But, uh, where's the drow racial description? Did I miss it? How are players who want to play drow going to know their backstory?
I remember three or four times over 3.5 Eberron, having to spend many minutes of the session explaining the intricacies of Eberron's drow... I was really hoping the Players guide would alleviate that sort of workload =/
Drow fell on the DM side of the player/DM divide. Now clearly people can play them, PC options for them are in the EPG because that's where player options go, however the information on them is mostly secret so it went into the EPG.
Keith has said that the Vulkor, the Sultar, and the Umbergen all get discussed in the 4th ECS. THey're not known to the general population of Khorvaire which the EPG information is heavily bent towards, so the information is left out.
Drow fell on the DM side of the player/DM divide. Now clearly people can play them, PC options for them are in the EPG because that's where player options go, however the information on them is mostly secret so it went into the EPG.
Fair enough. Still disappointing I have to explain "No... no, you can play a cleric even though you're a guy... no, you see, they don't worship Lolth... no, she doesn't... no... they're not... Khyber isn't a hospitable place, so you guys instead... no... Damnit."
(Drow are really really popular in my groups, heh. And not because of Drizzlawfulgoodt, because I don't allow good drow, and thus, they appear in my games as BADASS, as they should be =P)
Fair enough. Still disappointing I have to explain "No... no, you can play a cleric even though you're a guy... no, you see, they don't worship Lolth... no, she doesn't... no... they're not... Khyber isn't a hospitable place, so you guys instead... no... Damnit."
(Drow are really really popular in my groups, heh. And not because of Drizzlawfulgoodt, because I don't allow good drow, and thus, they appear in my games as BADASS, as they should be =P)
Well to be fair, Drow didn't get much attention in the last Campaign Book either. You needed to go to Races of Eberron, Player's Guide to Eberron, and Secrets of Xen'drik, along with the seperate Umbragen article in Dragon to really get any information, let alone feats or equipment.
The EPG at least has the Xen'drik Boomerang and Drow Longknife and associated feats.
Well to be fair, Drow didn't get much attention in the last Campaign Book either. You needed to go to Races of Eberron, Player's Guide to Eberron, and Secrets of Xen'drik, along with the seperate Umbragen article in Dragon to really get any information, let alone feats or equipment.
The EPG at least has the Xen'drik Boomerang and Drow Longknife and associated feats.
Iunno, I find that makes it a bit WORSE actually... like, it invites players to play the drow with all of these options but doesn't actually tell them how to play.
Imagine being given the Mark of Healing but not having access to info on House Jorasco. Even though I understand why they did all this, I still find the contradiction a bit irritating =P
Danged if you do, danged if you don't.
Actually.... With Eberron, you could count on the fact that the fluff hasn't changed much, if at all between editions and that the old books going over Drow culture, Dal Quor, the fall of the Dhakaani, and other pieces of information can still be accessed. A lot of the later 3.5 Eberron books were written with the intent that they could be fluff references for 4E campaigns. Until the 4E EPG, however, we were pretty much entirely in the dark about mechanics.
That might be why the EPG was released first.
And since the Forgotten Realms underwent such radical changes, it was decided to release the Campaign Setting first so that existing DMs and players could get reacquainted with the new world before diving in to play it.
Also, why would you not allow neutral and/or good drow in Eberron? In FR and traditional D&D style settings, Drow are evil. In Eberron there is nothing evil about them... they are just ruthless. They need to be to survive in their environment. Being ruthless does not automatically make someone evil though. I mean, it might make being good difficult... but it definitely wouldn't preclude a whole slew of neutral drow, which is what I imagine most dark elves in Eberron are. They are not out to destroy the world, or kill everyone around them. They are just out to survive by any means necessary...
Also, why would you not allow neutral and/or good drow in Eberron? In FR and traditional D&D style settings, Drow are evil. In Eberron there is nothing evil about them... they are just ruthless. They need to be to survive in their environment. Being ruthless does not automatically make someone evil though. I mean, it might make being good difficult... but it definitely wouldn't preclude a whole slew of neutral drow, which is what I imagine most dark elves in Eberron are. They are not out to destroy the world, or kill everyone around them. They are just out to survive by any means necessary...
True that. We actually have an Umbragen sorceress in our group. She's actually good...but definitely not nice. She's always the first to use aggression, intimidation is her specialty, she doesn't give her trust easily and never takes insults well. Not a very forgiving person either, especially when it comes to Khyber cults.
Are Deva common knowledge? According to their established fluff, they're virtually unheard of, yet there they are, number one on the (alphabetical) list. This is, of course, due to their presence in PH2. Drow are found in FRPG, and therefore assumedly less relevant.
A blurb would've been fine. Genasi got that much, and they are pretty much altogether irrelevant in Eberron. I can guarantee you no typical NPCs in my Eberron know what the heck a Genasi is. Plus, as with drow, they are found in the FRPG, not in PH or PH2. What gives?
