| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Enslaved DM07-12-04, 01:35 AM | Actually, I'm not try to flame anyone, but I do want an attention getting title. The strength of the Realms is not that the setting is flawless. There are a number of things I dislike about it (Chosen Horde, the weave, the do-gooderHarpers are irratating). And it isn't that the Eberron sucks. It's the presentation. From the first Dragon articles I read, to the box sets, and up to 3.0 Realms setting book, the atmosphere of the Realms has seeped through. It is written like a guide book for adventurers. Ruins and dangerous areas are detailed in the descriptions of nations. Evil organizations get country-sized write ups. Colorful villians are detailed. There is a monster hunted wilderness all around. Eberron suffers from the same thing that killed my interest in Greyhawk. It is deadly dull. The country write ups are uninspiring. They fill me with zero enthusiasm. It is a game that references pulp noir and swashbuckling in the beginning, but doesn't create the atmosphere within. Airships can be found in the equipment section, but where do I find out about air pirates? They are nowhere to be found. I don't say this to beat up on other settings. Planescape, Dark Sun, and the Realms were all written with an adventure-eye view and they remain beloved to gamers for that reason. Pick them up and the adventure rolls off. Greyhawk and Eberron do not. The flavor they are suppposed to convey does not come through in their primary source material. The source book should LEAD BY EXAMPLE. They don't. The fault is in the writing. It does not evoke the wonder or the adventure of the world. The fans of both settings are ill served by it. |
| Ranger REG07-12-04, 03:43 AM | I see ember glowing. Kindling catching a spark. |
| Another Gnome07-12-04, 04:36 AM | Isn't it a kind of wasted effort to tell people here that FR is better..? |
| warlockco07-12-04, 04:46 AM | Originally posted by Another Gnome Isn't it a kind of wasted effort to tell people here that FR is better..? Well, you know some people do have to step up to the podium, and give a speech, even if it isn't required. |
| Thondred07-12-04, 05:30 AM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM I don't say this to beat up on other settings. Planescape, Dark Sun, and the Realms were all written with an adventure-eye view and they remain beloved to gamers for that reason. Pick them up and the adventure rolls off. Greyhawk and Eberron do not. The flavor they are suppposed to convey does not come through in their primary source material. The source book should LEAD BY EXAMPLE. They don't. The fault is in the writing. It does not evoke the wonder or the adventure of the world. The fans of both settings are ill served by it. Different things hit different people, different ways. The writing in both Eberron and Greyhawk evokes every bit of the wonder of the world to me. But neither of us can be the authority on what is or is not inspiring to anyone other than ourselves, which is why these kinds of threads are so pointless. Setting preference is just that, personal preference and opinion, and nothing more. |
| Mr. VanderMeer07-12-04, 08:54 AM | While I like the Forgotten Realms (mainly due to its extensiveness and detail), I do think you are wrong. Greyhawk is a very evocative setting in my eyes. When I read the Living Geyhawk Gazetteer I could see adventure seeping through all of the pages. It's history is very rich and fascinating and it provides a great basis to build upon. It contains a lot of opportunities and it's inspiring. Eberron might seem less compelling, because it is only one book at the moment. It hasn't had the chance to really grow through time. I do however see its potential and I like the new ideas that this setting contains. Do not confuse the abundance of Forgotten Realms material with inspirational superiority. (in some cases this overabundance of detail is actually a drawback of the Realms.) As I said, I like the Forgotten Realms a lot, but IMHO it's definitely not the best setting out there. |
| Mystery Man07-12-04, 09:06 AM | I don't think Eberron is deadly dull. It's actually quite interesting and when my FR campaign wraps up my players want me to run it for a while. But I like the Realms better for many reasons and will always go back to it, and continue to by the books and supliments etc. Deadly dull is another setting by another company (without naming names) that has the DnD logo on it. |
| Mystery Man07-12-04, 09:08 AM | Originally posted by Mr. VanderMeer Do not confuse the abundance of Forgotten Realms material with inspirational superiority. (in some cases this overabundance of detail is actually a drawback of the Realms.) And it is also that overabundance that prevents many new settings to be truly original. Eberron - age of dragons, FR - age of dragons. Sharn (I think, I don't have the setting book as of yet, just looked at my players so far) has a big dungeon underneath it? Waterdeep. You see what I'm getting at. Another one: On airships, Halruaa had airships dating back to the Netheril migration. |
| The_Declaration07-12-04, 09:14 AM | it's imo impossible to compare the Realms now with Eberron now. the FR have lik 16 years of history, with dozens of novels, video games and sourcebooks published, while Eberron has been released 1 month ago. Give the setting a rest, there are no Pirates in the air so far? Talk about it in 3 years again? I don't know about the future of these two settings, but i think it was quite sad that wotc was following only one world of D&D. It's much better to have 2 different settings from which you can pick for your campaign. Some will like one more than the other and will play 100% of their games in it. Some will like both and choose one or the other, depending of the atmosphere they need for their current campaign. So as long as: - the 2 settings get a strong support (3-4 sourcebooks a year) - the content is of quality - the settings don't overlap I don't think that anybody should be unhappy of the existence of Eberron. |
| Mystery Man07-12-04, 09:22 AM | You know guys, just because the book doesn't say that there are no pirates in the air doesn't mean you cant put them there. I've noticed a lot of complaining that certain things aren't in what and am quite astonished at the unwillingness (notice I did not say inability) of people to think for themselves. |
| Masakado07-12-04, 10:10 AM | Originally posted by Ranger REG I see ember glowing. Kindling catching a spark. :D I agree that at this stage in the game, comparing the FR to Eberron is pretty much comparing apples to oranges. Eberron is a setting in it's infancy and obvously doesn't have the history of development that the FR has. I ran the adventure in the back of the Eberron sourcebook over the weekend & my players seemed to enjoy being in a setting and playing races that they practically knew nothing about. One of my people has fallen in love with the Warforged, and has statted out his Mythril Body Warforged Monk quite well. I haven't seen him this excited about a game race since the Genasi. While there are some things about the Eberron setting that make me shrug (ex. for there to be so many powerful monsters, there sure don't seem to be a lot of powerful NPC's, at least not statted out ones), my players seem to enjoy the overall "pulp cinema" feel of Eberron. I've noticed a lot of complaining that certain things aren't in what and am quite astonished at the unwillingness (notice I did not say inability) of people to think for themselves. Such things arise, sadly, when folks spend too much time delving over sourcebooks and not enough time rolling dice, IMO. Instead of studying the books til you're nauseous and asking "Why?", get some friends over, order pizza, play til 2AM and ask "Why not?" |
| Mr. VanderMeer07-12-04, 10:19 AM | Instead of studying the books til you're nauseous and asking "Why?", get some friends over, order pizza, play til 2AM and ask "Why not?" I agree. And a setting with a limited history gives a lot of possibilities for releasing your own creativity. |
| Boz Shulun07-12-04, 11:14 AM | To quote Willow Ufgood: "Yuck.... Trolls!" |
| WizO_BigSister07-12-04, 11:23 AM | Sigh ... once again I have to tell you the golden rule. “It is ok to disagree with what someone has written; it is not ok to attack the person who wrote it. If you can't tell the difference then maybe you shouldn't make the post!" Please stop the remarks about other posters, and stick to discussing the content of other people's posts. |
| Auburn07-12-04, 02:26 PM | Overall I sort of agree with your feeling if maybe not the way you've put it. From what I've heard about Eberron it seems fundamentally uninteresting to me. It seems like the Last War destroyed so much that the situation has pretty well shaken itself out. As a result there aren't a lot of monters/bad guys around. Someone on the Eberron board even did percentages of the population by race, and the individual monstrous races had pretty small percentages of the overall population. Overall from what little I've heard Eberron seems to be a campaign setting for people who want a setting that is heavy on roleplaying while also making it hard for the PCs to have much of an effect on the world. I think there is hope though because as anohter topic on the Eberron board said the main continent on the planet has an extremely small population as given in the ECS so there's plenty of room for stuff to be added by the DM or at a later date by WOTC. Originally posted by Enslaved DM It is a game that references pulp noir and swashbuckling in the beginning, but doesn't create the atmosphere within. Airships can be found in the equipment section, but where do I find out about air pirates? They are nowhere to be found. The thing about this from what I understand is that airships are cutting edge technology in Eberron. The skills of one or perhaps more of the dragon marked houses are needed to construct one. As a result there aren't that many out there, and those that are are only in the hands of those trusted enough to have them. |
| Enslaved DM07-12-04, 02:50 PM | I'm not saying Greyhawk and Eberron are dull. I'm saying the main books are inferior. Read any country in the original Greyhawk boxed set or the 3.0 gazeteer and compare that to the descriptions of nations in the Realms main book. It isn't even close. The Realms book has far more adventure ideas, places to explore, mysteries etc. Eberron and Greyhawk only give you a basic overview. I shouldn't have to invent air pirates for Eberron. I can do that. I'm buying a big, expensive hard bound book that is suppossed to give me an adventure setting alive with pulp noir and swashbuckling. It is the responsibility of the writer to deliver. And that's the problem. They don't. Greyhawk was the home of the original D&D campaign. It should be full of adventure ideas. But the main settting bood doesn't supply it. Compare the information about the Zhentarim and the Red Wizards of Thay to that of the Hierarchs of the Horned Society and the Scarlet Brotherhood. The organizations are roughly equivelent, but the Realms book tells me far more about them. I have a better idea on how to use them in a campaign. My point is for the use of both players and DMs the Realms book is superior. It isn't that Greyhawk is inferior. The presentation of Greyhawk is inferior. |
