Post/Author/DateTime	Post
lostintime 02-13-07, 07:11 PM	What level of industrialization do you use in your Eberron campaign? I realize the campaign setting states that it is mostly a medieval setting with high levels of magic simulating technology. I however preferred use and industrialization model. As in some ways even in our modern world we still have "medieval type societies". I personally use 1880 America as an example. The more civilized lands of the five king for instance tend to be more modern and have more modern amenities. While the frontier and more undeveloped lands I tend to use the Western American frontier as an example for what would and would not be available. For example I would consider any major city located within the five kingdoms to hold a fairly high level of industrialization. Replacing coal-fired steam plant's with a magical equivalent. So this would imply textile factories, large-scale smuggling operations, and production of common mundane items on a large scale. I also apply this model to the production of relatively mundane magic items. The only thing I have not figured out for my campaign setting is the status of the assembly line. We give Henry Ford credit for developing the assembly line. However pseudo assembly lines have been around for a long time. What Henry Ford did was to developed any organizational model to develop assembly lines. This particular line of thought has no bearing on the game other than as background information. I like this model because of the richness of an 1880s type setting, everything from the American frontier, the rebuilding of America after the Civil War, and British and other European countries imperialism of the world. This model does not need to conflict with any of the material published for Eberron. For instance the Dragonmarked sourcebook talks about guilds. In the heartland of the five kingdoms guild's merely run the factories. In outlying lands guild membership is still important for people who produce local materials. As the guilds tend to hold monopolies on their various aspects of the industries and services offered in any setting. As anyone else modified the basic industrialization level of the game away from that presented in the Eberron campaign setting? There is nothing wrong with a medieval setting, however I find an emerging industrial society setting to be far more interesting to play in. It gives a richness to the game that is rarely found in fantasy role-playing games.
Alex_ 02-13-07, 08:30 PM	Your views mostly mirror my own. In the cities, you can find inkpens, books with move-able print, and even typewriters. Mostlymagical of course. There are also magical "factories" which are more like massive workshops where multiple people contribute to the collection of materials, crafting of individual components, and basic assembly of magical and alchemical devices before they get to the spellcasters, who only have to concentrate on the enchanting aspects, allowing them to spit out items faster and more affordable. I've also taken some influence from Iron Kingdoms and added brand names. You can buy a bag of holding at most high end adventuring/outfitting business, but one place might call their product "Morgrave's Pocket-sized Vault" and have it hold 20% more stuff than "Boris's Super Sack" sold by competition. A potion of cure light wounds is now "Silve Flame Revitalizing Tonic" according to the guy selling it on the side of the street, even though his version heals 1d4 hp instead of 1d8.
Kreistor2 02-13-07, 11:29 PM	I use an eclectic mix of 1700's to 1900's. The printing press is still stuck in pre-1800, so it isn't the equivalent of steam powered, but I will allow small car-like inventions like the air skiffs in limited quantity. It's not quite steam-punk, but it's close. Mental attitudes are 1850's. That goes for politics, religion, economics, and ethics.
Moebius 02-14-07, 11:14 AM	do you feel that it's a sort of suspension of belief on our parts when it comes to the lack of firearms? It seems like if Eberron were really real, firearms would exist. I am not suggesting that they should be in the setting, I'm just saying that it makes more sense, realistically speaking. Is there a really good convincing reason why firearms are not in the setting?
Identitystolen 02-14-07, 12:05 PM	Is there a really good convincing reason why firearms are not in the setting? Mass produced wands and a wide variety of people who can use them?
Alex_ 02-14-07, 12:58 PM	do you feel that it's a sort of suspension of belief on our parts when it comes to the lack of firearms? It seems like if Eberron were really real, firearms would exist. I am not suggesting that they should be in the setting, I'm just saying that it makes more sense, realistically speaking. Is there a really good convincing reason why firearms are not in the setting? Theme. Eberron is about magic. The idea behind it is that EVERYTHING is done with magic. It's like the Flintstones, where you have some sort of prehistoric animal replacing modern conveniences, only in Eberron, they use magic. So "logically" given the advances in the world in the fields of alchemy and metallurgy (compared to Forgotten Realms which DOES have firearms), no, there's no reason I could probably give that would be convincing. However, from a thematic point of view, Eberron's "magic as technology" theme means that non-magical solutions to technological issues should always be a lower priority than magical ones. So if you have to choose between advancing medicine and advancing healing magic you go with healing magic. If you want airships, you don't use lighter than air gases, you use magic wood. If you want a train, you don't use steam engines and tracks, you use a magical lightning elemental. Plus, for whatever reasons, people hate guns in their DnD. I personally don't mind, and allow DMG Renaissance firearms in my Eberron games.
