in one post
As other people have point out, Midnight was never submited to the Search and Keith Baker is no releation to Rich Baker.

 

[mythusmage]

Re: Re: Beat out Midnight???

...and Keith Baker is no releation to Rich Baker.

To be technical, no close relation to Rich Baker.

After all, everybody, at the greatest remove, is a 50th cousin of everybody else.

(Yes, Teflon Billy is a relative of yours)