| Masakado07-12-04, 03:02 PM | Originally posted by Auburn Overall I sort of agree with your feeling if maybe not the way It seems like the Last War destroyed so much that the situation has pretty well shaken itself out. As a result there aren't a lot of monters/bad guys around. While this is somewhat true, it's also a bit of a misnomer. Eberron has it's share of traditional villainy (ie. worshippers of the Dark Six, remnants of a goblin empire), but the most interesting thing to note is it's acceptance of alignment as barometer. For example, this means that unlike the Realms, your central Eberron villain can be a fully functioning cleric placed inside the environs of a good-aligned church, and still have him receive spells from the deities of said good-aligned church. You'd be hard pressed to place a NE cleric in the Church of Sune, but such a thing is possible in Eberron. Also, it means that you're just as likely to face off against an evil Gold Dragon as you are to befrend a good Bugbear. There are villains in Eberron, just not in the places you'd find FR villains. Actually, this is one of the things about Eberron that annoys me, as I've always liked the moral compasses that go along with the FR setting. When I play the FR, I enjoy being a clear cut good guy, and I am not sure I'd enjoy the realtivity of alignment that Eberron offers. So far it is a fun setting to DM, and my players enjoy playing in the setting. However, I'm still undecided whether or not I personally would enjoy being a player. Originally posted by Enslaved DM I shouldn't have to invent air pirates for Eberron. I can do that. I'm buying a big, expensive hard bound book that is suppossed to give me an adventure setting alive with pulp noir and swashbuckling. It is the responsibility of the writer to deliver. And that's the problem. They don't. So, spending $40 means that all of your material is supposed to be handed to you in a neat little package? :confused: And why the quip about air pirates? There are airships in Faerun, but no air pirates. Probably because no one is stupid enough to attempt to hijack a Halruaan airship. Air travel via airship in Eberron is controlled by a powerful dragonmarked merchant house, so you could draw the same analogy as to why there is no mention of air piracy in Eberron (ie. it's suicide) Originally posted by Enslaved DM The organizations are roughly equivelent, but the Realms book tells me far more about them. I have a better idea on how to use them in a campaign. Aha, so your issue is fluff. I can't say that I don't agree with your point, but then again, there's a whopping total of one Eberron sourcebook and one follow up adventure in Dungeon magazine, and only so much space in the aforementioned sourcebook. Your complaints aren't much different from those of the people that were around when the FR was a ground-floor setting. Naturally you don't want to wait around for a decade for Eberron to become a fleshed out setting, and as more material is released for the setting, the more "complete" it will seem to you. |
| Thondred07-12-04, 03:13 PM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM Eberron suffers from the same thing that killed my interest in Greyhawk. It is deadly dull. You did say it was deadly dull. But I see your points. Rather than seeing this as a downfall however, I see it as a boon. That's the problem with the Realms in my opinion...they are overdefined, they leave me little to invent on my own for the setting without probably changing something in the book. That's fine too though, I don't mind changing the setting around a bit. This game is about being creative. I don't want an Eberron book that tells me everything and defines it all for me. I want some room to be a creative DM, or let my players shape the world. One of our current PCs in our Eberron game has already become a pirate of an airship, teaming up with disaffected renegade House Lyrandar pilots. There you go. As someone else pointed out, the use of airships is still low. Give it time to develope and I am sure you will see more air piracy. As someone else mentioned, comparing FR to Eberron right now as far as detail goes is completely absurd. Eberron hasn't even existed for but a fraction of the time. It needs years to develope. As it is, Eberron more than delivers enough adventure to keep me busy, and it is certainly a breath of fresh air from older settings that I need a break from. As for the FR book being superior to the Eberron book, I don't see how a book that stunts creativity through perpetual overdefinition of the setting can be superior. I see it that way because I like to have something left to create or add to the setting to personalize it, which is also why I love Greyhawk. There are many other reasons why I dislike the Realms, but they aren't really applicable to this post at the moment. On this, I think we just have to agree to disagree, and realize that there are different strokes for different folks, and neither is better or worse. Cheers. :devil: |
| Enslaved DM07-12-04, 03:23 PM | Yes, I am buying a setting for an adventure game. I should get more than two paragraphs on an evil organization. The Realms gives me more, why should Eberron give me less? I wasn't blasting the setting. Sure, there can be a corrupt priest working in a temple. Sure there are all sorts of options. Why don't they give me some good examples? Ideas are easy. Anyone can come up with the idea for a novel. Writing the damn thing is something else. I'm not paying for ideas. I'm paying for development. I'm paying (or I should say two of my friends payed) $50+ Canadian for a hardback book. Look at the list of movies at the beginning? Does the rest of the book evoke the same feelings as those movies? Do ideas for adventures bubble forth? Is it full of organizations and cabals and conspiracies that scream swashbuckling and film noir? Are they developed and easy to use in my game? If the answer is yes, then you got good value. If the answer is no, then I you didn't. I do like some of Eberron's features, but the setting fails to excite me as a player or a DM. And that is why it fails. |
| Masakado07-12-04, 03:47 PM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM Yes, I am buying a setting for an adventure game. I should get more than two paragraphs on an evil organization. The Realms gives me more, why should Eberron give me less? Depends on your definition of less, I suppose. It also depends on whether or not you pick "freedom from choice" when given freedom of choice. You really should pick up an old version of the FR books. In the earlier stuff, the section with the iconic NPC's consisted of blurbs of three sentences or more, and about half of them had levels associated with them. This was a over a decade ago. The FR has had the benefit of multiple revisions and facelifts, and as we all know not all plastic surgery is good plastic surgery. You're seeing Eberron at the ground floor which reads about the same as the FR did on the ground floor. Go buy some graph paper & make some stuff up. Originally posted by Enslaved DM Anyone can come up with the idea for a novel. But not everyone can come up with an idea for a good novel. Originally posted by Enslaved DM I'm not paying for ideas. I'm paying for development. Keith gives you the keys to your very own car and you decide to take the bus. ;) All joking aside, your comment is spot-on and I suppose you have to take a "Glass half full or half empty" philosophy when dealing with Eberron. The lack of fluff in Eberron is indeed disheartening on first glance, and as I said before, I had to make up a lot of things, especially NPC's, on the fly. Honestly, I'm not sure what I have more problems with: a setting like Eberron where I have to burn the midnight oil to keep it breathing, or a setting like the Realms which has been defined to death and just "happens" without much effort on my part. One thing that irks me about Eberron is the whole "relative power" issue. A lot of anti-FR people gripe about the iconic "munchkins" like Elminster that seem to keep Faerun a happy, joyful place. Eberron is, for all intensive purposes, completely devoid of such iconics and that is annoying, especially considering that some of the more formidable forces of Eberron are extremely formidable. I've gone from a setting where my PC's are eclipsed by NPC's, to a setting where my PC's could be the stereotypical "world's last hope," and that strikes me as a bit too cartooney (if "cartooney" is a word). Then again, I can't be too harsh because after all, there is only one sourcebook, and more information should be coming down the pike.. Eberron is a newborn. We have to be patient with newborns. |
| Faraer07-12-04, 04:02 PM | The presentation of Greyhawk isn't inferior to the Realms, it's just a different approach: a basic setting for adventures that trusts the DM to provide societal details (from his knowledge of medieval and renaissance history) and a lot of the fantastic inspiration (cued by the modules which are the World of Greyhawk as much as the setting books are, and inspired by an assumed shared reading in 20th-century fantasy). To someone with that mindset, which I can share in, the Realms' great detail is obscurantist and unhelpful to running campaigns. Long live difference. I don't know about Eberron, but it would take centuries of rules-heavy 3E sourcebooks to equal the lore the Realms has gathered in its 37 years; if it had that as a goal. |
| Enslaved DM07-12-04, 04:24 PM | To use previous metaphors I'm paying for a body and I get a skeleton. The problem isn't the realms advantage in history. The feeling of adventure comes through in the original Dragon articles and in the earlier boxed sets. Greyhawk is old and still dry. Does anyone remember the year calender in the original boxed set? The one with several interesting incidents a month, each begging to be used as the core of an adventure. Even if you used none of them, you still got an idea of what the Realms was like. Nothing in the Greyhawk source material or Eberron comes close. It's a shame, but the core setting book fails to convey the themes of the setting. |
| Masakado07-12-04, 04:48 PM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM To use previous metaphors I'm paying for a body and I get a skeleton.. And as some of us have said before, whether you see the seeming "lack of development" as a blessing or a curse is up to the individual. What you see as a "skeleton," some may see as an opportunity to get their hands dirty in a setting for the first time in a long time. Their first chance to fill some blanks in for themselves, instead of feeling as if they have to earn a PhD in Game Lore and study decades worth of source material, before they feel they can confidently start a campaign. I am also not sure why folks assume that because someone like Eberron that they hate the Realms, or think it impossible to like Eberron because someone likes the Realms. I enjoy both settings for completely contradictory reasons, but that's my prerogative. |
