While reading over the FRPG I realized there was a lot of space dedicated to the separate nations, I think over a 1/3 of the book.
How do you think it will be different in Eberron. There are only 13 nations in Khorvaire. I'm actually hoping they spend the extra spaces discussing how the steam punk/noir is affected in the daily life.
Discuss!
I personally hope to get more info on regions other than the four nations. Darguun, Droamm, Valenar, and Zilargo are, in my opinion, begging for more detail. Aerenal, Argonessen, Xen'Drik, and Sarlona can get more detail too.
Unlike 3.5, Wizards isn't planning on releasing a metric ****ton of supplemental books for the setting, so they need to cover as much of the crunch as possible in the EPG.
I don't think that fluff should be sacrificed necessarily, I'm just anxious over not feeling that they included everything they should for a rather thematically different campaign setting, such as Eberron.
Disagree with Nephalim. The only Eberron-exclusive crunch we need are Dragonmarks and Dragonshards, and even that could be ported to a generic setting with enough work. Give us fluff, preferrably a balance of every corner of Eberron (but this time, nothing about Kaius III in the Player's Guide, mkay?)
Can we PLEASE not have like, monthly supplument books for Eberron? Namely, have ALL 4 CONTINENTS explained at least partially in-depth into one book? I'm frowning deeply at the fact of the many supplument Eberron books I got, and how much money I wasted (29.95! Outrageous!) just to get all these suppluments.
They're doing 3 Eberron books total, and that's it. No need to worry about book bloat.
and how much money I wasted (29.95! Outrageous!) just to get all these suppluments.
I have all the books myself, and yes, its a bit much but I still don't really feel like I have wasted money on them, but that is mostly since it has given me much better "insigt" into the world and helps me build cool campaigns. But that might only be me, and it might be that you are sarcastic/ironic (I find it hard to tell on the interweb).
No need to worry about book bloat.
Only a bunch of unorganised articles from the dragon magazines :P
Only a bunch of unorganised articles from the dragon magazines :P
Well, I was trying to keep it all positive...otherwise I would have said "no need to worry about getting lots of good material, since they're going to axe a lot of it to make it fit in three books." ;)
And thats a good thing.
Looking forward to this tome, believe it or not. I may reserve Eb for my 4e games, if I like what I see.
I would think that they would use that same space the same way - it just means that Eberron's thirteen nations would get far more detail then FR's sixty or so.
And thats a good thing.
Looking forward to this tome, believe it or not. I may reserve Eb for my 4e games, if I like what I see.
*cough*only12nationsarerecgonizedbythetreatyofThronehold*COUGH*
...3 Eberron books. Total. SERIOUSLY?
Links please? If this is true...wow, I better seriously re-consider tossing away my hoard of Eberron supplument books. I know for certain they won't (or will refuse) to shove all those supplument info into 3 books, like, say, the provinces of Riedra :|
...3 Eberron books. Total. SERIOUSLY?
Links please? If this is true...wow, I better seriously re-consider tossing away my hoard of Eberron supplument books. I know for certain they won't (or will refuse) to shove all those supplument info into 3 books, like, say, the provinces of Riedra :|
It's true, and they've been saying it for a while. One setting per year, at most three books per setting, and that's it. All of the 4e FR books together have amounted to the Campaign Guide and the Player's Guide, plus (supposedly) one more coming out early next year, and everything else FR has just been novels.
They don't want so many settings cluttering their core market, so they're watering down their setting stuff, crunching it into the limited mold of core (complete with shoehorning the cosmologies into the default one), and otherwise limiting the coverage they're giving it.
It's true, and they've been saying it for a while. One setting per year, at most three books per setting, and that's it. All of the 4e FR books together have amounted to the Campaign Guide and the Player's Guide, plus (supposedly) one more coming out early next year, and everything else FR has just been novels.
Actually, as I understand it, the 3rd book will always be a quest, and FR has already got its quest (the tower of spellgard). This means that there will be no new FR books coming out next year. All other FR specific info that will be released will be released over DDi. Once the players guide, campaign guide, and first quest will be released for Eberron, it too will find itself in the same situation.
For some this is a blessing. For some a curse.
Actually, as I understand it, the 3rd book will always be a quest, and FR has already got its quest (the tower of spellgard). This means that there will be no new FR books coming out next year. All other FR specific info that will be released will be released over DDi. Once the players guide, campaign guide, and first quest will be released for Eberron, it too will find itself in the same situation.
Tower of Spellgard is out already? I must have missed it. But yes, they have said the third one will be an adventure of some sort, though I got the impression that this wasn't set in stone.
For some this is a blessing. For some a curse.
I find myself in the latter category. So much potential, so few books.
For some this is a blessing. For some a curse.
