Gripe from the layout of Eberron campaign book [Archive] - Wizards Community

Gripe from the layout of Eberron campaign book [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Jabari
10-12-04, 05:20 AM I have recently started to lead Eberron campaign, I like to world and it seems interesting, but the book. Why oh why must all information be scattered the way they are!!!

There is clearly information only intended for DM's on everywhere in the book. I would have expected that it would have had the layout like Star Wars book which has pages for players and pages for DM separated.

So far I've summarized all the information players need into separate word documents and copied the spell lists for artificer so I can keep the book tightly for my own use and prevent them from accidentally reading something I've intented to happen on my campaign and they should not know about it from the book!
Somebloke
10-12-04, 07:37 AM I have recently started to lead Eberron campaign, I like to world and it seems interesting, but the book. Why oh why must all information be scattered the way they are!!!

There is clearly information only intended for DM's on everywhere in the book. I would have expected that it would have had the layout like Star Wars book which has pages for players and pages for DM separated.

So far I've summarized all the information players need into separate word documents and copied the spell lists for artificer so I can keep the book tightly for my own use and prevent them from accidentally reading something I've intented to happen on my campaign and they should not know about it from the book!
Agreed. Nothing like a little side-panel called "Kaius revealed" to keep the players knowledgable. I'm going to have to alter so much of this campaign just to keep them on their toes...
polt
10-13-04, 08:45 AM I just said to my players: "Dont buy the book, if you want to know something, ask me".
billseurer
10-13-04, 09:17 AM I too don't like the secrets stuff scattered around int he middle of the descriptive text. Even putting the levels of NPCs in there is a bad idea. That sort of stuff belongs in a separate section or even a separate book.

I think the overall layout of the Eberron book was just plain bad too. There were things later on in the book that should have been covered much earlier and things right at the start that should have been at the end. This is a common failing with WotCs D&D books. They like to put the rulesy parts right up at the start (rules for new races and such) before you know how they fit into the world.
polt
10-13-04, 09:20 AM Now we are at it.

Its weird that i have to read about the Half-ling soceity in the Talenta Plains description. Yes, i know that is where they live, but i would much rather had that info under the Halfling, and the section about the talentaplains describing the nature, creatures, where the cities in more details.
debatedeus
10-13-04, 09:29 AM I too don't like the secrets stuff scattered around int he middle of the descriptive text. Even putting the levels of NPCs in there is a bad idea. That sort of stuff belongs in a separate section or even a separate book.

I think the overall layout of the Eberron book was just plain bad too. There were things later on in the book that should have been covered much earlier and things right at the start that should have been at the end. This is a common failing with WotCs D&D books. They like to put the rulesy parts right up at the start (rules for new races and such) before you know how they fit into the world.

I disagree about the layout situation.

The book tells you in the introduction that you SHOULDN'T read the first couple chapters first, that you'll get a better idea of the setting by looking at the other chapters in the book and then going back and reading the crunch. Just because a book is placed with crunch first doesn't mean you need to start with that crunch. Also, with all the crunch up front in the book, anything you need to look up is right there in the beginning of the book (or in the middle, darn Artificer Spell List!).
polt
10-13-04, 09:44 AM Well, its would be easier if, for example, the Description of Sharn was divided into two groups:

Player & Dm:

and

Only DM:
reveal
10-13-04, 09:58 AM There are other gripes that I have about the layout than Player/DM Info. For example, one of my players told me healing spells didn't work in the Mournlands (yes, I've seen the posts on the board about it so no need rehashing it ;)).

Anyway, I looked up the Mournlands in the book and, after about 5 minutes, told him I couldn't find it. So a couple of other players pulled out the book and looked. Finally, one person found in the Government and Politics section! Why the heck is it there?! Why not under Life and Society or just in the General Info? That makes no sense...
Korhal IV
10-13-04, 12:46 PM I didn't really have problems with the layout. Sure, the "no healing" is in the Gov't + Politics section, but that's pretty much the reason why the LoB settled in the Mournlands, so of course they've got to mention it there. Would've been nice if they mentioned it elsewhere too, but the whole Mournlands entry is only a page or two, so it's not unreasonable to expect someone to have read the whole thing pre-game - not that I'm knocking anyone who didn't, you know, the whole reason for buying a campaign setting is so you can avoid spending all your time prepping a game.