| Ormus07-12-04, 04:50 PM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM It's a shame, but the core setting book fails to convey the themes of the setting. Eh? I can't think of one theme of Eberron that does not come across with useful brilliance in the setting. What themes exactly are you referring to? Country writups are uninspiring? The way countries interact in Eberron are far more interesting than in the Realms(where it seems like good nations are monolithically so). The countries are extremely inspiring, and the recent Last War only furthers the intrigue of the new nations struggling for dominance. If perhaps just Amn and Tethyr had half the inspiration I might play FR. But I don't, and they don't :devil:. What countries of Eberron to you find particularly uninspiring? I am curious. Everything about the Eberron book creates the swashbuckling/pulp atmosphere, from the action points to the endless possibilities of intrigue of the nations/dragonmarked houses/religions/cults/etc. By the time I run out of ideas from the setting book, I will have developed plenty of my own, and as it stands, more books will be coming out to replenish the campaign. Like someone else stated, the use of airships has not yet expanded enough to account for widespread airship piracy, but you could easily change that for your game with a little creative thinking. You can hardly call that a setting defect just because your personal desire for airship pirates doesn't fit with the setting as it comes. The ECSB conveys every bit of what it should(with the exception of a decent map :D ), and certainly leads by example. Give the book another read, try playing it some, and see if it comes through. If not, hey, go play the Realms if that is what you prefer. If you want every detail handed to you on a silver platter requiring no creative innovation on your part, the Realms is probably just the thing for you. That does not mean there is something wrong or inferior with a setting that leaves something for the DM to decide on his or her own. :rolleyes: To each their own. I enjoy the Realms, Greyhawk, and at the moment, I especially enjoy Eberron. They are all great in their own ways. |
| Enslaved DM07-12-04, 05:46 PM | Read an account of Cormyr and you have dozens of potential adventure sites before getting to dynastic conflicts (Cormyr's noble are fracticious). What monsters plague the borders of Eberron's nations? What regions within them are dangerous? What monsters haunt which woods? If I want something nasty around Dagger Dale a quick look in the Realms book will give me good ideas. What nation oozes film-noir or swashbuckling? The sky city seems to have potential, but not secret societies or crime lords leap out at me? Where is crisis? Where are the lurkers in the darkness? I don't need your permission to ignore material. I can do that. But I have to have the material to ignore. Two of my friends bought the Eberron book and were disappointed. They won't buy anything more. That is a failure and I am laying it where it belongs: at Wizard's feet. Maybe if they hadn't fired half of their game designers it would have been better. I'm glad you're enjoying Eberron. There are things in it that I like. But the book doesn't deliver on it's promise to be the gateway to excitement and adventure. And it isn't a unique occurance. It's the same thing that makes Greyhawk dull. The source material doesn't convey the setting. If I read the Greyhawk gazeteer I will learn almost nothing about the Horned Society, the Circle of Eight, Castle Greyhaw, the Scarlet Brotherhood, etcetera. These are the things a campaign book should focus on, but that are barely described. What can you tell me about the Dragon Below? Little. Eberron deserved better. |
| Masakado07-12-04, 05:50 PM | Originally posted by Ormus I enjoy the Realms, Greyhawk, and at the moment, I especially enjoy Eberron. They are all great in their own ways. Hopefully folks on all sides of the fence will draw this healthy conclusion, even if you don't particularly care for another setting. The most important thing to acknowledge is that no one posting here is wrong for feeling the way they feel about a setting, and I hope the discussion presses forward with respect to that spirit. I love the Realms and right now, I'm really beginning to appreciate Eberron. Hopefully there is enough acceptance to conclude that one can appreciate both settings and does not have to "chose a side." |
| Ranger REG07-12-04, 06:19 PM | Originally posted by Masakado The most important thing to acknowledge is that no one posting here is wrong for feeling the way they feel about a setting, and I hope the discussion presses forward with respect to that spirit. I optimistically hope it would be, but history have shown that a thread like this -- however good intention in the beginning -- usually end up being a means to bash other products. That and the fact that I have such low confidence in humanity. |
| Thondred07-12-04, 07:04 PM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM What monsters plague the borders of Eberron's nations? What regions within them are dangerous? What monsters haunt which woods? If I want something nasty around Dagger Dale a quick look in the Realms book will give me good ideas. What nation oozes film-noir or swashbuckling? The sky city seems to have potential, but not secret societies or crime lords leap out at me? Where is crisis? Where are the lurkers in the darkness? I don't need your permission to ignore material. I can do that. But I have to have the material to ignore. Two of my friends bought the Eberron book and were disappointed. They won't buy anything more. That is a failure and I am laying it where it belongs: at Wizard's feet. Maybe if they hadn't fired half of their game designers it would have been better. I'm glad you're enjoying Eberron. There are things in it that I like. But the book doesn't deliver on it's promise to be the gateway to excitement and adventure. And it isn't a unique occurance. It's the same thing that makes Greyhawk dull. The source material doesn't convey the setting. If I read the Greyhawk gazeteer I will learn almost nothing about the Horned Society, the Circle of Eight, Castle Greyhaw, the Scarlet Brotherhood, etcetera. These are the things a campaign book should focus on, but that are barely described. What can you tell me about the Dragon Below? Little. Eberron deserved better. From what I am looking at, every nation entry in the Eberron book has sites of interest, adventure hooks and ideas, as well as sufficient detail to add your own touches, but not too much detail. Certainly up to par with the FRSCB. What monsters plague the borders of Eberron's nations? If you read the book, you could probably answer this for yourself. But here you go: (not to mention many of Eberron's nations plague eachother's borders, or did so recently) The Dragons of Argonnessen plague Aerenal with frequence. The monstrous humanoids of Droaam plague the Western reaches of Breland. Cults of the Dragon Below/Aberrations plague the Shadow Marches, Lizard clans of Q'bara there, etc etc. The list goes on, you just need to read the book. A quick look even. ;) If I can't find a monster to throw in a forest, I can look through the monster section, or a Monster Manual, find creatures that live in forests, and bam. All set. What nations ooze the thematic elements of the setting? Why all of them of course. Karnnath, The Demon Wastes, The Shadow Marches, Talenta, Aerenal, etc. They all have this flavor oozing out of them. You don't have to like the flavor, but it is there. Even Sharn has agents of Sora Katra(one of the Hag daughters of Sora Kell) around, taking over other criminal elements in the city. The Order of the Emerald Claw? The Aurum? There are plenty of Lurkers. Again it really sounds like you did not read or are not very familiar with the material you are assaulting. Where is crisis? Where is crisis not? It is everywhere. When alignments are not black and white(as they are in the Realms) more conflict is not only inevitable, but more frequent. More sides clashing over more gray shades of course. From what you seem to be stating about Eberron, you are ignoring plenty of material, otherwise you could have answered all those questions yourself. There is plenty of material, enough to run a great game. For all that, the setting is still an infant, and needs time to grow before anyone can fairly compare it to any setting that has been around for much longer. I respect your opinion, and obviously disagree with it for the above reasons. |
| Enslaved DM07-12-04, 08:02 PM | I'm glad you think you got your money's worth from the book. I hope that everyone who shells out the money for Eberron enjoys it. But the book is dry. I read it and none of it resonates with me. I love noir and enjoy swashbuckling adventure, but only occassionaly do I feel those elements in the setting. It isn't evocative. It doesn't pull me in the same way Ed Greenwood's Dragon magazine articles did. I rarely use alignments. You don't need them for conflict, but if you are going to reference noir and swashbuckling you are going to need evil. Both genres thrive off conflict. You can find shades of grey in Chinatown, Blade Runner, and Pirates of the Caribbean, but you can also find black. There are no sections written by inhabitents of Eberron, there are no detailed NPCs for each region. The organizations are thin skeins, not detailed organizations. It doesn't come alive. I'm not trying to beat up Eberron. I'm trying to point out a pattern of poor setting development. Planescape and Dark Sun still have fans long after their product lines were abandoned by developers. Their fans are still with them. Read their setting material. It comes through. Now compare how Greyhawk or Eberron is written. |
| The_Declaration07-12-04, 08:18 PM | if you expect a setting to be as detailed as the Realms, since the beginning, then i think you'll play FR all your life and nothing else. you're like asking a 10 years old boy beginner in martial arts (even though full of potential) to kill Jet Li in a fight. I don't feel rubbed with what is inside the book, details about organizations and stuff will come with the development of the setting. And this is a long term task, it doesn't consist in spending 5 years in a 6 m2 room to put on the shelves a 600 pages book with 6-sized times new roman font in it. About your criticism concerning the noir/pulp that doesn't come out as it should, i partly agree with you, but it's not the place to do a pro/cons of Eberron. there is the eberron forum for that. |
| dragonspear07-12-04, 08:25 PM | My opinion on Ebberon is biased... but I'll throw it out there anyway. The main reason I don't like Ebberon is because of the D&D miniature "Warforged Titan". I hate that figure passionately. And I don't like the idea of a new campaign setting as much as I would like to see more focus on Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, etc. Granted, there will still be plenty of FR supplements to come, I would just like to see more published adventures for Greyhawk or Realms. Also Forgotten Realms will always be the best to me because it was the first world I played in. It was my own personal intro to D&D so it will always have value to me. And lastly... I know nobody cares about my reply anyway...;) |
| Drake Dragonslayer07-12-04, 09:15 PM | Firstly: I don't like FR, I never have done, I probably never will do either, It's because of bad past experiences. Secondly: I got the Eberron book as soon as my FLGS got it in and I love it. Thirdly: My favorite settings are Eberron (DM) and Ravenloft (player). Now for the details as to WHY I like eberron so much. For one thing it has no "Iconic" NPC's yet so there is noone for players to clone if they can't think of a concept. *cough* Drizzt *cough* ;) Another thing is that unlike pre established setings, it is new, therefore there are no expectations about who goes where and why for a DM to live up to. The main reason that I can see that you dislike Eberron is that nothing is fully fleshed out yet. However that is what I expect from a campaign setting, not handing us everything on a silver platter and asking us if we want a new napkin. But giving us some room to work with allows creative DMs to mould Eberron to our own tastes while still retaining the flavour of the area. Take my current campaign for example, The players are dealing with Halfing bandits in a certain region. Now in FR most players will have read so much on various organisations from the god knows how many different sourcebooks that they probably know what causes it from the start. (Exagerating but you get the point) However in Eberron they don't know enough about the various cults and guilds, allowing for a decent level of DM customisation, so they will be shocked to find out who is behind everything. FR is also a very bland setting in itself. Take away all the "Iconic" NPC's and what do you have, another stereotypical, cookie cutter , high magic setting. Now with Eberron, it has a uniqueness that doesn't fit into any major stereotypes and it has its own qualities that I think make it superior to FR in every way. |