Well you wont have to buy as many books this time around. Unless you find "core" books I really enjoy... But I would at least hope they realeased an adventure path for the different settings. And I was a bit under that impression since they named it FR1? (as far as I can make out from the low resolution pic). Not that I have heard anything official about it. Just seems odd not at least doing it like that...
Now I don't really mind having to remoddel adventures to make it fit with Eberron, but it would be nice if they at least made one adventure path that was specific for the setting...
Well you wont have to buy as many books this time around. Unless you find "core" books I really enjoy... But I would at least hope they realeased an adventure path for the different settings. And I was a bit under that impression since they named it FR1? (as far as I can make out from the low resolution pic). Not that I have heard anything official about it. Just seems odd not at least doing it like that...
Now I don't really mind having to remoddel adventures to make it fit with Eberron, but it would be nice if they at least made one adventure path that was specific for the setting...
Scepter Tower of Spellguard (FR1) is apparently 96 pages, so presumably Secrets of the Ashen Crown (EB1) is going to be the same size. That would mean it's pretty much the same size as the full 3E adventure path (Shadows of the Last War, Whispers of the Vampire's Blade and Grasp of the Emerald Claw). It would make it a little smaller than Eyes of the Lich Queen, though.
http://www.amazon.com/Seekers-Ashen-Crown-Adventure-Eberron/dp/078695017X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229526166&sr=8-3
Fluff goes in the setting guide, crunch in the player's guide. No, they're not intuitive titles, but that appears to be how they are organizing things from what we saw with FR. I would rather they just hadn't included fluff at all and done a better job with the crunch in the FRPG. They didn't even include the new continent they made up!
I agree that we won't see shifters and changelings in Eberron 4th ed books. they've been made core, which suits me just fine. They weren't uniquely eberron, what was done with them was. The warforged are a staple of the setting and will most certainly be one of the two races we see (if the FRPG is any indication of the count). We may see the kalashtar, or we may have no psionics at all and get a DDI supplement when the PHBIII or whichever one introduces psionics comes out. But since they're keith's baby (babies?) we may see them in print. They're more intimately tied to the backstory and metaplot of the setting, like the warforged and unlike the changeling and shifters.
I expect we'll see a lot of khorvaire and not a lot of anything else. and frankly I'm fine with that. I already have secrets of sarlona and dragons of eberron, and there was virtually no crunch in the latter and precious little in the former. Secrets of Xendrik was absolutely horrible (sorry keith, but it was a grab bag of hooks, not an inspiring collection of new ideas; that was what was intended but not what was desired), but stormreach made up for it and again had virtually no crunch.
In fact, most eberron supplements were mostly crunchless. the Player's guide had a few good things but was still 90% fluff or more. Explorer's handbook was bad and had no crunch to speak of. Five nations, minimal crunch, just a prestige class and a few monsters at the end of each chapter. Faiths of eberron narrowed it to the prestige classes. Shards of war, less than 1% crunch. Sharn had really inspired crunch but it was still a pretty thin section at the back. The only crunch heavy book was magic of eberron, and the quality was pretty awful (daelkyr blooded could have been a feat it was so uninspired. at least they recognized that with the psiforged). That leaves us with races of eberron, which had a few more light prestige classes and feats that were pretty good and will probably get covered in the new Eberron PG, and dragonmarked, which was again fairly light on the crunch but did fantastic things with what it had and will probably get incorporated in some way.
In other words, we don't need a lot updated. Just make it good, don't waste space with enormous fonts and huge blank spaces like the FR crap, and stop saying ludicrously stupid things like using the second person in paragon path descriptions ("you are a wanderer...you trace your lineage back to ancient times...you make me gag") and actually tell us something about them. We can figure out how to apply it to ourselves without the second person condescension, thank you very much.
I just wish they'd go back to the old layout format. The FR books were awful, there was practically nothing in them. You learned virtually nothing about a nation in its two page spread. If you didn't already know FR, those books were useless except for some crunch ideas in the PG. ugh. I hope we can expect more for eberron.
I found that the new FR books were FAR better then any of the old FR books. Its the first time in a long time that I actually want to run a FR game (and I am today)...
Fluff goes in the setting guide, crunch in the player's guide. No, they're not intuitive titles, but that appears to be how they are organizing things from what we saw with FR. I would rather they just hadn't included fluff at all and done a better job with the crunch in the FRPG. They didn't even include the new continent they made up!
I like the crunch in the FRPG. Its a great book.
I agree that we won't see shifters and changelings in Eberron 4th ed books. they've been made core, which suits me just fine. They weren't uniquely eberron, what was done with them was. The warforged are a staple of the setting and will most certainly be one of the two races we see (if the FRPG is any indication of the count). We may see the kalashtar, or we may have no psionics at all and get a DDI supplement when the PHBIII or whichever one introduces psionics comes out. But since they're keith's baby (babies?) we may see them in print. They're more intimately tied to the backstory and metaplot of the setting, like the warforged and unlike the changeling and shifters.
