Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 logos7 Jul 27, 2009 23:27:38	Hey Everyone, been pouring over my gorgeous new Players and Campeign Guide and I had a few questions. The New Five Nations (and others) write Ups don't include the population and demographic breakdowns. I can understand that in general this is kinda boring information, but is there any hint if the information is the same or different. Also the new maps don't have scales. After 3.x's scale quabble I can understand but should the original distances be used or a more organic approach (personally last edition I ended up multiplying populations in the Eberron Campeign Setting by like 20 to create numbers that sorta matched up with the quick and dirty guide to medevil demographics, and I got the spread sheet to prove it. ) I'm not trying to be pendantic or argue Raw or anything. I'm just wondering if the info has been intentionally changed or not. Any help would be appreciated. L
#2 nthdegree256 Jul 28, 2009 10:28:51	The big map of Khorvaire does have a scale; comparing it to the old map, it looks like the continent shrunk a bit. The old Khorvaire was roughly 3500 miles from west to east (more if you count the islands on the eastern side), while the same area covers only about 3000 miles on the new map. I don't know about population data, but I could've sworn I saw something in the new ECG about Sharn having two million people, which I think is consistent with previous numbers. I could be completely wrong, though.
#3 Beleriphon Jul 29, 2009 7:29:17	I don't know about population data, but I could've sworn I saw something in the new ECG about Sharn having two million people, which I think is consistent with previous numbers. I could be completely wrong, though. 200,000 souls, and about 1/3 are human.
#4 superdeadsmurf Jul 29, 2009 15:01:03	200,000 souls, and about 1/3 are human. and that, unfortunately is the same number as was in the 3.5 books. Still a woefully small population - I'd like to double nearly every population figure in the book really, well everything over 10k anyway.
#5 Hellcow Jul 29, 2009 15:48:08	I didn't work on this aspect of the EPG. So I don't know what they had in mind here, and whether the omission was accidental or intentional. Personally, I'm just as glad it's not there. I always hated the fact that there were entire large countries listed as having less than half the population of the Boulder, Colorado. So personally, I completely ignored the population numbers. What mattered to me was the RATIO: that yes, Valenar has far, far fewer people in it than Breland. Aundair has the smallest population of the Five Nations. But given my interest in cinematic play, to me, I never let a listed population number interfere with my story. What is important to me is that the human nations include large areas that aren't densely populated - that you have webs of settlements radiating out from the major cities, but then you do have vast open spaces that have never been fully settled, places where you could discover a Dhakaani ruin untouched for centuries. The population numbers were too low in 3.5 Eberron. I suggest that people increase them. But the idea that there's a lot of Breland that's never been fully utilized - that there's settlers near Graywall, but not masses of them - was an intentional part of the setting. So. You might keep the RATIO of population from 3E... but I wouldn't feel obliged to keep any of the specific population numbers. I don't.
#6 AvonRekaes Jul 29, 2009 16:46:41	Yeah. Personally I have Sharn set to be 2,000,000 residents. For comparison, the island of Manhattan alone (not including the other counties of New York City) has a population of just over 1,600,000. I understand that medieval cities could not normally hope to be anywhere near as densely populated as modern cities, but Sharn stands out in my mind as the major exception. It is the largest city on Khorvaire, possibly the world if you only count humanoid cities, and it probably enjoys a the highest amount of the setting's "modern" magical conveniences per capita. Sharn is also bigger than Manhattan. While Sharn's square milage is comparable to that of Manhattan's, Manhattan's skyscrapers would barely extend into Sharn's Middle City. However, I've never had to explain this to any of my players. I basically just describe to them a city entirely of skyscrappers, about twice as tall as the tallest in Manhattan. I'm pretty sure the population density they get in their heads from that picture is good enough.
#7 Hellcow Jul 30, 2009 2:13:25	I understand that medieval cities could not normally hope to be anywhere near as densely populated as modern cities, but Sharn stands out in my mind as the major exception. It is the largest city on Khorvaire, possibly the world if you only count humanoid cities, and it probably enjoys a the highest amount of the setting's "modern" magical conveniences per capita. Indeed. It's NOT a medieval city.