"Kaius Revealed" was sorta out there, no question about it. I just trust my players to keep their mouths shut if it comes up. Or pull the "What do you know?" dragonshard on them.
Laskaw
10-13-04, 05:07 PM One thing I'll probably be doing is expanding on secrets revealed in the book when they come up in game. For example, if the PCs would learn about Kaius, they will learn that not only that he's a vampire and killed his grandson, but that he recently changed Aurala into a vampire too. That way you actually give something the players are surprised over even if they know the ECS front-to-back.

Personally, I like the players knowing some secrets because it enables them to think of a more clever background. Maybe they want to be a former Blood of Vol cultist who was part of Kaius's harem, or a warforged who was recently created by the LoB but escaped. Plus, IME, the more details you give to the players (even OOC knowledge) the more interested they are in the setting. Though of course, you do have to trust that they won't use OOC knowledge in game.
Darrek
10-13-04, 05:32 PM I wonder if I'm the only one who felt this way:
More than anything else, the Eberron campaign setting made me yearn for the glory days of the TSR boxed set. A book for the PCs (Races, classes, feats, spells, all the crunch and introductory fluff), a book for the DM (or 2, or 3, with the hardcore fluffy goodness that makes the setting spectacular), a full-colour fold-out political/travel-route/geographical map (the thought bringing tears to my eyes), and then the odd little goodies that came with the best of the boxed sets (Still got my Dysheka dice, my Tarokka cards, and my Spelljammer deck plan cards)
Edymnion
10-13-04, 07:02 PM I wonder if I'm the only one who felt this way:
More than anything else, the Eberron campaign setting made me yearn for the glory days of the TSR boxed set. A book for the PCs (Races, classes, feats, spells, all the crunch and introductory fluff), a book for the DM (or 2, or 3, with the hardcore fluffy goodness that makes the setting spectacular), a full-colour fold-out political/travel-route/geographical map (the thought bringing tears to my eyes), and then the odd little goodies that came with the best of the boxed sets (Still got my Dysheka dice, my Tarokka cards, and my Spelljammer deck plan cards)No thanks, $40 is steep enough for a single book, IMO, I don't want to pay $100 just because they wanted to slap on a couple extra covers and an extra $0.02 of paper and plastic goodies.

I don't really mind how its got stuff mixed together. When reading about the mournlands, it tells me whats going on in the mournlands. Yeah, sure, it drops a few "secrets" in the process, but oh well.

I make sure to only game with mature players who know the differance between in game and out of game knowledge. Yeah, they know the Lord of Blades has this many levels of this, that many levels of that, but they're not going to go about building a LoB-Killer PC.

The only time I've ever had to bring people back in line was when one of my DM's had an NPC talking about Vol the Lich, and everybody was just going along with it. I spoke up with the old "What you talkin' 'bout, Willis?" routine, and reminded the other players that the whole Lich thing behind the blood cult wasn't public knowledge. After that, everybody played it the way they were supposed to.

Really, the DM/Player mixed info is only a problem if you play with people you can't trust not to metagame.
Brastan
10-13-04, 07:53 PM A lot of the so called secrets that are printed in sideboxs and in the text are actually rather vague. Although the player (and probably the PCs by extension ) might know that Kaius is... and did... but they don't know what he's doing now, how he's doing it, or who else is involved. Same goes of the Lord of Blades, and a few others. For the amount that had to be stripped and reedited its amazing that the story is very viable, and the rules are for the most part stable.

Although I've never found a Wizards book I actually like for its layout. Eberron included.
greatfrito
10-13-04, 10:16 PM I'd say the "What do you know" dragonshard is an essential with Eberron (hence why it was covered). Player knowledge and character knowledge really needs to be kept seperate. Granted, that's hard, but what makes the post-Last War politics of Khorvaire really interesting are the secret parts... convincing players that "No really! It's really cool! Why? Uh... trust me on it" would just not be fun.
Save-vs-DM
10-14-04, 12:38 AM I've never had a problem with my players abusing OOC knowledge. They all own the book. It's never been a problem. Like Edymnion, I also have mature players who can handle the IC/OOC situation.

