Post/Author/DateTime	Post
heirodule 07-24-07, 04:22 PM	As someone mentioned in another thread, this new creature (a baatezu) in MMV "in eberron", is a descendant of the original quori and resides on the material plane. :confused:
Rerecros 07-24-07, 04:42 PM	:yuck: someone needs to be strung up by their eyelids for that. I looked at the exert for the arcadian avenger, what the heck? A celestial being acting as a mercenary in a conflict among mortals? How and why would they go to shavarath? Never heard of a celestial cult before either, as they tend not to desire mortal worship. While they seemed to completely forget to give them a purpose on their home plane.
mhacdebhandia 07-26-07, 12:44 AM	Never heard of a celestial cult before either, as they tend not to desire mortal worship. This is probably a reference to radiant idols.
Teron Gorefiend 07-26-07, 03:27 PM	The "X in Eberron" blurbs always suck. ALWAYS. Apparently not satisfied with inserting stuff into the setting where it doesn't make sense, their authors generally make grievous mistakes about the most basic elements of the setting. For instance, canonical Eberron sources have given little indication that Tiamat is anything more than a constellation in the night sky. According to the (terrible) Monster Manual 4, though, she's a real and openly active deity who wants the chromatic dragons to stop studying the Prophecy and restart a war with the metallic dragons that never happened, and she's recently created a variety of misbegotten monsters for that purpose. You shouldn't read them at all to avoid being misled or mortally annoyed.
Nundahl 07-26-07, 04:03 PM	You shouldn't read them at all to avoid being misled or mortally annoyed. While I mostly agree with the previous point, I disagree with that statement. Sure, on the whole they are pretty bad, but they aren't canon. I think its a matter of expectations on the reader's side. We see and expect this - "This is how it is in Eberron, so that makes this monster a completely valid installment into the world" And this is how it should be read - "If you'd really like to use this creature in Eberron, you can always make up your own fluff, but here's a quick idea to get you started ..." That's the problem. There's canon, and then there's everything else, don't take everything else as a whole, its meant to be gleaned for those morsels of information that you find to be sound. I'd never use Tiamat in the game I run as more than a constellation of stars, and even that is just a gentle nod to an iconic being in my hobby. There is however that DM out there who wants Tiamat included and needs some help fitting her in. This gives him a good general idea of how he can set it up and what her motivations are ... because you can't say he's contradicting the setting by making a war between dragons, its his game, the setting is malleable, suggesting anything less than that stifles creativity, kinda the opposite of what D&D stands for. There have been a few I've sneered at, but hidden in there were quite a few gems that jumped at me (none that I can come up with off the top of my head I'm afraid). Point being, not every creature in the MM's exist in Eberron, nor does every bit of fluff, its just DM preference, which hopefully reflects whats most fun for his group.
Badace36 07-26-07, 06:15 PM	While I mostly agree with the previous point, I disagree with that statement. Sure, on the whole they are pretty bad, but they aren't canon. I think its a matter of expectations on the reader's side. We see and expect this - "This is how it is in Eberron, so that makes this monster a completely valid installment into the world" And this is how it should be read - "If you'd really like to use this creature in Eberron, you can always make up your own fluff, but here's a quick idea to get you started ..." That's the problem. There's canon, and then there's everything else, don't take everything else as a whole, its meant to be gleaned for those morsels of information that you find to be sound. I'd never use Tiamat in the game I run as more than a constellation of stars, and even that is just a gentle nod to an iconic being in my hobby. There is however that DM out there who wants Tiamat included and needs some help fitting her in. This gives him a good general idea of how he can set it up and what her motivations are ... because you can't say he's contradicting the setting by making a war between dragons, its his game, the setting is malleable, suggesting anything less than that stifles creativity, kinda the opposite of what D&D stands for. There have been a few I've sneered at, but hidden in there were quite a few gems that jumped at me (none that I can come up with off the top of my head I'm afraid). Point being, not every creature in the MM's exist in Eberron, nor does every bit of fluff, its just DM preference, which hopefully reflects whats most fun for his group. SOMEONE GIVE THIS MAN A MEDAL Seriously. You're about the only person on these boards I've seen who has the right outlook on these little blurbs.
OctaviusIII 07-26-07, 06:40 PM	SOMEONE GIVE THIS MAN A MEDAL Seriously. You're about the only person on these boards I've seen who has the right outlook on these little blurbs. But... you're here too... To go even more tangentially: where the devil (heh) are radiant idols? MMV?