#8 To11 Aug 05, 2009 21:18:41	While the population figures always struck me as odd (and were ignored when I ran it in 3.5), the scale of Khorvaire has always been more bothersome to me. Mind you, this is only because I like to look at travel times for a sense of setting when I'm running an adventure. Breland is still very big (over 1,000 miles east to west). I'm curious if anyone has scaled down the size of Khorvaire, and to what extent.
#9 Sarlax Aug 05, 2009 21:58:14	While the population figures always struck me as odd (and were ignored when I ran it in 3.5), the scale of Khorvaire has always been more bothersome to me. My bug in 3.5 (and still now) isn't just that Khorvaire is statted something like an uninhabited wasteland, but that it's hard to imagine how there can be unified culture across such a vast area given the available communication methods, travel restrictions, and radical diversity. I like to compare Khovaire to Europe. Europe has 50 countries, and the greatest political union it's ever known, the EU, has 27 nations. It has a history thousands of years old, yes - but look at Khorvaire. Up until a century ago, Khorvaire had only 5 countries. Now it has, what 13 nations? Germany is (very roughly) about the same size as Zilargo and it wasn't even a single state until 1871 - and then it had a hiatus where it was split for decades. Even today there are big cultural differences in different parts of the country. The countries of Khorvaire strike me as far too homogeneous. It's hard to believe that a place this big could go so long and just have a few distinct nations, let alone a continent with dozens of different intelligent races. Khorvaire should be cut up into a hundred different microstates. *** That said, I dig the feel and general history of Eberron, so when it comes to actually running or playing it, I ignore that cognitive dissonance and just take it easy.
#10 Madfox11 Aug 06, 2009 6:20:58	Be careful with comparing Khorvaire too much with Europe. For example, in RL China and India consisted of empires and nations easily on par with the ones of Khorvair and even in Europe the Roman empire lasted several centuries. The reason that Europe had so many different nations is due to its many natural bariers, and even then many of those different nations did have the same overall ruler. You provide Germany as an example, but France and England are opposite examples. The five nations in Khorvair do follow natural barriers and the war proved that only Galifar united the seperate regions. More importantly, the communication and transport techniques of Khorvair are at least on par with the Roman empire (and they have been for a long time) and since the lightning rail and Sivis sending stones at an almost modern level (and in some cases actually more advanced then modern techniques). In the end, I feel the current number is big enough for adventures, but not so big that it becomes impossible to run for a DM and that is ultimately more important then historical correct data. [Side note: for me, scale and demographics are easier to deal with then with then the time lines. I sometimes get the feeling 1 century in RL is like a millenium in Eberron ;)]
#11 Sarlax Aug 06, 2009 15:57:12	Be careful with comparing Khorvaire too much with Europe. For example, in RL China and India consisted of empires and nations easily on par with the ones of Khorvair and even in Europe the Roman empire lasted several centuries. The reason that Europe had so many different nations is due to its many natural bariers, and even then many of those different nations did have the same overall ruler. You provide Germany as an example, but France and England are opposite examples. The five nations in Khorvair do follow natural barriers and the war proved that only Galifar united the seperate regions. More importantly, the communication and transport techniques of Khorvair are at least on par with the Roman empire (and they have been for a long time) and since the lightning rail and Sivis sending stones at an almost modern level (and in some cases actually more advanced then modern techniques). While Khorvaire may have a long history of magic, many of what it relies on now was invented recently ("D&D recently"). The speaking stones were created in 783 YK, the lightning rail started up in 811, etc. Sure, Orien was keeping roads like the Romans before that, and Vadalis had carrier griffons for the mail, but there wasn't widespread integration. There still isn't. My problem isn't with the rise of large states in Khorvaire - it's the development of national identities. How do you sustain something like a Brelish identity? What do these individuals have that actually unites them as a people?
#12 malignant_narcissist Aug 06, 2009 19:34:58	Huh. I always just kinda accepted the low population numbers as a result of The Last War. Basically I just assumed that if Khorvaire survived another 10 years there would be something akin to the baby boom of the United States.
