Post/Author/DateTime	Post
joelsanda 10-17-04, 12:24 PM	I'm curious to hear folks talk about their experiences DM'ing and playing in Eberron - particularly those who have played Forgotten Realms. I still have the first FRealms boxed set and absolutely love the setting. I own and have read about 2/3's of the novels and am extremely comfortable DM'ing in that setting. This is what I like about the FRealms: Magic it not the technology/science it seems to be in Eberron but is an art. Sure the gnomes have flying ships but the idea of the lightning rail seems to scream Buck Rogers and not Drizz't or Lidda or Regdar. The novels are great to pass on to players for more information on something. As a DM I can pass a Salvatore novel to a player whose character would know the information (e.g. a bard) or to the group when the group opts to puruse a libary in Silverymoon. That won't happen for some time with Eberron. I like the idea of a Warforged more than having them in the campaign. They seem to be similar to Golems but as a sentient race and potential player's character I wonder if they can lead to a play imbalance. Doubtful, Eberron seems to be too well designed for that but something about Warforged rubs me the wrong way. FRealms is simple high fantasy - and perhaps my bias towards that is growing up when D&D was the subject of new stories and religious outrage and I'm just showing my age with this one ;-) Eberron seems to be a more cynical setting than FRealms. That's not a judgement - if cynicism is a child of irony I have an entire family of cynics ;-). But the feel of Eberron is different that FRealms. Which brings me to: Alignments as "relative gauges of a character or creature's viewpoint, and not absolute barometers of affiliation and action..." is an incredibly interesting idea and a hat tip to situationalism. But - this brings me back to the cynicism of Eberron - where's the idea of an intrinsically evil being that needs to justification to destroy? A pillar of fantasy, I'd argue, is the stubborn knight (Sturm, anyone?) who refuses to violate a principal of his oath and hence alignment: do only good, even if that can mean doing something that could be seen as ambivalent of bad. If evertyhing is "blurred" it's all, well, blury. Finally, the 'cinematic' tone to Eberron is a nice tuch - but not something 'new'. A glance at Unearthed Arcana and we can see the source of some of the rules like Action Points and Contacts. Those fit quite well in the FRealms - and I'm glad to seem them 'canonized' in Eberron. But one certainly does not need the Eberron setting to implement these rules. I'm not juding anyone's devotion to Eberron - I've read the entire ECS and I think it's amazing. I can't wait to read some of the setting's future novels and short stories. The setting a testament to Keith Baker's awesome imagination and the incredible flexibility of D&D. Having said that, it doesn't "feel" like D&D to me - but that may very well be a bias born from reading FRealms and Dragonlance novels since their initial publications. And if I never play or DM in the setting I'm very glad it has been released and seems to enjoy the support it is - D&D can only get better and grow when there are many settings to play in. Has anyone else wrestled with a potential move from the Realms to Eberron? How did you like it? What didn't you like. If you DM what were your players' reactions? Are you glad you moved - sorry you started an Eberron campaign?
Hellcow 10-17-04, 02:30 PM	Well, I can't speak to the move from the Realms to Eberron, but I thought I'd clarify a few things. Finally, the 'cinematic' tone to Eberron is a nice tuch - but not something 'new'. A glance at Unearthed Arcana and we can see the source of some of the rules like Action Points and Contacts. Those fit quite well in the FRealms - and I'm glad to seem them 'canonized' in Eberron. But one certainly does not need the Eberron setting to implement these rules. Actually, the base mechanic for action points was drawn from D20 Modern. Unearthed Arcana actually drew ideas from Eberron. If you look at Dragon 315, you'll see that there were additional uses for action points that were originally planned for Eberron, and that's just a few of them. Ultimately it was decided that these were a little TOO over the top, and were better presented as variants in Unearthed Arcana. So yes, you don't need Eberron to implement the rules -- but that doesn't mean that they came from UA. Eberron went through a very long development period! but the idea of the lightning rail seems to scream Buck Rogers... Interesting. To me, the idea of teleportation portals seems more like Buck Rogers. The lightning rail is relatively slow and has a limited path; you can deal with robberies, murder on the train, adventures involving trailblazing and the like. In terms of technological impact, it's arguably 19th-century -- but hardly 24th. Now, the issues may be primarily visual: it LOOKS too sci-fi, which is certainly a valid complaint. On the other hand, if you are content with airships, you could fairly easily drop the lightning rail in favor of an increased number of airships; as it stands, Lyrandar and Orien are already increasingly butting heads as domestic airship travel becomes more common. The novels are great to pass on to players for more information on