Since when were changelings in core? I certainly hope we DO see changelings done in the EBPG, as they won't be in the PHB 2. I don't mind not seeing shifters since they will be in the PHB 2, and there is no need to double print information... but kalashtar, warforged, and changelings better all be there. I personally would be rather disappointed if one of them will not be.
Since when were changelings in core?
Changelings=doppelgangers now. Just have a look...
Yes, I am aware. And, you will notice, dopplegangers are not featured as a playable PC race. Not over DDi, not in the PHB, and it will not be in the PHB 2 (as far as I know). Unlike the Shifter, which will appear in the PHB 2 as a PC race, there is currently no support for changeling characters. Yet, changelings are an important part of the Eberron setting. That is why they were in the first Eberron campaign setting. As such, I should seriously hope that they do include changelings in the EPG for 4e.
But they are a playable PC race in the MM. And frankly, out of playable races in the monster manual I would rather see get full write-ups for eberron, I would rather see the goblin races.
The background we would get for changelings/doppelgangers is something that could be used for any setting. The stuff we would get for goblins would be integral to the world of Eberron. Changelings are neat, they add to the whole intrigue angle, but they aren't intimately tied to the setting like Warforged, Kalashtar, and the goblinoids. Even shifters are more tied in with the world.
But they are a playable PC race in the MM. And frankly, out of playable races in the monster manual I would rather see get full write-ups for eberron, I would rather see the goblin races.
Be that as it may, your personal preference does not equal expectations based on the first ECS. Changelings as a PC race are a key feature of the setting, goblins as interesting as they are, and as much as I would like a PC write up for them as well, are not.
The background we would get for changelings/doppelgangers is something that could be used for any setting. The stuff we would get for goblins would be integral to the world of Eberron. Changelings are neat, they add to the whole intrigue angle, but they aren't intimately tied to the setting like Warforged, Kalashtar, and the goblinoids. Even shifters are more tied in with the world.
I disagree. The Cabinet of Faces is specific to Eberron. Moreover, as the "Races of Eberron" and the first ECS featured Changelings and not goblins, it would seem that the intent of the setting disagrees with you as well.
I'm not saying goblins as a PC race does not work well in Eberron... but its changelings which are core to the setting.
Since Shifters will be in the PH2, I still expect writeups for the other Eberron races: Warforged, Changelings and Kalashtar.
Same.
Tons of spaces that will allow for a deeper/fuller fleshing out of the intrigue/plots/stories involved in Eberron that got a real short shrift in FR due to their limited spacing.
But shouldn't all these said, intrigue/plots/stories be in the Eberron Campaign Guide of which only the DM should be reading? I mean lets not have another Kaius incident in Eberron please.
It may very well be that ECS has both the Kalashtar (as a new race) and Changeling (as a more fully fleshed out) races. For example Drow were already in MM, but not fully fleshed-out until the FR books were released. Just be patient and wait until the book is in your hand.
I am betting that Kalashtar won't appear until psionics are added to 4E (perhaps in the PHB III). I expect they will get a brief blurb ala half-orcs, shades, etc. did in the FR Player's Guide.
Don't forget that Eberron content will continue appear in Dungeon & Dragon (and the print "best of" book they plan on publishing every year). I also expect to see supporting material in future "splatbooks" as well.
But shouldn't all these said, intrigue/plots/stories be in the Eberron Campaign Guide of which only the DM should be reading? I mean lets not have another Kaius incident in Eberron please.
I agree with this sentiment, but things like a condensed timeline for the war, how the houses became so pivotal to Khorvaire, and why aberrant dragonmarks are bad. Some structure on how the inspired took over Sarlona and how Adar life is in a constant war. Some day to day in Seren or even in Aeranal. Seriously how freaking odd must the Aeranal be considering their culture and how short of information we really are about them. How about some actual more definition of the planes as interpreted by the scholars of Eberron.
The limited scale of the world of Eberron allows for a deeper delving into each countries stories that helps them come alive.
In Eberron, you...well, you already have all the regions nicked out, no matter how mysterious. Argonnessen was unveiled. I can top off all 8 provinces of Riedra, and in Khorvaire, well again...everything is too well-defined, even if you say "in the deepest, most unknown forest of the world...", you're probably in a not-very-unknown-forest-at-all-but-actually-the-King's-Forest.
Now given, this would be both a good and a bad for various players. For me? It's mixed. I like Eberron more so than FR, but only because of its devotion of an entire continent to psionics (psionics>magic), and because of its flavor and tone.