| Enslaved DM07-12-04, 11:28 PM | I took a long time considering whether or not to create this thread and where to post it. I ended up placing it here because I am comparing what D&D has done right with what it has done wrong. With Realms/Dark Sun/Planescape the flavor and character of the setting comes through clearly in the early material. That isn't the case for Greyhawk and Eberron. The former is presented in an adventure encouraging format and the later is presented in rather dull presentation of facts. I posted because I think this problem affects multiple D&D worlds. I didn't post it on the Eberron board because it seemed to close to trolling. My concern is that otherwise interesting settings are being poorly served by pedestrian writing. A noir/swashbuckling setting should be awash with cynical commentaries and wry observations. Colorful and sinister minor characters should be presented in their appropiate places along with background information about them and tying them into the setting. Who doesn't like planescape slang? Who can forget the harsh realities of living under the Dark Sun? It was Ed Greenwood's background to his Dragon magazine articles that attracted me to Realms, before there were a hundred published settlements. I remember the story behind the Wand of Teeth and the ecology of the cockatrice. Those are what hooked me. The Realms isn't perfect, but it is well presented. |
| WizO_BigSister07-13-04, 06:32 AM | Thanks guys for keeping this a lively and interesting debate, without any personal attacks. You've prooved it is possible to disagree and make your point strongly without stooping to name-slinging and mud-flinging! Nice one :D |
| Masakado07-13-04, 07:25 AM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM I posted because I think this problem affects multiple D&D worlds. I didn't post it on the Eberron board because it seemed to close to trolling. On the other hand, anyone who posts to this thread think that Eberron is not so bad runs the risk of being called a troll. Like some of us did on the first page. ;) I really think this thread should have been put on the Eberron board for nothing less than to make it more visible to Eberron players. Originally posted by Enslaved DM A noir/swashbuckling setting should be awash with cynical commentaries and wry observations. Why? We as DM's are cynical and wry enough to come up with such observations on our own? :D Why does Keith have to do the work for us? Originally posted by Enslaved DM Colorful and sinister minor characters should be presented in their appropiate places along with background information about them and tying them into the setting. Again why, when DM's are perfectly capable of coming up with this info on their own. The lack of detail = pseudo ownership, IMO. A mysterious Elf swordsman encountered in Eberron can be your creation, it doesn't have to be Salvatore's creation. An Iconic grumpy wizard in Eberron can be your wizard, not Ed Greenwood's wizard (with all due respect to Ed, naturally). Originally posted by Enslaved DM Who doesn't like planescape slang? I don't, but then again, I never cared for the Planescape campaign. Originally posted by Enslaved DM Who can forget the harsh realities of living under the Dark Sun? I can. Dark Sun was a pretty depressing setting. Now Al-Qadim! That was some good stuff. I understand that you need some "hook" to get interested in a campaign, and frankly, that's something that we all share. My hook to Eberron is that I get to homebrew my stuff more often than I would if I played the FR. Originally posted by Enslaved DM It was Ed Greenwood's background to his Dragon magazine articles that attracted me to Realms, before there were a hundred published settlements. And these articles were written how many years ago? The FR has benefitted from how many years of development? (some say at the expense of Greyhawk, which addresses some of the "Greyhawk isn't well presented" arguments). See the point we're trying to make? |
| Drake Dragonslayer07-13-04, 07:29 AM | Yes, I agree that the setting needs aspects such as those. But that is what various supplements will be for. The next Eberron book to be pulblished, Sharn city of towers (correct me if I got the title wrong.) Will most likely have many detailed NPC's and "Colorful and sinister minor characters." They did not put so much in the first book because it was simply a way to get people into the feel of the setting. The realms are what most people think of when you say "High fantasy Setting" and in the future, Eberron will be what people think of when you say "noir/swashbuckling setting." Because they deal with tow relatively foreign subjects, it isn't really fair to compare them. Oh and one thing I always wanted to ask about FR: Do you REALLY need so many elven subraces ;) |
| Mr. VanderMeer07-13-04, 08:16 AM | Who doesn't like planescape slang? Who can forget the harsh realities of living under the Dark Sun? It was Ed Greenwood's background to his Dragon magazine articles that attracted me to Realms, I know many people who found the Planescape slang annoying and gimmicky (although I liked it). I personally though Dark Sun's harsh climate didn't hold its attraction for very long. Checking for dehydration doesn't remain interesting. Ed Greenwoods' Dragon articles are great. But how do you know that there will not be some great Eberron articles in the future? The setting is in it's infancy. |
| Enslaved DM07-13-04, 11:14 PM | To be clear, I'm complaining about how badly written the book is. I've said this about 3 times already. I'm not saying the setting sucks, I'm saying the presentation is lackluster. |
| WitheringSolid07-14-04, 12:47 AM | It's been mentioned befor, and it bares repeating...Ebberon is a brand new setting, we have only been given the skeletal basics. There is a whole lot of muscle, blood, and connective tissue for them to given to us later. The vast majoraty of of the book delt with only 1 of its 5 continents. More sourcebooks will be on the way. PCs also get to feel like truely special people from 1st level while at the same time there are enough dark terrible things to give em their cumupance. You woun't find too many scullery maids with levels in rogue, but you WILL find that people have greater access to basic magic... Something that has not occured in FR widespread, even with all the archmages running around ;) |
| ruleslawyer07-14-04, 12:59 AM | And there you have it. It's an issue of voice to me, something the Realms has in plenty and Eberron less so. However, I'll also agree with Masakado's points to a certain extent. The big problem that I see with the Realms is that voice, as connoted by Ed's excellent writing tone and his speckling the sourcebooks with interesting little adventure hooks, quirks of language, and world-lore tidbits, quickly gave way to novels, which in certain cases (such as RA Salvatore's books) actually didn't quite capture the voice of Ed's Realms, but instead created new voices and new protagonists, in the form of those authors' main characters. People read books, so fans picked up on the novels. Seeing the demand for integration of the novels back into the setting, the designers began to fold the novel characters and events back into the supplements. And so on, to the point that flavor, in the form of quirks of language, interesting background NPCs, and background rumors and events, turned into center-stage events that had the potential to quickly eclipse the PCs. IMHO, this is the major problem that gamers who don't like the Realms have. My campaigns (set in FR) have universally thrilled the people who didn't read the novels or the majority of published FR material, and have set the fanboys' teeth on edge due to the dearth of events IMC that took place in the novels or later supplements. Eberron, OTOH, is a new world, with a new flavor (post-WWI pulp-heroes Europe meets medieval fantasy!), unexplored lands and unknown NPCs, and some neat new rules and races. Doesn't mean I like it more than FR, it just means that I do respect it as a project. Originally posted by Drake Dragonslayer FR is also a very bland setting in itself. Take away all the "Iconic" NPC's and what do you have, another stereotypical, cookie cutter , high magic setting.I must disagree with this, for several reasons. First, "stereotypical... high magic setting" is one of those overused and rather facile statements about FR that's not really fair, since FR forms the definition of the archetypal high-magic setting in the first place; it's not an imitator. Second, it's all about voice, again. Check out some of the following for what I mean: -The 1e gray box set -FR4 The Magister -FR11 Dwarves Deep -FOR4 Code of the Harpers -Secrets of the Magister -Ed Greenwood's Everwinking Eye columns in Polyhedron, or City of Ravens Bluff -The Volo's Guides -Faiths and Avatars These materials are loaded with adventure hooks, interesting tidbits, and a great deal of flavor. I'd not call them "bland." Mind you, there are a ton of materials I WOULD call bland (in fact, none of the 3e material, with the possible exception of Silver Marches and some of the background stuff in Unapproachable East, has really grabbed me) Originally posted by Masakado I really think this thread should have been put on the Eberron board for nothing less than to make it more visible to Eberron players.Yeah, though I can imagine the flames coming a lot faster there, just because I do imagine that some folks who bought the ECSB (1) had preconceived (ill) feelings toward FR, and (2) if I buy and love something, I can imagine being ill-disposed toward someone sticking a post on my new love's message boards telling me how inferior it is to their favorite setting. Why? We as DM's are cynical and wry enough to come up with such observations on our own? :D Why does Keith have to do the work for us?Voice, again. Eberron has pulp ELEMENTS, but IMHO, the only aspect of the actual book that communicates the pulp flavor is the graphic novel-style illustrations. Some people might have preferred it if the ECSB had been written less like a geography textbook and more like a collection of story-based adventuring hooks. Again why, when DM's are perfectly capable of coming up with this info on their own.Because such NPCs flesh out the flavor of the setting. Elminster is really supposed to be a narrator, just like the Seven are supposed to be embodiments of the fey beauty and deadliness of magic. They're part of the setting description; landscape elements, as it were. The lack of detail = pseudo ownership, IMO. A mysterious Elf swordsman encountered in Eberron can be your creation, it doesn't have to be Salvatore's creation. An Iconic grumpy wizard in Eberron can be your wizard, not Ed Greenwood's wizard (with all due respect to Ed, naturally).Of course, this is a valid counterpoint, and I agree to a certain extent. However, I'll also say that DMs who don't put their own grumpy wizards and mysterious swordsmen in the FR campaigns are doing the Realms a disservice. Of course, the number of "iconic" NPCs populating the Realms (see my statement on that