lostintime 02-14-07, 01:33 PM	Theme. Eberron is about magic. The idea behind it is that EVERYTHING is done with magic. It's like the Flintstones, where you have some sort of prehistoric animal replacing modern conveniences, only in Eberron, they use magic. I think Alex gave the basic reson why they dont have firearms. I dont care one way or the other when it come to D&D in general and fire arms. You need to rember that the Chinese had gunpowder for about a thousand years (I could be wrong on this figure) before they developed the first crude guns. The only reason why the firearm replaced the bow for European armies is because it is relatively easy to shoot and requires no eccentric training. The Longbow require about a year of training to produce an effective archer. In a few intensive weeks of training you can produce a relatively decent marksman. Other uses for gunpowder, such as large artillery pieces, you already have in Eberron in the form of wand of fireball and other nasty magical effects. If you think about it it magically enhanced crossbow also give you an easy to use rapid firing firearm replacement. Another use for gunpowder is as a construction tool. If you can cast a few simple spells to soften stone, change consistency of the earth, or even shaped stone, what do you need a chemical explosive for.
Kreistor2 02-14-07, 02:41 PM	The only reason why the firearm replaced the bow for European armies is because it is relatively easy to shoot and requires no eccentric training. The Longbow require about a year of training to produce an effective archer. In a few intensive weeks of training you can produce a relatively decent marksman. This subject is not that simple. There are many who disagree with it. There are also issues such as breakage, cost and quantity of ammunition carried, and so on. Shooting the longbow really well takes years, true, but creating someone capable of shooting a bow into the mass of an army does not take that much time. I learned how to shoot the bow well enough to stand on the line in only a few days. I couldn't hit an individual target at range, but when you're shooting at a charging army 100 yards away, you're not aiming at an individual, you're arcing so high and the travel time is so long, you're just praying someone is in the way when it comes down. At 30 feet, you can aim at an individual, but at 30' I could make a disabling wound with a rush shot 2/3 of the time, and if I missed that one guy, I would have hit the one behind him, and that's with only a few evening's training, and I'm a clutz with little capacity for accuracy with gun or bow. If you wanted to train a mass of men on the bow quickly for an army, you could do it. Many feel the primary reason the firearm won out was solely economics. Guns were cheaper than longbows. Ammunition was easier to carry, faster to make, and simply more convenient. Others think that it was the shock value of a rank of firearms shooting that won for them. Those early guns were nothing if not loud. They scared the enemy off the battlefield. Which theory is true? We'll likely never know.
Alex_ 02-14-07, 03:46 PM	I think Alex gave the basic reson why they dont have firearms. I dont care one way or the other when it come to D&D in general and fire arms. For thematic reasons. Ther is no real "logical" or historical reason why they shouldn't exist in Eberron. You need to rember that the Chinese had gunpowder for about a thousand years (I could be wrong on this figure) before they developed the first crude guns. The only reason why the firearm replaced the bow for European armies is because it is relatively easy to shoot and requires no eccentric training. The Longbow require about a year of training to produce an effective archer. In a few intensive weeks of training you can produce a relatively decent marksman. Firearms existed in Europe for over a century If not longer) before they began replacing crossbows. The crossbow, for the longest, remained the primary ranged weapon of the common man, but both bows and firearms were still used. There's nothing historically inaccurate about firearms, bows, and crossbows (including repeating crossbows) existing all at the same time. In DnD, crossbows are simple weapons that deal medium damage with slow reloading. Bows are martial weapons that deal the least damage, but have the fastest reload time. Firearms are exotic weapons that deal the most damage with slow reloading times. Repeating crossbows are exotic weapons that deal medium damage with fast reloading times. All weapons are balanced against each other in the game, which mean each one has a place. Other uses for gunpowder, such as large artillery pieces, you already have in Eberron in the form of wand of fireball and other nasty magical effects. But they us ballistas and catapults in Eberron too, even though they pale in comparison to most AoE magical spells at higher levels. Magic doesn't totally remove the utility of non-magical artillery, so cannons utilizing gunpower can be a nice compliment. It's still logical. If you think about it it magically enhanced crossbow also give you an easy to use rapid firing firearm replacement. Firearms can be magically enhanced too.