Cheers,
Save vs DM
Bud Green
10-14-04, 07:33 PM I'm glad they don't have a DM-only section. That always struck me as naive. If it's published in a book that anyone can buy and read - guess what? It's not a secret! Anyone that pays the money for the book will read it - all of it - regardless of what their DM tells them. Oh yes they will! In fact, anything in a published book that says DM ONLY might as well say PLAYERS READ THIS FIRST. If you think otherwise, you're naive.

If you as the DM need to have secret machinations going on then you need to work those things up yourself. Use the published secrets of Eberron as guidelines and examples - but don't be so foolish as to think that players won't know these things. They will.

I liked how this was handled with Forgotten Realms sourcebooks. They hinted at legends and told you common rumors, but it was up to the DM to decide what was true and what was false.
MageofMyth
10-15-04, 04:52 PM I wonder if I'm the only one who felt this way:
More than anything else, the Eberron campaign setting made me yearn for the glory days of the TSR boxed set. A book for the PCs (Races, classes, feats, spells, all the crunch and introductory fluff), a book for the DM (or 2, or 3, with the hardcore fluffy goodness that makes the setting spectacular), a full-colour fold-out political/travel-route/geographical map (the thought bringing tears to my eyes), and then the odd little goodies that came with the best of the boxed sets (Still got my Dysheka dice, my Tarokka cards, and my Spelljammer deck plan cards)

I really wish that box sets were still put out. I used to love buying a new one, looking at all the new spells, and the new monster pages that came with each. And don't forget the large maps, and dungeon cards.

I would gladly pay for a box set.
polt
10-15-04, 04:55 PM Bud Green.

Well, i would regard my self as naive, but my players won't read stuff in the book if i tell them not to. Simple as that.
WynnHuntr2
10-15-04, 07:36 PM I would gladly pay for a box set.

Here, Here!