explosion, above) does make this a bit too complicated. I too like the fact that Eberron leaves its ranks of adventurer-level PCs and NPCs sparse; the inverse is that I find that there aren't quite enough NPCs to let me understand really what an Aundairian is like, or how the Gatekeepers really think or work. Minor NPCs (not stat blocks, but 1e FR-style descriptions) would have been a good idea, IMHO. My hook to Eberron is that I get to homebrew my stuff more often than I would if I played the FR.Just curious: Why is that the case? Eberron certainly has less baggage attached to it than the Realms, but the Realms are a really, really big place and seemingly perfectly-designed to incorporate new elements. And these articles were written how many years ago? The FR has benefitted from how many years of development? Yeah; more's the pity. IMHO, one of the biggest assets of Eberron is that it's new. The FR has been beaten half to death by such a torrent of support material that it can be hard for some to find new life in the setting. My own jaundiced approach to the Realms kinda drives this home to me; there's such an enormous portion of the Realms that I ignore (all the novels and novel-derived events and characters, many of the 2e supplements and a few of the 1e supplements, and much of the "flanking" material, including some of the minor gods and many of the high-level spellcasters seemingly inserted at random starting in the Forgotten Realms Adventures hardback onwards) that I'm arguably not playing in the setting to begin with. Playing in Eberron would allow me to jump straight into the setting and build from the "skeleton" of the ECSB onward. However, I am a bit concerned at the fact that there isn't enough flavor for me to sound like an Aundairian, or get into the mind of a Zilargan, without resorting to real-world equivalents (which come a bit too close to hand for my tastes). Oddly, it's easiest to coax flavor from the REALLY exotic cultures, probably because they're so extreme; Darguun hobgoblins and Aerenal elves would be easy for me to portray without skipping a bit. Eberron is, for all intensive purposes, completely devoid of such iconics and that is annoying, especially considering that some of the more formidable forces of Eberron are extremely formidable. I've gone from a setting where my PC's are eclipsed by NPC's, to a setting where my PC's could be the stereotypical "world's last hope," and that strikes me as a bit too cartooney (if "cartooney" is a word).Actually, I think that's kinda the point. It is the point of the pulp genre, anyway. Did you ever get the feeling that if Indiana Jones failed to stop the Nazis from wielding the power of the Ark, some other incredibly tough, daring, and lucky adventurer would just step up? |
| Masakado07-14-04, 07:09 AM | Originally posted by ruleslawyer Just curious: Why is that the case? Eberron certainly has less baggage attached to it than the Realms, but the Realms are a really, really big place and seemingly perfectly-designed to incorporate new elements. Actually, I have to disagree slightly. Faerun being so big is actually more germaine to gaming on the fly with existing elements, than it is for incorporating new elements. I don't need new villains becase the laundry list of existing bad guys is a mile long, and the same can be said for heroic beings, cities, personalities, and other various & sundry game elements. Then there is the stigma of new <> "canon." For some reason, some players that I've DMed over the years are terribly resistant to new things I bring into the FR setting, whereas they'd probably be more accepting of them in Greyhawk or Dark Sun. The Realms has such a powerful flavor to it that somethng new seems somewhat alien. I once tried to introduce Sindonish (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rp/20021106a) as a villain in one of my campaigns. Despite the fact that he's on the website as a Realms Personality, his esoteric classes make him not only an anamoly, but subject to rejection by those wanting more "medieval" fare. People don't particularly care for reasonable examples for the existance of the more exotic, yet core / standard classes in the Realms, what makes you think that they'd be willing to see something completely new? How many "monks don't belong in the FR" threads have we seen, anyway? :rolleyes: The bittersweet fact of the matter is that we are all so familiar with the Realms, that we already have predetermined notions of what we want from the setting & what we expect the setting to incoporate. There is precious little room for new elements, unless of course they're introduced to us in a novel or a sourcebook. Then they are "canon" and we accept the changes. Well... some of them anyway.. The devs added a new cosmology. We see evidence of how well that change was accpeted everyday. :rolleyes: You said it yourself. I also feel that those that do not add to world do it a disservice, but with an abundance of material, is there ever really a need to add to the Realms? Originally posted by ruleslawyer Because such NPCs flesh out the flavor of the setting. Elminster is really supposed to be a narrator, just like the Seven are supposed to be embodiments of the fey beauty and deadliness of magic. They're part of the setting description; landscape elements, as it were. On the contrary, Elminster and the Seven are direct meddlers in the events of Faerun. They are much more than setting. I am also capable of creating such NPC's to flesh out Eberron's setting for my players using the cultural elements already in existance. I don't really need someone else's spokesperson to do it for me, although I admittedly enjoy such iconic characters. Besides that and as we've also mentioned before, Eberron is just getting started. With more material will come more of the fleshing out that we expect in our settings. Originally posted by ruleslawyer Actually, I think that's kinda the point. It is the point of the pulp genre, anyway. Did you ever get the feeling that if Indiana Jones failed to stop the Nazis from wielding the power of the Ark, some other incredibly tough, daring, and lucky adventurer would just step up? Possibly not, but there was still a little thing called the Allied Powers that defeated the Nazis in a war. I like the "one vs. many" style, but realistically, there are supposed to be suitable balancing forces in existance in one form or another. Like Indy, I certainly expect my PC's to win the more important, covert victories so that the general nations can rest easier, but they can only do so much, and I don't believe for a second that they they're the only adventurers out there. After all, Blade wasn't the only vampire slayer in his comic book, just the one who was the premier attraction of his comic book. |
| ruleslawyer07-14-04, 11:17 AM | Excellent points, Masakado. Just two small things: Originally posted by Masakado On the contrary, Elminster and the Seven are direct meddlers in the events of Faerun. They are much more than setting. IMHO, they're not (at least as conceived in the earlier material) supposed to be meddlers in the PCs' affairs, though. They're figures of story and song, the same way that Odysseus would be if you ran a Greek mythic campaign, or Dr. Armitage if you ran a "canon" Call of Cthulhu game. Possibly not, but there was still a little thing called the Allied Powers that defeated the Nazis in a war.Well, you've got the armies of grunts available just fine; Breland has a floating fortress full of 'em and a bad***** secret agency, after all! Between Karrnath's zombie armies and Kundarak's stalwart guardians, there are a plethora of NPC low-level forces out there; it's just that there's a dearth of individual achievers, which is where the PCs come in. |
| Masakado07-14-04, 11:43 AM | Originally posted by ruleslawyer IMHO, they're not (at least as conceived in the earlier material) supposed to be meddlers in the PCs' affairs, though. They're figures of story and song, the same way that Odysseus would be if you ran a Greek mythic campaign, or Dr. Armitage if you ran a "canon" Call of Cthulhu game. Sadly, I can point to the excellent 2ed grey box adventure Beneath the Twisted Tower where Elminster has a deus ex machina cameo, as well as another module in which Regis and Drizzt shows up as NPC's that the PC's are encouraged to interact with. The iconics would be the stuff of bard song & legend if they were not still taking an active part in Faerun's affairs, but we already know that they are, and since they are the most powerful representations, they will naturally affect the PC's state of affairs, both directly and indirectly. For example, if you're PC's aspire to be high-level Moonstars, most likely they will eventually expect to run into Khelben Arunsun at some point in time (they're probably counting on it), which means that the iconic NPC will indeed directly affect the PC's state of affairs. The same can be said for villains: if your PC's are opposing the Zhentarim, eventually they'll want a crack at Scyulla or perhaps even Manshoon. If they do wish to confront Manshoon, who am I to stop them, as they are doing what heroes should do (ie. stop the bad guys)? This is probably the level of direct iconic intervention we're most used to: the PC's become high enough level to believe that they must take the fight to the evil bosses and put them down once and for all. Originally posted by ruleslawyer Well, you've got the armies of grunts available just fine; Breland has a floating fortress full of 'em and a bad***** secret agency, after all! Between Karrnath's zombie armies and Kundarak's stalwart guardians, there are a plethora of NPC low-level forces out there; it's just that there's a dearth of individual achievers, which is where the PCs come in. True enough, but just as Spidey patrols Manhattan while Daredevil monitors Hell's Kitchen, I do not expect the PC's to combat every evil that rears it's head in Eberron. There should be other forces at work. I do not expect the land to be overflowing with overachieving adventurers like the PC's, but I don't expect the PC's to be the only source of heroism, either. That notion does run slightly against the whole pulp / noir concept, but it's a notion I can't seem to part with. |
| Auburn07-14-04, 04:20 PM | Originally posted by ruleslawyer Actually, I think that's kinda the point. It is the point of the pulp genre, anyway. Did you ever get the feeling that if Indiana Jones failed to stop the Nazis from wielding the power of the Ark, some other incredibly tough, daring, and lucky adventurer would just step up? Maybe I'm missing the point, but Spoilers didn't Indy fail in stopping the Ark from falling into Nazi hands? Then God killed the Nazis for trying to use the Ark? Maybe it has been too long since I've seen the movie. End Spoilers But this still brings up an interesting point in my opinion. Eberron isn't exactly overflowing with high level characters good or evil. That in my opinion is a weakness because it really diminshes the impact the PCs have on the world. There really isn't a threat that only the PCs can stop because all the enemies are so weak. But then again I really like the fact that FR has established high level characters. It gives the players something to shoot for. Once Elminister has to come to the party's wizard for help you know you've arrived. Similarly once the party is capable of changing the world in ways that even these high level characters can't it gives a real sense of accomplishment. |
| Masakado07-14-04, 06:00 PM | Originally posted by Auburn There really isn't a threat that only the PCs can stop because all the enemies are so weak. 1st level Eberron PC's would be hard pressed to match wits with the Daelkyr and live to tell the tale. :rolleyes: Eberron does indeed have it's share of high-level nasties. |