Badace36 07-26-07, 06:43 PM	But... you're here too... To go even more tangentially: where the devil (heh) are radiant idols? MMV? Well, besides me. And Radiant Idols are in Sharn: City of Towers.
mhacdebhandia 07-26-07, 07:38 PM	Of course, radiant idols are supposed to be angels banished from Syrania - their CR is 11, almost double that of the CR 6 arcadian avenger. Still, the idea of a cult springing up around a celestial in Eberron is pretty flexible.
Shady314 07-26-07, 07:57 PM	SOMEONE GIVE THIS MAN A MEDAL Seriously. You're about the only person on these boards I've seen who has the right outlook on these little blurbs. Yeah how dare someone pay 40 dollars and expect the authors to come up with decent explanations! Geez you'd think they were getting paid or something! :rolleyes: When did it become ridiculous to expect quality from a Monster Manual you paid a lot of money for????
mhacdebhandia 07-26-07, 08:02 PM	I agree that it's a shame the various Monster Manual "X in Eberron" entries aren't more . . . sophisticated.
Nundahl 07-26-07, 11:20 PM	When did it become ridiculous to expect quality from a Monster Manual you paid a lot of money for???? Tsk ... tsk ... tsk. Quality is subjective. What's a great Eberron write-up for you is not for me necessarily or Joe Schmoe around the corner. Now, I don't want to argue for the quality of the book, but I do think we should stand against bashing what they have given us. I think its cool that they are giving a jumping point for DMs, you're paying for the monsters, fully statted and loaded with mean special abilities to throw at your players, the flavor text is bonus for how you shoehorn it in. Remember that these creatures are designed to fit anywhere, not Eberron specific supplements.
Shady314 07-27-07, 06:34 PM	Tsk ... tsk ... tsk. Quality is subjective. What's a great Eberron write-up for you is not for me necessarily or Joe Schmoe around the corner. A blurb that references things that have never happened in the setting (like an ancient enmity between orcs and elves that doesn't exist in the setting) shows a complete lack of knowledge of something you're writing about. I'm supposed to pay 40 dollars for an author that's writing about something he clearly doesn't know anything about? It's not a matter of preference it's a matter of consumer intelligence. Now, I don't want to argue for the quality of the book, but I do think we should stand against bashing what they have given us. :rofl: GIVEN us! When did our capitalist society fall apart. Apparently I should be grateful they are letting me pay them for goods and services! Given us... tsk tsk tsk. They haven't "given" me the MM V. I think its cool that they are giving a jumping point for DMs, you're paying for the monsters, fully statted and loaded with mean special abilities to throw at your players, the flavor text is bonus for how you shoehorn it in. When people on the boards can come up with more interesting/sensible blurbs for creatures in the book you paid money for than the professional author something is wrong. Oh it's BONUS. Super! So where's my basic MM V with just the stats for cheaper? Or one without the flavor text but more creatures for the same amount? Remember that these creatures are designed to fit anywhere, not Eberron specific supplements. Yeah I'm well aware. What's that have to do with anything?
mhacdebhandia 07-27-07, 10:06 PM	I'm happy to use the remmanon (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=894212) as fiends of Khyber associated with the Lords of Dust. It makes a lot more sense than a baatezu descended from quori.
Nundahl 07-28-07, 08:25 AM	Okay, okay, I made the mistake of saying that they gave it to us, I realize my error there. I don't mean to suggest that WotC is some benevalent overlord, but as I said at the end, these books are designed to fit any setting. The flavor blurbs are shoehorning, forcing something not designed for Eberron into the setting in a quick, "here's how I might do it" fashion. If that requires (in their mind) changing parts of the setting, that is ok, everyone's Eberron is their own. Just look at how many, "Ok, I'm adding a new mark ..." threads out here. My point comes back to the same I made before, these aren't canon, they are ideas. And yeah, go figure that we, the obsessed fans who by far outnumber WotC staff can come up with better fits, we also come up with a lot of bad ideas ... see above, "Ok, I'm adding a new mark ..." ;) What I feel that it all boils down to is a simple misconception of the worth of the flavor text. Its not set in stone, take what you like and leave the rest. When I say that they have "given" us I refer to the fact that there could be no flavor text in there, and for many fans that would be a bad thing, for you its not, but it sure isn't hurting you to read over it. You know WotC is a business first and foremost, like all businesses you can claim customers come first but that really means dollars come first. There's not going to be a special print without the flavor text because its not cost effective. There's not going to be another book with more monsters and less flavor because making fans pick one set of extras over another would be atrocious, I really doubt you want that, regardless of which you'd pick in this case, thats not a trend I'd ever want to see develop. Take what you get, don't spend the money if you don't want to. And remember that the books are not designed to be taken as a whole. Not everything fits in Eberron, but everything can be made to fit, welcome to fiction.