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jabari 10-12-04, 05:20 AM	I have recently started to lead Eberron campaign, I like to world and it seems interesting, but the book. Why oh why must all information be scattered the way they are!!! There is clearly information only intended for DM's on everywhere in the book. I would have expected that it would have had the layout like Star Wars book which has pages for players and pages for DM separated. So far I've summarized all the information players need into separate word documents and copied the spell lists for artificer so I can keep the book tightly for my own use and prevent them from accidentally reading something I've intented to happen on my campaign and they should not know about it from the book!
Somebloke 10-12-04, 07:37 AM	I have recently started to lead Eberron campaign, I like to world and it seems interesting, but the book. Why oh why must all information be scattered the way they are!!! There is clearly information only intended for DM's on everywhere in the book. I would have expected that it would have had the layout like Star Wars book which has pages for players and pages for DM separated. So far I've summarized all the information players need into separate word documents and copied the spell lists for artificer so I can keep the book tightly for my own use and prevent them from accidentally reading something I've intented to happen on my campaign and they should not know about it from the book! Agreed. Nothing like a little side-panel called "Kaius revealed" to keep the players knowledgable. I'm going to have to alter so much of this campaign just to keep them on their toes...
polt 10-13-04, 08:45 AM	I just said to my players: "Dont buy the book, if you want to know something, ask me".
billseurer 10-13-04, 09:17 AM	I too don't like the secrets stuff scattered around int he middle of the descriptive text. Even putting the levels of NPCs in there is a bad idea. That sort of stuff belongs in a separate section or even a separate book. I think the overall layout of the Eberron book was just plain bad too. There were things later on in the book that should have been covered much earlier and things right at the start that should have been at the end. This is a common failing with WotCs D&D books. They like to put the rulesy parts right up at the start (rules for new races and such) before you know how they fit into the world.
polt 10-13-04, 09:20 AM	Now we are at it. Its weird that i have to read about the Half-ling soceity in the Talenta Plains description. Yes, i know that is where they live, but i would much rather had that info under the Halfling, and the section about the talentaplains describing the nature, creatures, where the cities in more details.
debatedeus 10-13-04, 09:29 AM	I too don't like the secrets stuff scattered around int he middle of the descriptive text. Even putting the levels of NPCs in there is a bad idea. That sort of stuff belongs in a separate section or even a separate book. I think the overall layout of the Eberron book was just plain bad too. There were things later on in the book that should have been covered much earlier and things right at the start that should have been at the end. This is a common failing with WotCs D&D books. They like to put the rulesy parts right up at the start (rules for new races and such) before you know how they fit into the world. I disagree about the layout situation. The book tells you in the introduction that you SHOULDN'T read the first couple chapters first, that you'll get a better idea of the setting by looking at the other chapters in the book and then going back and reading the crunch. Just because a book is placed with crunch first doesn't mean you need to start with that crunch. Also, with all the crunch up front in the book, anything you need to look up is right there in the beginning of the book (or in the middle, darn Artificer Spell List!).
polt 10-13-04, 09:44 AM	Well, its would be easier if, for example, the Description of Sharn was divided into two groups: Player & Dm: and Only DM:
reveal 10-13-04, 09:58 AM	There are other gripes that I have about the layout than Player/DM Info. For example, one of my players told me healing spells didn't work in the Mournlands (yes, I've seen the posts on the board about it so no need rehashing it ;)). Anyway, I looked up the Mournlands in the book and, after about 5 minutes, told him I couldn't find it. So a couple of other players pulled out the book and looked. Finally, one person found in the Government and Politics section! Why the heck is it there?! Why not under Life and Society or just in the General Info? That makes no sense...
Korhal IV 10-13-04, 12:46 PM	I didn't really have problems with the layout. Sure, the "no healing" is in the Gov't + Politics section, but that's pretty much the reason why the LoB settled in the Mournlands, so of course they've got to mention it there. Would've been nice if they mentioned it elsewhere too, but the whole Mournlands entry is only a page or two, so it's not unreasonable to expect someone to have read the whole thing pre-game - not that I'm knocking anyone who didn't, you know, the whole reason for buying a campaign setting is so you can avoid spending all your time prepping a game. "Kaius Revealed" was sorta out there, no question about it. I just trust my players to keep their mouths shut if it comes up. Or pull the "What do you know?" dragonshard on them.
Laskaw 10-13-04, 05:07 PM	One thing I'll probably be doing is expanding on secrets revealed in the book when they come up in game. For example, if the PCs would learn about Kaius, they will learn that not only that he's a vampire and killed his grandson, but that he recently changed Aurala into a vampire too. That way you actually give something the players are surprised over even if they know the ECS front-to-back. Personally, I like the players knowing some secrets because it enables them to think of a more clever background. Maybe they want to be a former Blood of Vol cultist who was part of Kaius's harem, or a warforged who was recently created by the LoB but escaped. Plus, IME, the more details you give to the players (even OOC knowledge) the more interested they are in the setting. Though of course, you do have to trust that they won't use OOC knowledge in game.