| Thondred07-14-04, 06:03 PM | Originally posted by Auburn But this still brings up an interesting point in my opinion. Eberron isn't exactly overflowing with high level characters good or evil. That in my opinion is a weakness because it really diminshes the impact the PCs have on the world. There really isn't a threat that only the PCs can stop because all the enemies are so weak. But then again I really like the fact that FR has established high level characters. It gives the players something to shoot for. Once Elminister has to come to the party's wizard for help you know you've arrived. Similarly once the party is capable of changing the world in ways that even these high level characters can't it gives a real sense of accomplishment. I disagree. Your opinion of Eberron's lack of high level opposition operates under the prospect that the DM never raises the level of NPCs or monsters as the PCs progress in levels. That is a DM weakness, not a weakness of the setting. The world is not stagnant afterall. I'd expect a good DM to do this in any setting. It makes perfect sense that while the PCs are out adventuring and leveling, that NPCs and monsters all over the world are doing the same. As it stands, there is nothing weak about the Daelkyr, or any number of the ancient dragons of Argonnessen, and you wouldn't even have to level them up to raise the challenge level for your PCs (unless you are near Epic, of course). Nothing about Eberron diminishes the potential for the PCs to impact their world, in my opinion. If there were high level NPCs around, the NPCs could do all the heroics for the PCs (in fact, that would be all the more likely). You don't have that problem in Eberron unless your DM brings it there. When I run FR, I toss out the high level NPCs. They exist only as a setting backdrop, because they have no place taking over the stage intended for the PCs. |
| Monsoon2807-14-04, 06:30 PM | Just as an aside.. You are aware that Ed Greenwood was writting/Creating the FR world YEARS before D&D even existed! By the time the First FR book came to market Ed had already been living in it for 20 sum-odd years. While i'm sure Keith and the boys&girls of WotC have been working at it for the last year or two. It's impossible for them to come up with that kind of same level of fluff. Like Masakado stated, its a "Newborn" you can't expect for it to measure up at it's inception. I will agree the setting hasn't captured my interest much either, I would of preferred a "Arcanum: of Steamworks & Magick Obscura" Campaign Setting Sourcebook. But that's just me, but the VG was Awesome and that's a Fact!! :D |
| Thondred07-14-04, 06:39 PM | Originally posted by Monsoon28 I would of preferred a "Arcanum: of Steamworks & Magick Obscura" Campaign Setting Sourcebook. I liked the flavor and tone of that game a lot. Homebrewing that to d20 would be great. Maybe in the next setting search someone will use it as inspiration... |
| The Simple Seeker II07-14-04, 10:49 PM | Originally posted by Monsoon28 Just as an aside.. ( You are aware that Ed Greenwood was writting/Creating the FR world YEARS before D&D even existed! By the time the First FR book came to market Ed had already been living in it for 20 sum-odd years.) From 1967 to 1968...FR channeling had begun. While i'm sure Keith and the boys&girls of WotC have been working at it for the last year or two. It's impossible for them to come up with that kind of same level of fluff. Like Masakado stated, its a "Newborn" you can't expect for it to measure up at it's inception. I will agree the setting hasn't captured my interest much either, I would of preferred a "Arcanum: of Steamworks & Magick Obscura" Campaign Setting Sourcebook. But that's just me, but the VG was Awesome and that's a Fact!! :D Like all things new...let it grow....and watch it grow |
| ruleslawyer07-15-04, 02:07 AM | Originally posted by Masakado Sadly, I can point to the excellent 2ed grey box adventure Beneath the Twisted Tower where Elminster has a deus ex machina cameo, as well as another module in which Regis and Drizzt shows up as NPC's that the PC's are encouraged to interact with.That is later stuff though, Realms-wise, Masakado, which was kinda my point. And I'm not so fond of the adventure featuring Drizzt and Regis that you mention, but... [For example, if you're PC's aspire to be high-level Moonstars, most likely they will eventually expect to run into Khelben Arunsun at some point in time (they're probably counting on it), which means that the iconic NPC will indeed directly affect the PC's state of affairs. The same can be said for villains: if your PC's are opposing the Zhentarim, eventually they'll want a crack at Scyulla or perhaps even Manshoon.Well, here you're talking about an issue that comes up in EVERY campaign world, aren't you? Eberron has this too; Vol is a big deal, as are the University bigwigs and the House leaders. It's just that they don't have Khelben's extensive game pedigree to deal with... But I do take your points; on the whole, the published Realms NPCs are individually much more prominent in the setting than the Eberron NPCs are ever likely to be, which does leave Eberron more "open" for DM-created NPCs. |
| Helmo07-16-04, 06:18 AM | As far as I know about Eberron the FRs are a better campaing setting for me. Of course they have been around for 20 years I think and have perhaps a hundred novels about them so they should be far more popular. Anyway, I like the Eberron demographics published at wizards and I am considering getting them into my campaing. I never liked the general system given in DMG because it creates far too powerful communities. In a 200 people village there shouldn´t be a single wizard and perhaps just one cleric, but that is not the case. In certain countries warriors or fighters should be far more common that in other ones while barbarians should be very common in Rashemen and wizards in Halruaa. Most people should be commoners and experts, with some warriors, adepts and aristocrats. The PC classes should be left for few people, perhaps not so few as the 2nd edition or Eberron pointed, but something not as usual as it is with the DMG system. I think the PGtF or FRCS should have created their own tables, more according with the ones in Eberron. |
| Enslaved DM07-16-04, 09:06 PM | I dislike having to repeat this, but is does seem to be necessary: 1) It is not the quantity of material of material on Eberron that I have issue with. I have never stated that was the problem. The Realms interested me with a few articles and hooked me with the first setting box. That I now know more about the Realms is the result of it hooking me and maintaining my interest. The examples I gave were ones so my fellow gamers would know what atmospheric details I was talking about, not a complaint on lack of volume. 2) The problem is the quality of writing. The rules for the new gear was fine, the art was usually excellent, if a little too manga for the setting's themes. The problem is that the writing did not evoke adventure. The Realms is steeped in it. I didn't get a L. A. Confidential orIndiana Jones vibe off the setting. It was dull. The description of the nations are dull. The writing was competent enough to describe the setting, but that was all. It didn't come alive. |
| Alac Luin07-16-04, 09:35 PM | I guess it's a personal preference here. Reading the Ebberon boards, the writing of of the book did invoke creativity in many. At least once I have seen one person make the exact opposite assesment, saying how much better Eberron was becouse it invoked adventure in a way that the FRCS never could. It really is a matter of personal taste, some will like FR, some will take to Eberron, some even still take to Dragonlance and Grayhawk. When Dark Sun came out, some people loved it. Personally, I didn't see it. And I really did try. What am I trying to say? I don't know.:) |
| Alac Luin07-16-04, 09:44 PM | darn dirty dubble posts |
| Igmo07-17-04, 02:47 PM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM 2) The problem is the quality of writing. The rules for the new gear was fine, the art was usually excellent, if a little too manga for the setting's themes. The problem is that the writing did not evoke adventure. The Realms is steeped in it. I didn't get a L. A. Confidential orIndiana Jones vibe off the setting. It was dull. The description of the nations are dull. The writing was competent enough to describe the setting, but that was all. It didn't come alive. This is, alas, just a matter of personal preference. There are literally thousands of people out there that currently believe Eberron has a superior writing style to FR. Does this make them right? Nope. However, it also doesn't make you right either. Overall, it seems like you obviously dislike how Eberron is written and <b> to you </b> the Realms are better. Just don't push your opinion as the "correct" one. |
| mortellan07-18-04, 02:06 AM | FR's presentation benefitted from a few things: 1) Greyhawk paved the way and in some cases let FR borrow from it. From a design standpoint, FR and others like Darksun had published game world precedents to follow or avoid. 2) FR peaked during a renaissance in graphical presentation. Video games, novels and full color publications were not the norm before FR. GH only seems dull because its like the golden age of black and white TV that a cherished few had, whereas FR is the new color TV that everyone has one or two of per home. 3) Almost single-minded direction. Ed Greenwood is still the backbone of the setting's theme. Imagine how different the theme of FR would be if Ed Greenwood had cashed out in the 90's when TSR went under. With someone else in charge of development like what happened to GH, you can possibly get a different animal altogether. |
| Enslaved DM07-18-04, 03:55 PM | Wrong. Read my post. I'm not complaining about quantaty, but quality. Dark Sun hooked by interest with the first boxed set, the Realms interested me with first Dragon articles. Eberron's problem is that is written in a manner that more closely resembles the Greyhawk boxed set. The writing is dull and fails to strike my imagination. They aren't written in an adventure friendly manner. They describe the world adequetly, but that's not what a D&D setting needs. Despite my disappointment with the writing in Greyhawk's gazateer and boxed set, I quiet like Canonfire. The things that most interest me about Greyhawk are NOT detailed in the initial setting materials, and that's a shame. If the Circle of Eight, Horned Society, and Scarlett Brotherhood got the same kind of attention as their Realm's equivalents, I might have stayed with Greyhawk. A brief list of dangerous areas around each country and the common dangers to be found within would have been tremedously useful to me back when I was a teenager and played in Greyhawk. But Greyhawk is written too much like an atlas and too little like an adventurer's guide. |
| mortellan07-18-04, 07:22 PM | I was talking presentation which was your point I thought, correct? As for the GH gazetteer being like an atlas, well thats what a gazetteer is by definition. It's primarily for DMs use only. In contrast the FRCS is an atlas AND a players guide. I'd rather my players not be privy to the same info as me. GH's adventures in the early days were contained in the abundance of modules not the atlas (which judging by Gygax's early Dragon articles was only meant to be a political backdrop since all his adventures tended to be dungeon crawls). And with today's gazetteer this hasn't changed, except now Living Greyhawk is where the new modules are generated. So I agree with you in a way. I'm not sure about Eberron yet. |