#13 To11 Aug 06, 2009 20:34:33	At one point, Keith Baker said that the continent of Khorvaire was mis-scaled thanks to a mix-up with the art department. It was off by a factor of 10. This was back when Khorvaire was 5,000 miles wide. I assume he meant area, and not actual width. He had envisioned Khorvaire's Five Nations being more the size of France or Germany (as opposed to Russia or China). If you apply those changes to the map, what would it look like?
#14 Madfox11 Aug 07, 2009 5:09:43	While Khorvaire may have a long history of magic, many of what it relies on now was invented recently ("D&D recently"). The speaking stones were created in 783 YK, the lightning rail started up in 811, etc. Sure, Orien was keeping roads like the Romans before that, and Vadalis had carrier griffons for the mail, but there wasn't widespread integration. There still isn't. Still a lot bigger then in Europe Dark Ages. The Europe of the Romans was reasonably unified cultural, at least those people who wanted to mean something. It was also quickly forgotten once the unifying culture collapsed and the others were pushed away by invading hordes from the East. My problem isn't with the rise of large states in Khorvaire - it's the development of national identities. How do you sustain something like a Brelish identity? What do these individuals have that actually unites them as a people? Well, besides China as a RL example, it should be noted that in Europe national identities are a relatively novel idea that took hold at an incredible speed (mere decades). Before Napoleon most commoners really did not care all that much whether their rulers was the king of England or the emporer of Austria. It was before the Great War (Eberron's war) that those inventions like speaking stones and lightning rail were made. Who says that before those inventions people really identified themselves by their nation cultural (beyond the fact that there was a unified law and king)? I suspect that it is actually a relatively new development...
#15 bobiago Aug 07, 2009 11:05:29	I was just noticing last night the change in scale applied to Argonnessen. In 3.5e, Argonessen was about 3800 miles square, or about 14.5 million sq miles. Given the population numbers of "over 50,000 dragons", that equated to one dragon every 290 square miles, on average, which I always thought was a bit crowded, but given the differences between the Vast and the Thousand, it could work. (I always cut the number of dragons in half, mentally, and it never came up in game - "tens of thousands" of dragons is sufficient to impart the conceit). Now it's about 2000 miles square, a little more than one quarter of its former size. Thoughts?
#16 Hellcow Aug 07, 2009 11:07:34	At one point, Keith Baker said that the continent of Khorvaire was mis-scaled thanks to a mix-up with the art department. It was off by a factor of 10... He had envisioned Khorvaire's Five Nations being more the size of France or Germany (as opposed to Russia or China). The third sentence is correct, the first two aren't. I did see the Five Nations as being more on the scale of France or Germany. But the "Off by a factor of ten" is a general thing - it's not ACTUALLY that a zero got added on by someone at the art department. I wasn't involved in the creation of the maps for the ECS, and I feel that the size is a mistake based on not thinking through the consequences of the size. But it's not something where Person A said "Make it a hundred!" and Person B wrote down a thousand - or if it was, I wasn't either of those people.
#17 Hellcow Aug 07, 2009 11:27:14	Given the population numbers of "over 50,000 dragons", that equated to one dragon every 290 square miles, on average, which I always thought was a bit crowded, but given the differences between the Vast and the Thousand, it could work. For me, that difference is the key. In the Thousand, it's stated that dragons live in family groups, with an adult dragon potentially living with her mate and children, or up to a dozen dragons sharing a monolith tower. "Some flights spread out across their domain, while others prefer to live in close proximity"... and "A dragon is almost always visible in the sky." The reduction in scale is probably a good reason to reduce the total population numbers, but setting the Vast aside, the dragons of Argonnessen aren't loners by nature. When it comes to things like food - how do they maintain a high population in limited space - bear in mind that we are talking about the most magically potent civilization in the history of the world. They may enjoy hunting, and in fact cultivate dangerous livestock for this purpose (per page 24 of DoE), but at the same time, Travelers' Feast is a 4th level ritual; other the course of tens of thousands of years, the dragons have surely come up with superior innovations to address their dietary requirements. Personally, I envision something along the lines of living eternal rations - beasts bred to be hunted that can be eaten only to regenerate and rise again, like Thor's goats. I know food wasn't necessarily the issue you were raising, but my point is that the Thousand, Tapestry, etc isn't just a bunch of dragons hanging out in one place; it's a dragon civilization, and it's more magically advanced than Khorvaire or Aerenal; it stands to reason that they have used magic to solve many problems facing society. So the dragon in Xen'drik or Khorvaire is the equivalent of the man living in a shack with no electricity or running water - while back in Argonnessen, they've developed things to make a dragon's life easier. So Argonnessen can support a higher draconic population density than you could pull of when dealing with "wild" dragons.