Cifer 02-14-07, 04:02 PM	But they us ballistas and catapults in Eberron too, even though they pale in comparison to most AoE magical spells at higher levels. I'd see ballistas and catapults as relatively cheap (haven't got the price tables with me) substitutes. Wands are easier to carry, have 50 charges you don't need to supply with ammo, and you only need a first-level adept, wizard or the like instead of training a whole artillery crew.
Alex_ 02-14-07, 05:48 PM	I'd see ballistas and catapults as relatively cheap (haven't got the price tables with me) substitutes. Cannons are big tubes of wood/metal with gunpowder and anything you want jammed into them. They don't have to be fantastically expensive compared to ballistas or catapults, but have their own advantages in terms of performance as a non-magical artillery alternative. Wands are easier to carry, have 50 charges you don't need to supply with ammo, and you only need a first-level adept, wizard or the like instead of training a whole artillery crew. Doesn't stop folks from using non-magical siege weapons though, and cannons can be rather effective non-magical siege weapons.
mhacdebhandia 02-14-07, 08:08 PM	I generally assume a non-historical level of industrialisation - dragonmarked houses such as Cannith will operate large-scale workshops somewhat akin to factories for major projects, but most goods will still be produced by independent craftsmen rather than on assembly lines. Likewise, I would assume that House Sivis relies upon scribes for most of its work, but that official documents such as travel papers, warrants, and the like are probably produced as standard forms by a magical process somewhat akin to printing and simply filled in with the relevant details. So I suppose there would be an equivalent to the printing press for large-scale work, including books, but no equivalent to typewriters for small-scale or one-off documents. Airships would be built in hangars by teams of craftsmen, but soarsleds would probably still be produced by individual builders or small teams in private workshops, the same way large ships are built in docks but small boats might be constructed by individuals. Another example: warforged were produced en masse by creation forges, but artificers still build their own homonculi themselves. Big projects would be standardised and industrialised, but smaller projects and custom work would be done on an individual scale.
mhacdebhandia 02-14-07, 08:10 PM	As for firearms, I exclude them from Eberron via thematically-justified fiat. They look for magical solutions to their needs, not technological or chemical solutions.
Sereno 02-16-07, 10:33 AM	I don't think Eberron's reached the assembly line level of technology ... most item creation still seems to be done by individuals making Craft checks. As far firearms go, it makes NO sense what-so-ever to carry several pounds of unstable and dangerous explosives on your person when just about anyone you meet could potentially shoot flame at you directly from their hands. Burning Hands + gunpowder = BOOM!!
Yakman 02-16-07, 10:36 AM	As for firearms, I exclude them from Eberron via thematically-justified fiat. They look for magical solutions to their needs, not technological or chemical solutions. Well why not dragonshard powered firearms? Stuff that uses magic instead of gunpowder? It would seem to me that someone would've figured this out in the Last War.
SSj3goblin 02-16-07, 10:52 AM	Magic of Eberron has a view on the level of industrialization of Eberron wich is that Eberron is not Industrialized at all. Sure they sell and buy lots of magic, have trains and airships. But each item is made by one (or many, in some case) artisan but are never mass produced. Even Cannith approved Guild swords are all the same but each one is made on its own. You won't find a factory of Cannith swords. Same goes for warforged, who were produced one at a time. So I'm guessing by Industrialization you really mean "Renaissance / Industrial revolution" type commodities.
goblin_pride 02-16-07, 10:52 AM	As for firearms, I exclude them from Eberron via thematically-justified fiat. They look for magical solutions to their needs, not technological or chemical solutions. The only real exception I make to this is the ancient Dhakaani that used a siege engine that "belched flame and smoke as it roared and threw the largest of stones into the enemy's walls". Not that they were common or even effective, but the use of the more primitive cannons did exist.
Yakman 02-16-07, 11:06 AM	The only real exception I make to this is the ancient Dhakaani that used a siege engine that "belched flame and smoke as it roared and threw the largest of stones into the enemy's walls". Not that they were common or even effective, but the use of the more primitive cannons did exist. Like the great Tsar Cannon? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Cannon
goblin_pride 02-16-07, 11:46 AM	Like the great Tsar Cannon? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Cannon Not entirely, a bit more like a cross between a bombard and a mortar that was heavily decorated like the eastern cannons. The Dhakaani saw the inherent danger of gunpowder on the battlefield, so they rarely ever used them, but in times of siege when they could bring them up close to fortifications, they would use more than a few to quickly destroy city walls and defensive fortifications. On the third day of the siege, Kethet the Elder wheeled the great dragon-bells up to the base of the eastern walls and his engineers ripped and blasted the fortifications from atop the walls in a thunderous symphony. Many died that day feeding the dragon-bells as they tore the defenses of the wall from their foundations and in the end, their sacrifice allowed the siege towers clear access to the top of the enemy's walls.