| Enslaved DM07-18-04, 11:11 PM | Yes, you were. I wasn't intending to attack you, but to expand my commentary. The gaming community shells out a fair amount of its hard earned dollars on games, supplements, and settings. We want value for our money. Constructive criticism and discussion are important parts of the development process. Greyhawk and Eberron are examples of, in my opinion, missed opportunities. Settings with potential that suffered from poor initial products. It is the Greyhawk online community and Dragon articles that have rekindled my own interest in this world. I certainly don't take attacks on the Realms personally. I run homebrew campaigns more often than ones set in the Realms, despite my affection for Ed Greenwood's creation. I would hope that this thread has an impact, however miniscule, for the better. We all want good, inspiring settings that sets our blood racing regardless of what world we are playing in. |
| Kid SixXx07-19-04, 12:17 PM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM Greyhawk and Eberron are examples of, in my opinion, missed opportunities. Settings with potential that suffered from poor initial products. It is the Greyhawk online community and Dragon articles that have rekindled my own interest in this world. To be a "missed opportunity," the Eberron message boards sure are getting busy. Speaking of which, I'll offer a friendly suggestion. If you're curious about why Eberron players enjoy the setting, you really should lurk the Eberron boards (no law says you have to post there) and see what's what, instead of retreating to these boards and wondering about what's what. You'll get no real insights into the Eberron setting in a complaint thread in the FR forum. And please define "poor initial products" as far as Greyhawk is concerned. Do you know how old the Greyhawk campaign is, or how much material for other settings (*cough* Erelehi-Cinlu = Menzoberranzan *cough*) it's inspired? |
| Enslaved DM07-19-04, 02:39 PM | I have lurked and I have even posted. There are some interesting ideas in Eberron, but that doesn't make the setting book well written. I like the Vault of the Drow, I have played it and run it. BUT THAT IS IRRELEVANT. It isn't in the Greyhawk setting book. I wasn't attacking the setting, I WAS SAYING THE MAIN SETTING BOX WAS UNINSPIRING. DITTO FOR EBERRON. I DON'T LIKE USING CAPS, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE NECESSARY. THE MAIN SETTING BOOK IS DULL. REPEAT THREE TIMES, ADDRESS THE POINT. |
| ruleslawyer07-19-04, 02:54 PM | Guys, Let's go back to what Enslaved DM might be saying here: Namely, that the Eberron CSB reads a bit too much like a social studies textbook and not enough like a storybook or roll of adventures. On that front, I'd actually agree with him; the writing style is much more straightforward and less "flavorful." (The opposite extreme, IMHO, would be the Planescape materials, which blend in-game cant and metagame rules-speak pretty seamlessly.) OTOH, this arguably has less to do with Eberron vs. FR and more with 3e vs. previous editions. The 3e FRCS reads a bit too textbook-like for my taste too. I'd say this has a lot to do with 3e's design philosophy, which is about putting gaming tools in the hands of DMs and letting them generate their own flavor. Ed never really cared about rules consistency or even about quantifying much of the game setting in terms of hard rules (from what I hear, he doesn't even play 3e!), so FR's direction was recast with 3e anyway. I think Eberron's an excellent piece of work; it doesn't grab me the way that the Realms did, but that is, in part, for the same reason that I doubt the Realms would have grabbed me today if my first brush with it had been the FRCS. So it's not a lack of creativity on the designers' part, but more a change in overall game philosophy, perhaps. Just a thought... |
| Kid SixXx07-19-04, 03:18 PM | Originally posted by ruleslawyer Let's go back to what Enslaved DM might be saying here: Namely, that the Eberron CSB reads a bit too much like a social studies textbook and not enough like a storybook or roll of adventures. On that front, I'd actually agree with him; the writing style is much more straightforward and less "flavorful." (The opposite extreme, IMHO, would be the Planescape materials, which blend in-game cant and metagame rules-speak pretty seamlessly.) I can agree with that sentiment, but I really don't see the textbook construction of the Eberron CSB as a flaw. Some people enjoy the "It's better to have it & not need it, than need it and not have it" fluff abundance that the FRCS has, while most Eberron players think that a perceived overabundance of fluff can be distracting at times. It's personal preference, IMO. One thing that concerns me about Enslaved DM's posts is that he appears to be asking Eberron players to sell the settting to him, while all the while being hell bent on not being sold. That seems like a recipe for defeatism to me. Originally posted by ruleslawyer So it's not a lack of creativity on the designers' part, but more a change in overall game philosophy, perhaps. My logic as well. The first couple of FR books contained lots of fluff, but the rest of the FR material is pretty crunchy by previous standards.: |
| Faraer07-19-04, 03:18 PM | As part of the balance of making Eberron familiar and different and not too much of either, I'm sure the prose style is figured in; obviously, if they leach too much taste and distinctiveness from Eberron or Realms sourcebooks people will lack reasons to buy them over any other book. Jim Lowder recently revealed how the Realms-dialect in Ed's original Spellfire draft was toned down to make it better fit what other authors would write. I don't know if Keith Baker's original submission was much different, but with a company-owned setting the thinking may be to standardize the prose so it can be easily recreated by different authors, similarly to the (excruciatingly dull, to me) house style Steve Jackson Games uses. Eberron, by the way, intrigues me a little, but not so much as many other settings, attached to RPGs or not, that I'd look into or run games in if I had the time. What's WotC's theory as to what's attractive about the new world? |
| Kid SixXx07-19-04, 03:32 PM | Originally posted by Faraer What's WotC's theory as to what's attractive about the new world? IMO, it's not the game world itself that's supposed to make the setting compelling, but the mechanical principles behind it. Eberron, mechanics wise, runs like an action movie / pulp novel: PC's are the premier heroes and mechanics are built in to insure that "fate" or deus ex machina has a chance to kick in via the Action Points system when the situation deems it necessary. Action points work sorta like Karma did in the old TSR Marvel Super Heroes game, in the spirit that in order to automatically succeed at something, you can spend your action points to make sure that you do. AP still work on the "bug vs. windshield" mentality: if you spend AP on one die roll, they're spent. If you run on horrible luck again, you're up the creek. |
| WizO_BigSister07-19-04, 05:23 PM | A little bit of "topic slide" is inevitable in subject like this. Rather than sticking purely to the issue of how well written the Eberron material is, people have taken things wider. It is understandable that some people think that the writing is affected wider issues so they then look at the wider picture. This leads to more posts examing the wider picture. I don't really have a problem with this ... it isn't off topic posting or thread hijacking. Perhaps it would be helpful if when you post you make it clear exactly which issues you are talking about. |
| Thondred07-19-04, 06:01 PM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM The fault is in the writing. It does not evoke the wonder or the adventure of the world. The fans of both settings are ill served by it. The fans of both settings seem to be perfectly content with the writing as it is. Most fans of Eberron are drawing plenty of inspiration from the material. In that, the authors have succeeded in bringing Eberron to life, evoking the wonder and adventure of the world. Look over at the Eberron boards(and I know you do ;) ). There are scores of people that are into the setting over there. The writing has failed them? I think not. The writing seems to have failed you.The writing is part of what is serving as inspiration in an amazing new campaign setting. I haven't heard too many other people complain about it, and certainly none to the degree that you have. Like I and others have said before, this entire argument is an argument over a matter of personal taste, of personal opinion, not of concrete facts. You don't like the writing of the books you mentioned, but plenty of people do. You can't convince those that love those settings that the writing is poor, and they can't convince you of the contrary. This is going no where... |
| Spungdeeper07-19-04, 06:08 PM | Eberron, campaign setting is great. The social studies aspect of the book lends a depth to the setting that isn't present in the Realms. Despite all the detail put into the realms areas still lack cohesive cultural icons and the history is at best hackneyed and shallow. I am quite serious. Ed Greenwood, I love him and hate him. His first books blew and only recently has he put out anything good. Of course this is my opinion, but this is an opinion thread. That said I've been playing the realms for years and put in history, cultural continuity and cohesiveness that adds depth to a sword and sorcery campaign. That is my job as a DM. The main difference I think lies in the tenors of the two settings. I think Eberron only resonates with pulp noir insofar as the DM is capable of creating it and the same is true for the Forgotten Realms sword and sorcery feel, although the realms being the ultimate plastic hodgepodge can be meld to any caste, which I personally feel is its ultimate weekness. That is why I stick to the sword and sorcery feel when I create realms adventures. Say what you will, but it is apples and oranges, and some people prefer citrus others don't. |
| Enslaved DM07-19-04, 06:28 PM | I don't have a problem with Eberron or Greyhawk. My problems are the following 1) People putting words in my mouth. I have raised specific issues and people are responding to me as if I was raising different ones. Threads drift, that's fine. But don't attack me for raising questions I haven't asked. Address my issues or raise your own. 2) My problem is a setting that is suppossed to evoke swashbucking/noir SHOULD NOT read as a social studies textbook. |