something. As a DM I can pass a Salvatore novel to a player whose character would know the information (e.g. a bard) or to the group when the group opts to puruse a libary in Silverymoon. That won't happen for some time with Eberron. Very true -- while there will be novels in February and March, they won't give you comprehensive coverage of the world. FRealms is simple high fantasy - and perhaps my bias towards that is growing up when D&D was the subject of new stories and religious outrage and I'm just showing my age with this one ;-) Possibly, but hey, I had the boxed set back in the 70's my own self. There's nothing wrong with a love of traditional fantasy -- but I think there's a lot of folks here who would argue that Eberron isn't just "for the young'uns." Eberron seems to be a more cynical setting than FRealms... Alignments as "relative gauges of a character or creature's viewpoint, and not absolute barometers of affiliation and action..." is an incredibly interesting idea and a hat tip to situationalism. But - this brings me back to the cynicism of Eberron - where's the idea of an intrinsically evil being that needs to justification to destroy? That would be, say, the daelkyr or the Lords of Dust (I'm assuming you meant "no justification"). If you want the pure knight, find a paladin of the Silver Flame or a devoted follower of Dol Arrah. The point of Eberron is that ambiguity exists -- not that there is no purity. Eberron was inspired by the pulps and film noir. The ambiguity and uncertainty is drawn from noir, and is represented by things like good churches that do terrible things, corrupt priests, good vampires, and groups like the Chamber and the Aurum that can do both good and evil. But pulp is generally black and white: watching Raiders of the Lost Ark, you don't say "I wonder if those Nazis are really OK guys." This is reflected by groups like the Dreaming Dark, the Emerald Claw, the Lords of Dust, and the daelkyr. It's up to the DM to choose whether he wants a session to feel more like Raiders or more like the Maltese Falcon, and to chose opponents accordingly. To a large degree, I see outsiders as being the most reliable representatives of an alignment (three of the four groups mentioned above being based around outsiders). It's not a firm rule -- you can have fallen angels, and you can get the kalashtar from the quori -- but I see outsiders as being very different from mortals, more manifestations of ideas than creatures with the same aspirations, goals, and free will as mortals. I'm not juding anyone's devotion to Eberron - I've read the entire ECS and I think it's amazing. I can't wait to read some of the setting's future novels and short stories. The setting a testament to Keith Baker's awesome imagination and the incredible flexibility of D&D... And if I never play or DM in the setting I'm very glad it has been released and seems to enjoy the support it is - D&D can only get better and grow when there are many settings to play in. Thanks! Likewise, I'm not arguing that you should like Eberron. It's not for everyone, any more than Planescape or Dark Sun. Eberron and FR are quite different; if you want traditional high fantasy, the Realms are certainly a better match. The amount of effort that has gone into FR, and the amount of pure information that exists about the world, is both impressive and invaluable to players and DMs looking for inspiration. But from what limited knowledge I have, I've seen no signs that WotC is going to reduce its support for the Realms in the future -- and if Eberron survives as long as the Realms has, I will consider myself a lucky man!
joelsanda 10-17-04, 07:45 PM	Keith; Thanks for the clarifications. Knowing the origins of Action Points is quite interesting - I've never (as one could probably deduce from my original post ;-) picked up D20 Modern so my frame of reference is usually D&D books. The Lightning Rail is very modern looking - the picture in the ECS reminds me of the Lionel train engine from my childhood, and that was the first thing to challenge my expectations when I started reading your book. Though one of Doug Beyer's "Mysterious Disappearances" article on the Eberron site mentioned a mystery involving a missing light rail car and that really resonated with me (Viva Amtrack!). A fascinating aspect of D&D is how Eberron can use rules that started with the first box set in the 1970s. The game is incredibly flexible, and obviously adept at evolving comparing the Greyhawk to Eberron. There's a mystique to Eberron that closely resembles some of my favorite things in the Realms (for example: the Harpers and the Wardens of the Wood in Eberron) but the stress on ambiguity seems to be the biggest difference between the two settings. That's probably most visible with the new ideas surrounding alignment and the now sentient Warforged. The Warforged first reminded me of the role Kender played in the earliest Dragonlance novels - a race with assumptions so alien to others they were always greeted with apprehension. The Kender stole/found anything they came across and the Warforged just 'don't fit in'. In either case, our group will certainly play The Forgotten Forge and we'll likely continue into Shadows of the Last War to get more than our feet wet. Thanks for a challenging setting and I eagerly await <i>Sharn</i>.