Alex_ 02-16-07, 11:58 AM	The only real exception I make to this is the ancient Dhakaani that used a siege engine that "belched flame and smoke as it roared and threw the largest of stones into the enemy's walls". Not that they were common or even effective, but the use of the more primitive cannons did exist. Which book is that from?
Yakman 02-16-07, 12:13 PM	On the third day of the siege, Kethet the Elder wheeled the great dragon-bells up to the base of the eastern walls and his engineers ripped and blasted the fortifications from atop the walls in a thunderous symphony. Many died that day feeding the dragon-bells as they tore the defenses of the wall from their foundations and in the end, their sacrifice allowed the siege towers clear access to the top of the enemy's walls. I'm not sure this makes any sense. It says that it destroys the defenses from the foundations--which seems to me that it would destroy the walls themselves.... yet in the end, siege towers were used to take the walls..... Missing something :confused:
goblin_pride 02-16-07, 12:16 PM	Which book is that from? It's not. I needed a desription of a canon from a perspective of a person that had never seen one so I used my brain and extrapolated the description, using what I know about the discharge of cannons to make it sound more fearsome. Sorry, it's the writer in me.
goblin_pride 02-16-07, 12:20 PM	It says that it destroys the defenses from the foundations--which seems to me that it would destroy the walls themselves.... yet in the end, siege towers were used to take the walls..... Actually razing the walls themselves would be possible. But I thought for a bit of flavor, an example of using cannons under fire to blast the fortifications off the top of the walls would be more dramatic. A bit of high adventure to a siege story, non?
Yakman 02-16-07, 12:30 PM	that's what I thought you meant. Might just want to change a few words around--and include something like 'tearing great gashes in the stone walls' to show the shots that hit the walls and not just the crenelations.
goblin_pride 02-16-07, 12:38 PM	Might just want to change a few words around--and include something like 'tearing great gashes in the stone walls' to show the shots that hit the walls and not just the crenelations. I think that one is perfect the way it is. But you're right, in later descriptions I would definately use the image of huge chunks of the walls being ripped apart by the stones thrown from the flaming maws of the great "dragon-bells". Even the kenning is a perfect fit for the Dhakaani, with the position of bards being so important to their culture. The important part in my mind is the huge danger to both target and firer of the cannons. Sure, they'll tear a fortress down to it's foundations, but how many of the cannons will explode rather than discharging properly?
mhacdebhandia 02-16-07, 04:04 PM	Well why not dragonshard powered firearms? Stuff that uses magic instead of gunpowder? It would seem to me that someone would've figured this out in the Last War. Magic isn't as "democratic" as technology. I mean, I can't think of a way to arm non-spellcasters with existing magical weapons like a wand of magic missile without seriously training them in Use Magic Device - a skill for which effective and reliable use requires class levels the average soldier simply doesn't have. Yes, you could create a new, dragonshard-powered magic item which an average level 1 warrior can operate reliably. On the other hand, by the guidelines in the Dungeon Master's Guide a "wand" of magic missile activated by a command word would cost 900 gp at a minimum to create, and that gets you the effect of the spell as cast by a first-level caster: an enormous 1d4+1 damage. That's for one use, like the cape of the mountebank which grants the use of dimension door once per day. 100 uses per day would ratchet the cost to a sky-high 18,000 gp . . . and that's just the cost to create it. At those prices doesn't the cost of a light crossbow you can fire every round for 17.5 gp (again, cost to create) plus 1 gp per 20 bolts start to seem reasonable, even if it doesn't always auto-hit like magic missile does? I don't view "It's powered by dragonshards!" as an excuse to abandon the rules of magic item creation. Even eldritch machines are explicitly plot devices, not written-up artifacts. I lean towards what Keith said: dragonshard dust and fragments are the reason, in Eberron, why magic items are so expensive to create; they're the "magic supplies" mentioned in the Dungeon Master's Guide, the primary "material component" of item creation. Rather than handwaving a dragonshard-powered rifle equivalent into the setting, I choose to assume that most common soldiers are equipped with mundane weapons, and that the magical ordnance they might carry are more like grenades or mines (blast disks, for instance) carried by squads in World War I. Real magic items - a wand of fireball, a ring of the ram, and so on - would be carried by specialists trained as spellcasters, usually artificers or wizards.