Darrek 10-13-04, 05:32 PM	I wonder if I'm the only one who felt this way: More than anything else, the Eberron campaign setting made me yearn for the glory days of the TSR boxed set. A book for the PCs (Races, classes, feats, spells, all the crunch and introductory fluff), a book for the DM (or 2, or 3, with the hardcore fluffy goodness that makes the setting spectacular), a full-colour fold-out political/travel-route/geographical map (the thought bringing tears to my eyes), and then the odd little goodies that came with the best of the boxed sets (Still got my Dysheka dice, my Tarokka cards, and my Spelljammer deck plan cards)
Edymnion 10-13-04, 07:02 PM	I wonder if I'm the only one who felt this way: More than anything else, the Eberron campaign setting made me yearn for the glory days of the TSR boxed set. A book for the PCs (Races, classes, feats, spells, all the crunch and introductory fluff), a book for the DM (or 2, or 3, with the hardcore fluffy goodness that makes the setting spectacular), a full-colour fold-out political/travel-route/geographical map (the thought bringing tears to my eyes), and then the odd little goodies that came with the best of the boxed sets (Still got my Dysheka dice, my Tarokka cards, and my Spelljammer deck plan cards)No thanks, $40 is steep enough for a single book, IMO, I don't want to pay $100 just because they wanted to slap on a couple extra covers and an extra $0.02 of paper and plastic goodies. I don't really mind how its got stuff mixed together. When reading about the mournlands, it tells me whats going on in the mournlands. Yeah, sure, it drops a few "secrets" in the process, but oh well. I make sure to only game with mature players who know the differance between in game and out of game knowledge. Yeah, they know the Lord of Blades has this many levels of this, that many levels of that, but they're not going to go about building a LoB-Killer PC. The only time I've ever had to bring people back in line was when one of my DM's had an NPC talking about Vol the Lich, and everybody was just going along with it. I spoke up with the old "What you talkin' 'bout, Willis?" routine, and reminded the other players that the whole Lich thing behind the blood cult wasn't public knowledge. After that, everybody played it the way they were supposed to. Really, the DM/Player mixed info is only a problem if you play with people you can't trust not to metagame.
Brastan 10-13-04, 07:53 PM	A lot of the so called secrets that are printed in sideboxs and in the text are actually rather vague. Although the player (and probably the PCs by extension ) might know that Kaius is... and did... but they don't know what he's doing now, how he's doing it, or who else is involved. Same goes of the Lord of Blades, and a few others. For the amount that had to be stripped and reedited its amazing that the story is very viable, and the rules are for the most part stable. Although I've never found a Wizards book I actually like for its layout. Eberron included.
greatfrito 10-13-04, 10:16 PM	I'd say the "What do you know" dragonshard is an essential with Eberron (hence why it was covered). Player knowledge and character knowledge really needs to be kept seperate. Granted, that's hard, but what makes the post-Last War politics of Khorvaire really interesting are the secret parts... convincing players that "No really! It's really cool! Why? Uh... trust me on it" would just not be fun.
Save-vs-DM 10-14-04, 12:38 AM	I've never had a problem with my players abusing OOC knowledge. They all own the book. It's never been a problem. Like Edymnion, I also have mature players who can handle the IC/OOC situation. Cheers, Save vs DM
Bud Green 10-14-04, 07:33 PM	I'm glad they don't have a DM-only section. That always struck me as naive. If it's published in a book that anyone can buy and read - guess what? It's not a secret! Anyone that pays the money for the book will read it - all of it - regardless of what their DM tells them. Oh yes they will! In fact, anything in a published book that says DM ONLY might as well say PLAYERS READ THIS FIRST. If you think otherwise, you're naive. If you as the DM need to have secret machinations going on then you need to work those things up yourself. Use the published secrets of Eberron as guidelines and examples - but don't be so foolish as to think that players won't know these things. They will. I liked how this was handled with Forgotten Realms sourcebooks. They hinted at legends and told you common rumors, but it was up to the DM to decide what was true and what was false.
MageofMyth 10-15-04, 04:52 PM	I wonder if I'm the only one who felt this way: More than anything else, the Eberron campaign setting made me yearn for the glory days of the TSR boxed set. A book for the PCs (Races, classes, feats, spells, all the crunch and introductory fluff), a book for the DM (or 2, or 3, with the hardcore fluffy goodness that makes the setting spectacular), a full-colour fold-out political/travel-route/geographical map (the thought bringing tears to my eyes), and then the odd little goodies that came with the best of the boxed sets (Still got my Dysheka dice, my Tarokka cards, and my Spelljammer deck plan cards) I really wish that box sets were still put out. I used to love buying a new one, looking at all the new spells, and the new monster pages that came with each. And don't forget the large maps, and dungeon cards. I would gladly pay for a box set.
polt 10-15-04, 04:55 PM	Bud Green. Well, i would regard my self as naive, but my players won't read stuff in the book if i tell them not to. Simple as that.
WynnHuntr2 10-15-04, 07:36 PM	I would gladly pay for a box set. Here, Here!