stembolt 10-17-04, 09:00 PM	Has anyone else wrestled with a potential move from the Realms to Eberron? How did you like it? What didn't you like. If you DM what were your players' reactions? Are you glad you moved - sorry you started an Eberron campaign? I (and my group) abandoned FR because we were fed up with it about 6-8 months before Eberron came out. And you could not pay me to go back. FR offers nothing not better supplied by another setting. FR is a heaping pile of garbage, no opinions involved. So in that regard Eberron is a breath of fresh air. A well written, well conceived setting. Personally I would really like to see an overhaul of FR. Take it back to start and re-realize the setting. Something that should have been done with 3rd edition.
joelsanda 10-17-04, 09:13 PM	I (and my group) abandoned FR because we were fed up with it about 6-8 months before Eberron came out. And you could not pay me to go back. FR offers nothing not better supplied by another setting. FR is a heaping pile of garbage, no opinions involved. What are your biggest complaints with the Realms? A lack of cohesion or new stuff a combination of both or something entirely different?
ImmortalBlueMage 10-17-04, 09:21 PM	The Eberron/Realms split continues to fascinate me, but during it all my opinion hasn't changed. I find Eberron fun, dynamic, intriguing, and very exciting. I find (and always have found) Forgotten Realms to be, just, well, boring. What is there in Faerun that you can't find anywhere else? 50th level NPCs from RA Salvatore books? I'll pass thank you. It's not that it's a BAD setting I guess, just not one with much individual identity. Maybe back when Realms was new it was original and inspired, but these days it seems pretty generic.
Korhal IV 10-17-04, 10:58 PM	I've never played in the Realms, although I have read many of their novels, and that's probably the bad thing about it. I've already seen players in my group rip off Salvatore (a human fighter named "W. Ulfgar"), and had another ask if he could play a drow. We weren't even playing Realms and the novels were affecting character creation! Which leads into problem number two: Frankly, as a "young 'un", I don't have the time or inclination to buy up and read all the novels and sourcebooks for FR, even though they're chronically referred to in newer editions and books. Which leads to problem number three: If I can't do it, how can I expect my players to? It seems there's so much information you need to know about FR's history before certain elements of it make sense - Mystra and her Chosen, the Time of Troubles, Waterdeep, etc. Eberron, at least for now, is mainly just one book, and parts of it can be skipped over depending on the campaign. My players can deal with that. FR is a wonderful place, but it's always going to be a place for novels in my mind.
stembolt 10-17-04, 11:51 PM	What are your biggest complaints with the Realms? A lack of cohesion or new stuff a combination of both or something entirely different? My biggest complaints are as follows: Elminster – Generally the fact that you can’t swing a dead cat and not hit an epic hero. Novels – the settings background is largely based on a series of poorly realized and written novels. Bad Rules – The FR “staff” generally has a poor grasp of the 3ed rules.
Somebloke 10-18-04, 12:03 AM	I personally always find a little delight in dealing with players who know campaign worlds inside out...you have little discussions like this: Me: Kaius draws his sword and advances. Player: I cast Daylight on his undead arse! Me: He advances, undisturbed. Player: But Kaius is a vampire... Me: Bet your character?
Sucros 10-18-04, 01:12 AM	Hmm... I'm a big fan of both settings, so I thought I'd weigh in on both settings. There are two huge differences between FR and Eberron: Tone, and Scale. Tone is a matter of preferrence. I'd argue that both usually end up being as "cinematic" as your DM is capable of. The big difference in tone is that, while Forgotten Realms is a world populated by adventurers, for adventurers, and anyone in that setting is a member of that culture; Eberron, it's a world that has a 'hero deficit'. Fundamentally, this gives players much more relative power in many situations. Each has their upsides, but it's easier to punish troublesome PCs in FR (common problem when I GM) The big difference is SIZE. Forgotten realms is massive, both in terms of physical size and lore. Many countries have radical differences, and each can be (and usually is) the subject of one or more than one sourcebook. And there are the massive ammounts of literature. Upside: Many players are already familiar with enough aspects of the world to have a feel for it. Also, there is massive ammounts of good stuff to pull from. Downside: Junk. Bad ideas, poorly written stuff, and stuff that has been converted time and time again. More subraces than you can shake a stick at, some poorly balanced, all to be exploited by players, and players who want to be renegade drow. In Eberron, it's much easier for the players to have a feel for the world as a whole. The interconnectedness is very nice for character ideas, and a coherent recent history makes fleshing out characters a logical process. I rather like the "small world" feel. But it does harm replayability. While a game in Calimshan can have absolutely nothing to do with a game in Waterdeep, after a few campaigns, it's possible that Eberron will feel like "this again" I welcome both. And look forwards EAGERLY to the Eberron novels.