Nundahl 07-28-07, 10:38 AM	Bah, now I'm just regurgitating my opinion, no more argument from me. I just had to get out that I acknowledge error with the word "given".
Shady314 07-28-07, 02:54 PM	I don't mean to suggest that WotC is some benevalent overlord, but as I said at the end, these books are designed to fit any setting. This doesn't mean anything. Even you accept the fans on the board often come up with better and more logical ways to place these creatures in the setting. Obviously the fact the book isn't solely designed for Eberron isn't affecting them. Why is it affecting the author? The flavor blurbs are shoehorning, forcing something not designed for Eberron into the setting in a quick, "here's how I might do it" fashion. Which does not mean the idea HAS to suck. It makes it trickier but they're a professional author. If that requires (in their mind) changing parts of the setting, that is ok, It's not ok for a professional author to just make any sort of weird radical changes to a setting, canon or not. Obviously they have to be held to a higher standard than a random fan on the boards. everyone's Eberron is their own. Just look at how many, "Ok, I'm adding a new mark ..." threads out here. My point comes back to the same I made before, these aren't canon, they are ideas. To be fair. Not EVERY blurb is bad. Plenty are perfectly acceptable. But there's no excuse, for what I would hope is a quality product, to make glaringly obvious mistakes about a setting. I would personally hope the flavor text is a bit more than a two second thought from the author. I would like to think they actually put some thought into it. Is you're argument really that the author is just so pressed for time he can't put some actual work into what he's creating? And yeah, go figure that we, the obsessed fans who by far outnumber WotC staff can come up with better fits, we also come up with a lot of bad ideas ... see above, "Ok, I'm adding a new mark ..." ;) That's a "go figure?" I wonder if you have this attitude for every job? Would it be perfectly acceptable to you if you knew more about plumbing than a plumber you hired? Would you be perfectly happy with a guy fixing your computer that said glaringly wrong things about the Windows OS? We do come up with plenty of bad ideas but again I say a paid professional author with WOTC stamp of approval should be held to a higher standard than you or me. What I feel that it all boils down to is a simple misconception of the worth of the flavor text. Its not set in stone, take what you like and leave the rest. That could be said about ANY of the books. Even the ECS. I'd just really really love it if something I pay a lot of money for could be mostly good stuff to keep (like the ECS) than stuff that needs to be changed by me. Buying the book is supposed to save us work. When I say that they have "given" us I refer to the fact that there could be no flavor text in there, I wish. and for many fans that would be a bad thing, Even YOU said the MM is about the creature's and their stats. I don't think many would miss the flavor text. for you its not, but it sure isn't hurting you to read over it. Actually I die a little inside when I read things like Tiamat. :D You know WotC is a business first and foremost, like all businesses you can claim customers come first but that really means dollars come first. So you're a consumer defending their right to put money before their customers and put out an inferior product? You're not getting how this capitalism thing is supposed to work are you. :P Consumers aren't supposed to just sit back and take that sort of thing. There's not going to be a special print without the flavor text because its not cost effective. ??? :confused: Less text and fewer pages means it's cheaper to put out and since it'd still contain the main reason anyone buys the MM I think it would sell fine. Obviously it'd have to be a tad cheaper. 35$ maybe. Anyways we can't really say what's cost effective without a deeper understanding of WOTC operating budget and things. But even you suggested the blurb is an author's brief rough draft of an idea. Exactly how important is it to keep? There's not going to be another book with more monsters and less flavor because making fans pick one set of extras over another would be atrocious, Yes I really really hate having choices. I really doubt you want that, regardless of which you'd pick in this case, thats not a trend I'd ever want to see develop. Yeah why have a choice so you can get exactly what you want? Better we just accept whatever WOTC decides to give us. Take what you get, don't spend the money if you don't want to. Believe me I don't. And remember that the books are not designed to be taken as a whole. Not everything fits in Eberron, but everything can be made to fit, welcome to fiction. Everything can be made to fit and not only that but it can be made to fit well. If you're willing to change enough. So there is no excuse for an author's hastily, poorly thought out idea.