#18 bobiago Aug 07, 2009 11:35:22	Do you have any particular "dangerous livestock" in mind? I like the artwork on page 172-173, but I keep thinking Kodos from WoW, or Aurochs from Song of Ice and Fire.
#19 AvonRekaes Aug 07, 2009 15:21:30	Wow... Dangerous Hunting animals + Regenerating Livestock.... Anyone else thinking the Tarrasque is just an Elder Red Dragon's Sul Dinner steak?
#20 Hellcow Aug 07, 2009 15:34:41	Anyone else thinking the Tarrasque is just an Elder Red Dragon's Sul Dinner steak? It is actually mentioned by name on page 24. ;) My point is that Aereni, Tairnadal, and Phiarlan are all elves, but all radically different because of their cultural traditions and advances. The same is true for dragons. A dragon born outside Argonnessen will be quite different than one born into the Thousand. Argonnessen isn't just a physical location, it's a civilization, and they may have developed magical tools to overcome the problems that have arisen over the centuries.
#21 Hellcow Aug 07, 2009 16:00:11	Germany is (very roughly) about the same size as Zilargo and it wasn't even a single state until 1871 - and then it had a hiatus where it was split for decades. Even today there are big cultural differences in different parts of the country. Since you brought it up specifically, I'll point out that according to the history of Zilargo, each of the major cities of the present day was originally an independent city state, and they only came together when threats arose that required mutual defense. Today they are united under Triumvirate and Trust, but we've specifically noted that family and clan bonds are very important to the Zil and are the basis for subtle feuds... and as clans are essentially the foundation of the old city-states, this is essentially a continuation of the old city-state rivalries. Meanwhile, The PGtE talks about the differences between the Mror clans, from the Droranath berserkers to the Kundarak bankers. It's not something that has been explored in great detail in the Five Nations, but a critical example is the Eldeen Reaches and Aundair - a split that was partially driven by the considerable cultural divide between the people of the rural west and the urban east. Looking to Breland, I think that the Brelish are bound together by pride in their nation's perceived achievements. But culturally, I think you'll see HUGE differences between a settler on the Droaam frontier, a Sharn merchant, and a farmer in one of the web of villages around Starilaskar. Most likely, they even have different accent; settlements with a history of interactions with goblins or Zil may have stolen words of pronunciation. That's one reason we've never given an official pronunciation guide for the world: I think it varies based on where you go. Is Cyre SEER-ee or SI-ur? That depends - are you from Making or Metrol? So I think that the nations are defined by shared ideals and history and (most of the time...) loyalty to a particular leader. IMO the Last War fueled a surge of nationalism, as Madfox11 suggests; suddenly it made more of a difference whether you were Brelish or not. Meanwhile, you have the humans of Valenar, who are a good example of Cyrans who never really identified with Cyre and don't really care that they're working for elves now. In any case, I certainly think that you see cultural diversity across the Five Nations, just as you'd find in Germany or England today. The Eldeen/Aundair split shows how far this can go. It's simply not something we've had a good place to discuss in detail; we've had enough trouble pointing out the things that Brelish have in common, without highlighting the different traditions found in the outer villages. But it's an issue of space - not because the western pioneer is supposed to be identical to the Sharn crimelord.