Aris Stormdragon 10-18-04, 06:22 AM	We're making the switch because we've been playing in the Realms for years, and it's time for a change. We'll probably go back to the Realms eventually, and end up splitting time between the Realms and Eberron. I think that Eberron is a much-needed shot in the arms for D&D. Four new races, the elimination of sub-races (not that I have a real problem with them; but there is such a thing as too much of something), airships, lightning rails - I could go on and on. I think the most important thing (for me and my group, anyway) is that this setting has a 1st Edition feel to it. That plus the fact that Eberron is the first setting to fully incorporate the 3.5 revision means that (to me) the products will be more cohesive, since the revision was used right from the outset, as opposed to the Realms, which had to release a sourcebook (or two) just to deal with the changes the revision made to the setting. As I write this, Shadows of the Last War is probably sitting in my P.O. box, and I am really looking forward to running it after we finish the Forgotten Forge, as I am also looking forward to the novel next year.
Setherial 10-18-04, 07:11 AM	I started out with FR and played it for over a year now and I had several issues with it : - first of all I think the books don't read too well, maybe it's the small two column print of 3e edition dnd, but it's really hard to read through it and not fall a sleep. I didn't have this problem with Eberron, I really wanted to keep on reading. Every chapter spawned so many new ideas it was worth reading. Another problem with the books of FR is that they give very little detail. For instance I bough Silver marches a few months ago and the book has it's typical feats, prestige classes, spells, etc sections which are just extra stuff and then the part that talks about the Marches consists only of a few fragments, short descriptions of towns and cities, a character here and there but nothing that really connects everything. In eberron the houses, the land itself and the rulers, the history it's all so closely related and rooted into every aspect of life that you really feel it is all part of one big whole. No matter which country you start a campaign in you will meet the same power groups. Forgotten Realms is huge, and without years of background, novels, adventures and the likes it is very difficult to get into the setting and feel related to it. If fact I played 2e dnd for a while in a game group who played FR and that is the only time I felt good about the setting because they played a bunch of 2e adventures that really went into detail and fleshed out the Dales. The 3e books don't say much and never really did it for me. I also like the Icewind Dale and Neverwinter Night computer games because they too flesh out the realms and it all feels good. But the books these days, pretty uninspired if you ask me... As for the more SciFi aspects of the Eberron setting, I take what I like and drop the rest. I don't see myself DM'ing a setting with the flying cities and railroads at this time so I don't introduce them, they are after all but a fragment of the setting. I like the warforged and the Lord of Blades so I use that. So I guess I go only halfway but still feel excellent about the setting. cheers David
Ishorn 10-18-04, 10:38 AM	Everyone has compared and contrasted Eberron to every campaign setting out there. The thing I find interesting is that I have run my Greyhawk campaign almost parallel to Keith's Eberron. I had flying ships and a magical railroad in Oerik. I also had plenty of secret societies and factions working against each other. The androids in Barrier Peaks became sentient and were demanding to make the mountains their own kingdom. Some Greyhawk fans will scream that this is blasphemy but I believe that Dungeons & Dragons is not just about high fantasy. It is whatever you want it to be. Gary wrote in the original basic rules that these were rules for playing any fantasy setting you wanted and he gave as an example Edgar Rice Burrough's John Carter's Mars setting and not JRR Tolkein's Lord of The Rings. As for Forgotten Realms and technology have you not read Crusade by James Lowder. According to that book Cormyr has a magical radio system. I really did not like the fact that when the setting was first advertised by Wizards that they made a point by saying that you can pick Eberron apart and take what you like and use it in your campaign but please just buy the book. I feel that they treated the setting like an unwanted child until they saw the sales figures. As for the average age of the fans who are interested in the Eberron setting I run an egroup devoted to the setting and the average age of the people that have asked to become members is mid thirties. We are the generation that was the perfect age to have seen Star Wars when it was first released in theaters. I can tell you this I was more influenced in my D&D campaigns by Star Wars, Conan, Elric, and Indiana Jones then I was by Frodo and the gang. This is why I love Eberron it includes many of the things I like in a setting. Oh by the way if you want to compare Drizzt to anyone do not look in high fantasy I would say he is alot like Clint Eastwood as the High Plains Drifter. That is just my opinion. Homer
nyysjan 10-18-04, 12:14 PM	My gripe with the FR setting except for the amount of books to by black & white characters there is evil and there is good even when authors try to make characters with grey morality they end up as good or evil both in action and intent. eberron makes a point about human or any other intelligent creature habit of intending one and doing other. "Good intentions+Bad application=Spanish inquisition"
Just another user 10-18-04, 04:45 PM	Why I think Eberron is better than the Realms. There are not a single culture which you can say "this culture is clearly inspired to the <insert heart culture here>. Sure there are similiarities, but there are enough differences to make them... different.