Nundahl 07-29-07, 12:42 PM	So you're a consumer defending their right to put money before their customers and put out an inferior product? You're not getting how this capitalism thing is supposed to work are you. Consumers aren't supposed to just sit back and take that sort of thing. Well, this is taking us down a new track, but Capitalism has an inherit flaw. We're supposed to pick the best quality at the most acceptable price, you're supposed to have choice as a customer. Yes, the system is designed to help the customer in that way, but then you hit a snag. You have a company like TSR that has risen from the bottom of the barrel, but now its Wizards, and Wizards is Hasbro, and Hasbro is huge. So, given their track record and name recognition, they really don't have to do anything more than be there and put out a product, then in flows the money. Capitalism is beautiful until it hits a breaking point, and that is the reality of the thing. So while I didn't miss the point of Capitalism, I also am resigned to the truth, however sad it may be. However, if you want to organize a revolution give me a call. Edit: Of course, this post is more fuel for your fire, as it sounds as if I have given up on quality and just decided to buy because "its new". Best I can say is I assure you that's not true, I like the flavor text.
Shady314 07-29-07, 06:25 PM	Well, this is taking us down a new track, but Capitalism has an inherit flaw. We're supposed to pick the best quality at the most acceptable price, you're supposed to have choice as a customer. Yes, the system is designed to help the customer in that way, but then you hit a snag. You have a company like TSR that has risen from the bottom of the barrel, but now its Wizards, and Wizards is Hasbro, and Hasbro is huge. So, given their track record and name recognition, they really don't have to do anything more than be there and put out a product, then in flows the money. This is a flaw of people's stupidity. Capitalism is beautiful until it hits a breaking point, and that is the reality of the thing. So while I didn't miss the point of Capitalism, I also am resigned to the truth, however sad it may be. What is the truth? That you HAVE to buy WOTC products? I spend most of my gaming money on NWOD. However, if you want to organize a revolution give me a call. I don't consider not buying inferior products something revolutionary. It's basic. I don't buy a sourcebook without looking through it and getting others reactions. Edit: Of course, this post is more fuel for your fire, as it sounds as if I have given up on quality and just decided to buy because "its new". Best I can say is I assure you that's not true, I like the flavor text. That's fine. You can like the flavor text. My problem was never with anyone liking the blurbs. I don't understand how you can like certain blurbs but as I said most are decent. My problem was that you said I as a potential customer (and consumer of other DnD books) and those that actually have bought the book have no right to complain about the content of the book, because it's some sort of "bonus", or about our purchase and also implied because Hasbro is huge we have to sit back and take whatever they "give" us.
Rechan 07-29-07, 08:42 PM	This is getting a little ludicrous. I'd also like to point out that fans can come up with some stuff that is better than the printed material from the official Eberron authors. I personally liked Fireballmage's Dragonmarked House (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=442444) writeups more than I did the Dragonmarked book.
Nundahl 07-30-07, 09:03 AM	Ok, I can certainly see where I came off as saying you had no right to complain. Certain wording should have been handled better, I've no problem admitting fault. I back down, but I would like to reiterate the original point that made me stand up. It was said that people should simply not read them, and I disagreed.
Jonasty 07-30-07, 09:39 AM	I am of the mind, as some are here, that you should ultimately fit things in where you want them. It is your game afterall. Don't be limited by whats written. With that being said, people seem to toss around what is "cannon" and what isn't all the time. The fact of the matter is, the easiest (and probably most basic) thing to keep in mind, if you don't see Keith Baker's name on the cover, its not cannon and you really shouldn't expect it to be such. There are definetly exceptions to this, for instance James Wyatt is another name I tend to trust as far as reliable sources go on products, but true cannon is from the man who made it, in my mind. Baker's name isn't on MMV, so I don't expect to find the absolute written word as to where those new monsters fit. I take the suggestions, but thats basically all they are at that point. In the same vein, should you then say that a monster without an "X in Eberron" entry should never show up in your game because whoever wrote it obviously meant for them never to appear in Eberron, ever. No, obviously not. And back to the first point, even if the book is 100% Keith Baker written and approved and signed and hand delivered by him with a free gift basket, it still doesn't mean you have to use it as written. As someone above had said, look at all the threads floating around, the ideas they are creating are what matters, not how strictly they adhere to what is "cannon".
ArcTan 07-31-07, 09:20 PM	As someone mentioned in another thread, this new creature (a baatezu) in MMV "in eberron", is a descendant of the original quori and resides on the material plane. :confused: We know the Quori were looking for some way to remain on the Prime after the Turning of the Age. That's the origin of the Quorcraft Warforged, remember? To be their bodies. Maybe some Quori found an alternate route besides the Quorcraft Warforged, that would allow them continued life after the Turning of the Age at the expense of horrible mutation. It's really not that bad if you put a little thought into it.