I'd also hardly consider Kobolds as "supporting cast". Gnolls and Minotaurs have playable write-ups, and are therefore two of the most likely monster races to be played in Eberron. Goblins and Orcs are two of Eberron's most relevant races. Give Kobolds a playable write-up, and then maybe they deserve a blurb. Until then, they're monsters (cool little monsters that probably deserve a write-up, but still just monsters).
Drow should've been given a blurb, but it's too late now. It will indeed remain the DM's job to educate any would-be players of drow, barring an extremely unlikely "Drow of Eberron" Dragon article.
My rant spent, I will acknowledge that the only place you're ever likely to plausibly encounter drow PCs is in a Xen'drik campaign. We've had two, one of which I played.
I found the lack of drow info in the "Other Common Races" section annoying, as well (pp34-47). My annoyance is only partially assuaged by the "they're not common knowledge" type of thinking.
Are Deva common knowledge? According to their established fluff, they're virtually unheard of, yet there they are, number one on the (alphabetical) list. This is, of course, due to their presence in PH2. Drow are found in FRPG, and therefore assumedly less relevant.
Ok, good call on this. If the Deva are commonly knowledge, then the Drow really aught to be as well...
But, I am guessing, knowing about the Deva doesn't really give anything away about the setting. Knowing about the drow might give away a little more...
But, I am guessing, knowing about the Deva doesn't really give anything away about the setting. Knowing about the drow might give away a little more...
True. For any out there that might not be familiar with the role of Eberron drow, their ignorance will make that first encounter all the more special.
I still feel they absolutely should've been included, but at least there's some small benefit to their absence.
Eberron Drow are renowned for their extreme xenophobia. Even Kalashtar and other inhabitants of Sarlonna seem to be better understood and more often encountered in Khorvaire than Drow.
Come to think of it, despite all the talk of Drow as possible player characters, I can't recall a single Drow NPC outside of Xen'Drik in the 3E books. Not even as a passing curiosity.
Gnolls and Minotaurs have playable write-ups, and are therefore two of the most likely monster races to be played in Eberron. Goblins and Orcs are two of Eberron's most relevant races.
Honestly, I wish the orc and goblin sections in the EPG had been a little stronger. I understand the idea of withholding information that isn't common knowledge and presenting it in the ECG, but given that goblins do have a strong central role in the setting, I'd like to have seen a little more about their potential for use as PCs (if only "additional information about the goblins can be found in the ECG"). Most PCs may know nothing about the cause of the downfall of Dhakaan, but I'd like players who know nothing at all about the setting to know that there was a little more to it than "the usual infighting"... that there's a lot of interesting options for a hobgoblin bard.
So I understand the design goal behind this decision - but Dhakaan is stil there in the ECG, along with Sulatar and Umbragen.
Honestly, I wish the orc and goblin sections in the EPG had been a little stronger. I understand the idea of withholding information that isn't common knowledge and presenting it in the ECG, but given that goblins do have a strong central role in the setting, I'd like to have seen a little more about their potential for use as PCs (if only "additional information about the goblins can be found in the ECG"). Most PCs may know nothing about the cause of the downfall of Dhakaan, but I'd like players who know nothing at all about the setting to know that there was a little more to it than "the usual infighting"... that there's a lot of interesting options for a hobgoblin bard.
Indeed. I knew it would never happen, but I'd dreamed of full Racial Write-ups for Orcs, Hobgoblins, Bugbears and Goblins. They are so important to the setting. They are generally no more "monsters" in Eberron than humans are, in my opinion. They definitely deserved more than tiny blurbs, but it's too late now.
As soon as we get a Dragon article for the Goblinoids (not so subtle hint for the powers that be), I'll be ready to play one of several concepts I have in my head. A duur'kala would be near the top of the list, obviously, and a modern-day daashor would be equally as awesome--especially in light of the awesomeness that is the Aritificer. He'd have a lot to prove before claiming the "daashor" title, no doubt. I also have the lingering desire to play a Goblin of the Silent Clans.
So I understand the design goal behind this decision - but Dhakaan is stil there in the ECG, along with Sulatar and Umbragen.
Thankfully, our group already loves and knows the setting, so Dhakaan and the drow are well understood by our players. It is regrettable that DMs have to direct new players to the ECG for such info, seeing as the EPG writers went to great lengths to prevent metagame knowledge.
DMs will assumedly have to feed the needed tidbits to such players. I think a better idea would to direct the player to the ECS' relevant sections, and maybe even assign a novel like Don Bassingthwaite's "Doom of Kings" (and/or its predecessor "Dragon Below" trilogy. Not all players are avid readers, no doubt, but Don's portrayal of the goblins' past and present is fantastic, in my opinion.) Reading the ECS would give them the info they need, without ruining any of the juicy new plothooks you've put into place in the ECG.