| Thondred07-19-04, 09:03 PM | Originally posted by Enslaved DM 2) My problem is a setting that is suppossed to evoke swashbucking/noir SHOULD NOT read as a social studies textbook. Well, that's just your opinion. Mine is obviously in opposition, but please don't take that as an attack, or any of my posts here for that matter. I don't find that it reads as a social studies textbook at all. I get every bit of the setting flavor that was intended to come across when I read it, just as many others do. How can the book have a defective presentation if it is working for so many people? I'm bummed that it doesn't work for you, but I can't buy your opinion that the book has something wrong in its writing when so many other people are getting along just fine. In particular, when the dissenting minority(from what I have seen in this thread alone) are just that; a minority. Originally posted by Enslaved DM The fans of both settings are ill served by it. It being the poor writing. I don't see too many Eberron fans on the Eberron boards complaining about the poor presentation, aside from the defectively printed copies that were shipped out. I don't think most Eberron fans feel "ill served." I think you do. Are you putting words into the mouths of Eberron fans with that comment? The problem I see here is sadly there are some attacks being made back at you. But when the title of your thread is what it is, you are bound to bring some of that on yourself regardless of what disclaimer you put in your first post. I hope you don't see my posts as flames. They are certainly not intended to be that. I simply disagree and do not see the merits of your opinion, because the majority of Eberron "fans" are completely enthused with the quality of the ECSB, and I for one can't seem to find examples of poor presentation or poor writing quality within. |
| Enslaved DM07-19-04, 10:05 PM | Obviously if people are Eberron fans they aren't dissappointed by the material. The only Eberron material released is the main book, if they liked it enough to call themselves fans, then they aren't dissapointed. That doesn't make them right. It's a pointless arguement, as we are talking about something as subjective as personal taste. I'm not trying to convince them they are wrong. My group was interested in Eberron and the prerelease material whetted our appetite. We are not happy with what we got. I (in general) like the Realms, but that doesn't mean I like every piece of material written about it. I am writing to critique the presentation and its (in my personal, subjective opinion) its failure. I am hoping future D&D material is better written. As for if it is worth it, that's not a decision I can make for you. We don't know each other. Do you like it? Does a friend who's opinion you respect like it? That matters. Lots of people like Tom Clancy, but you would have to pay me to get me to read one of his books. The number of Eberron fans doesn't convince me to like Eberron. Now if one of my friends thinks he can run a good Eberron campaign despite the flaws in the book, that's another matter entirely. |
| Cold Napalm07-20-04, 03:27 AM | Okay so if people's main complaint about comparing FR to ebberon is the age of FR setting...how about comparing 1st ed grey box FR to ebberon? Both brand new campaign world. Oh and don't give me that ed's years as DM as an excuse either...If professional game designers can't do as well a one lone DM then they should befired and DMs hired. That said, FR was WAY better fleshed out world the ebberon is. I mean most of what I read is "in general". If I wanted to come up with my own stuff, I'll do it myself and save my 40 bucks thank you very much. |
| Kid SixXx07-20-04, 08:36 AM | Originally posted by Cold Napalm Oh and don't give me that ed's years as DM as an excuse either...If professional game designers can't do as well a one lone DM then they should befired and DMs hired. Eberron was also the work of one lone DM: Keith Baker. It was the setting that resulted from the contest held a while ago. |
| Mystery Man07-20-04, 03:50 PM | Originally posted by Kid SixXx Eberron was also the work of one lone DM: Keith Baker. It was the setting that resulted from the contest held a while ago. ] Actually the initial write up was, then it was a group effort. |
| ruleslawyer07-20-04, 04:04 PM | Originally posted by Spungdeeper Eberron, campaign setting is great. The social studies aspect of the book lends a depth to the setting that isn't present in the Realms. Despite all the detail put into the realms areas still lack cohesive cultural icons and the history is at best hackneyed and shallow. I am quite serious. Ed Greenwood, I love him and hate him. His first books blew and only recently has he put out anything good. Of course this is my opinion, but this is an opinion thread. Wow. Just have to say that this is about the exact opposite to the way I feel about the Realms. Hmm... |
| Kid SixXx07-20-04, 04:30 PM | Originally posted by Mystery Man ] Actually the initial write up was, then it was a group effort. Splitting hairs a bit, aren't we? If there were no Keith Baker, there would be no Eberron, just as if there were no Ed Greenwood, there'd be no FR. The "one lone DM" argument doesn't wash with me because both worlds are pretty much the brainchildren of one person, both of whom obviously have differnent visions of what direction they wanted their settings to take. |
| Ivan Trollsplitter07-21-04, 12:44 AM | I must say that I like the Eberron campaign setting....BUT!!! I am fully sure that Eberron will be a major contender in years to come, however, we are playing right now. I think that WOTC should back another setting, hey it beats Greyhawk. While doing this, it should not forget what has been the bread and butter for D&D players and readers for years. Wizards is teetering on the brink of putting all of its eggs into a basket that they have not even tested yet. The new PC online game AND strategy game will be in the Eberron setting. I am not saying that they should not have a game or two to get people into the setting, what I am saying is that Wizards should make sure and keep pumping out things like this for Forgotten Realms and not assume that Eberron will the next FG just because they got to look at everything out there with the whole "make your own campaign world" sweepstakes. Wizards must realize that they must continually "shine their pearl" and that pearl is FG. Love it or hate it people, FG is what kept D&D around when TSR teetered on the brink of ruin. Even if you hate him, you have Ed Greenwood to thank for having a new D&D book to buy each month. If not for his initial setting, there would be no New York Times best-selling novels or possibly even a D&D around today. Sorry, but I am not telling you anything you do not already know :angel: |
| Cold Napalm07-21-04, 01:00 AM | Well, they are making a new FR game for console...unfortunately it's being produced by stormfront...who managed to mangle 2 FR games out of 2. I'm not sure who was the great brain to try to give them a 3rd try... Anyways, I'm not so sure about Ebberon's success...I'm even less sure about wizards attempt to shove it down our throught. The two game store owners around here told me they've sold maybe 10 books each...around. At the barnes and nobel nearby I see the same 3 ebberon book there everytime I visit. The market is saturated and they don't seem to get that...I mean the big deal with 2nd ed was they saturated the market with a bunch of optional rules/campaign settings and they swore they would not do that...3.0 reach 2nd ed status with splat books, psionics book, epic book, eq guide, savage species guide...and then there is the whole mess 3.5 caused...because now there is the 3.5 psionics book, epic book, splat books...and this is before 3rd party books...market saturation anyone? |
| ruleslawyer07-21-04, 11:04 AM | Originally posted by Cold Napalm Okay so if people's main complaint about comparing FR to ebberon is the age of FR setting...how about comparing 1st ed grey box FR to ebberon? Both brand new campaign world. If we're doing that comparison, I'll go out on a limb and say the Realms wins, hands down. Look at the magical books, the rumors section, the languages and expressions, the "Cyclopedia"-style presentation, the scripts, and the NPC descriptions; full of adventure hooks! However, as I said, it's a difference in presentation, and one that's driven strongly by a 3e design philosophy that impacts on FR materials these days too. So that's not a slam against Eberron, which I think does extremely well in conceptualization and material. |
| Mr. VanderMeer07-21-04, 11:12 AM | THE MAIN SETTING BOOK IS DULL I disagree. Both concerning Eberron and Greyhawk. IMO neither are dull, but actually very inspiring. It's all a matter of taste. The problem why you seem to be getting attacked is because you are stating your opinion as if it is better than everybody else's opinion. You don't say: I don't like the main setting book, You're saying: THE MAIN SETTING BOOK IS DULL. As if people must agree with you. I think that if you have trouble picking up the noir/pulp atmosphere from the books, maybe you are just the kind of person that doesn't pick up on vibes as quickly as others and who needs a bit of over-extension to get into a setting. That is perfectly okay, we are all different in that respect. Personally I see a lot more than an adequate world description in the Eberron sourcebook. But maybe I am just the kind of person who is quickly able to pick up the writers intention and see a world come to life in his mind. The market is saturated and they don't seem to get that I am a bit worried about this too. But personally I like having a lot of choice and a lot of books to buy :D |
| Greyson07-21-04, 08:37 PM | Originally posted by Thondred Different things hit different people, different ways. The writing in both Eberron and Greyhawk evokes every bit of the wonder of the world to me. But neither of us can be the authority on what is or is not inspiring to anyone other than ourselves, which is why these kinds of threads are so pointless. Setting preference is just that, personal preference and opinion, and nothing more. Thondred is right when he wrote the above back on the first page of this irreverent and unimportant thread. I added the bold in the middle of his quote because that is the central feeling I have about issues like this - EB vs. FR; FR vs. GH; GH vs. DS; etcetera. It is too much of an individual issue of taste, style and preference. Personally, Eberron is so good in my estimation that I will be slowly diminishing my play and GMing in the World of Greyhawk (including the RPGA's Living Greyhawk) and switching to Eberron. I look forward to the day I am solely involved with EB. I even bought two ECS books - one for me and one to pass around my table and let friends borrow. I do not own a single FR product from any edition. I have been playing since 1985. Anyway, these debates are tired and provoke people. I'm just glad WotC has kept D&D alive in these heady days of computer gaming, Harry Potter, PS2s and Xboxes (LOL, the latter I own). And, I am glad that WotC allowed a well rounded line-up of settings via the d20 franchise. If you don't like Eberron, it's cool. There are plenty of products out there for your individual disposition and taste. If you do like Eberron, that's cool too. It will find its niche, no matter what its detractors write or say. Happy gaming, nerds. :) |
| Brianish07-21-04, 09:48 PM | Yeah way to pit about a hundred fifty books worth of info against ONE. |
| Oakraven07-21-04, 11:56 PM | Just an observation, but the half price book store closest to me had three copies a week after It showed up, which incidentaly was where I picked it up, I think it has some interesting ideas that may or may not make it into my FR campain for that matter I have some Ghostlight in my campain, and our earlyest Campain took place in and around the 3.e Temple of Elimental Evil which I had placed close to the Dalelands with some Very heavy handed editing |
| Alac Luin07-22-04, 12:11 PM | Originally posted by Oakraven Just an observation, but the half price book store closest to me had three copies a week after It showed up, which incidentaly was where I picked it up, I think it has some interesting ideas that may or may not make it into my FR campain If your intrested, I did a write up of a few of the ideas I had for this posted on a thread here... http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=272397 If you had anything to add to it, I'd love to hear it.:) |