Player's Guide, any good? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Player's Guide, any good?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
akumadaimyo
Jun 20, 2009 11:22:12 Is the Player's Guide any good? Does it look like they pulled a FR on us and changed the setting around?
#2
ellorin
Jun 20, 2009 11:32:33 I thought there was already a thread on that...oh, whatever. I'm very pleased with the Player's guide. It's still the Eberron we know and love-most changes are pretty minor. EPG is also very good at keeping a player's perspective, avoiding certain spoilers like the nature of Kaius III. The PP seem quite interesting too.

(You do realise that your question was a little vague...)
#3
Alex_
Jun 20, 2009 11:49:49
Is the Player's Guide any good? Does it look like they pulled a FR on us and changed the setting around?

No FR scale changes. No time jumps. The biggest changes would be the addition of information that wasn't there before, but makes sense because it draws on established fluff and references elsewhere. Things like Syberis also being the Astral Sea and Khyber being akin to the Elemental Chaos. Dragonbron in Argonessen and Q'barra amongst Seren barbarians and Lizardfolk. Eladrin coming to Eberron and being enslaved by Giants, who then created the Elves and the Drow and hidden Eladrin cities who are trapped by the Mournland. Tieflings coming from many places, including a fallen kingdom that trafficed with fiends that was mentioned in Secrets of Sarlonna.
#4
superdeadsmurf
Jun 20, 2009 13:11:40 Is it good? Short Answer, Yes. It's Awesome.

Long answer - part 1 of my full review on my new blog.
More to come next week. It'll be long.
#5
tallric_kruush
Jun 20, 2009 16:10:46 As has been said, it's both good (the EPG) and relatively unchanged (the setting itself). No major changes have been made that weren't necessary, and those made were allowances for the new races to be included.

I have gripes about the layout of the EPG, but nothing that would prevent me from giving a strong recommendation to buy it. If you intend to play in Eberron, it's a must-have, quality supplement.
#6
juion
Jun 20, 2009 19:49:13 I haven't had any experience in Eberron before, but I picked up the book today just because the setting seemed really really interesting.

I found it really interesting to read, really nice details on the history and general mood of the setting.
#7
stogoe
Jun 20, 2009 20:39:16 As someone who bought the EPG specifically to scavenge mechanics, it's pretty good. I love the artificer, but there is way too much Dragonmarked stuff. Seriously, it's like half the book.
#8
tallric_kruush
Jun 20, 2009 21:37:01
As someone who bought the EPG specifically to scavenge mechanics, it's pretty good. I love the artificer, but there is way too much Dragonmarked stuff. Seriously, it's like half the book.

There's good cause for that. Unmarked PCs will be built using every 4E source available. The EPG is likely to be the only source for dragonmarked mechanics. At the most, an occassional Dragon article may supplement the EPG.

The EPG is and will remain the definitive guide for dragonmarked PCs, so we needed two-thirds of the book's mechanics focused on 'marks. The ECG will round out the setting for those that read it.
#9
bobiago
Jun 20, 2009 22:34:18 I was actually a little ticked off when I found out that they were just keeping the setting as it was without adding some new fluff to work with. I mean, I didn't need/want 100 years and a SpellPlague, but I was looking forward to the two-year jump and some new storylines/villains and a bit of fresh content to work with rather than a replay of the same old stuff I have been using for years. C'est la vie. The mob spoke/shrieked, and WotC listened, and we have what we have.

That said, I have been happy to see the hints at the new fluff that they did work in. The Eladrin were worked in very nicely, and some of the hints we have gotten for the ECG imply some new items worked in there with only minor retcons. The 4e ECG has a lot of pages to expand on what were chapters 7,8 and 11 in the 3.5 ECG. I am very optimistic.

The World Axis cosmology feels a little shoehorned in at the moment, but I'm coming around to that too. I feel like 4e cribbed a lot from Eberron in the first place, so the backward compatability is not much of a chore.

So yeah, so far it's great.
#10
tallric_kruush
Jun 21, 2009 10:44:29
I was actually a little ticked off when I found out that they were just keeping the setting as it was without adding some new fluff to work with. I mean, I didn't need/want 100 years and a SpellPlague, but I was looking forward to the two-year jump and some new storylines/villains and a bit of fresh content to work with rather than a replay of the same old stuff I have been using for years. C'est la vie. The mob spoke/shrieked, and WotC listened, and we have what we have.

I hear you. I was not in favor of a timeline bump, but I didn't share an opinion on these forums. I can definitely see why such a step ahead would interest you.

I think the darker tone of this 4E iteration, combined with a more fleshed-out overview of the setting (judging from Keith's ECG hints), will accomplish much of what you had hoped to see. Only time, and the release of the ECG, will tell, though.

The World Axis cosmology feels a little shoehorned in at the moment, but I'm coming around to that too. I feel like 4e cribbed a lot from Eberron in the first place, so the backward compatability is not much of a chore.

So yeah, so far it's great.

I have a feeling this won't feel that differently, in practice. One thing in its favor is that the planes are much more "visitor friendly" in 4E than in 3E. Most of 3E's planes weren't very appealing places to adventure, in my opinion. I think the new cosmology will change that.
#11
Cyber-Dave
Jun 21, 2009 10:52:48
I have a feeling this won't feel that differently, in practice. One thing in its favor is that the planes are much more "visitor friendly" in 4E than in 3E. Most of 3E's planes weren't very appealing places to adventure, in my opinion. I think the new cosmology will change that.

I just think its important to point out, while that statement was true of 3e in general, and Forgotten Realms, it was not true of Eberron. Each and every Eberron plane was already worked out to be a place where PCs could visit, and adventure.
#12
tallric_kruush
Jun 21, 2009 11:09:29
I just think its important to point out, while that statement was true of 3e in general, and Forgotten Realms, it was not true of Eberron. Each and every Eberron plane was already worked out to be a place where PCs could visit, and adventure.

Perhaps that was the intent, but I never found it true in practice.

What would really make you want to visit Risia, Fernia, or any of the elemental planes? Sure, you may create a solid plothook; but once your PCs get to Fernia they find a sea of lava and fire. More importantly, they find an environment that kills them by it's very nature. The same is true of many of Eberron's planes. This is realistic, in a sense, but not very enjoyable for many.

While the lethal natures of the planes will likely remain to an extent, and justly so, I think they'll be downplayed quite a bit. I'll be far more likely to whisk my PCs away to Fernia to derail a Sulatar plot if I know the elements themselves won't kill them independently of what the drow themselves do.

I may be playing up the inhospitability of the 3E planes, but not by a huge margin. I think an effort's been made to make them more interesting in 4E, and I think Eberron will benefit just as much as any other setting. Only a few of 3E Eberron's planes seemed suitable and/or interesting places to adventure. I hope and expect something different this time around.

If I'm wrong, then it won't be too big a deal. I'll just keep my adventures firmly planted in Eberron itself.
#13
nthdegree256
Jun 21, 2009 11:24:45 I agree with tallric_kruush. I never found many of Eberron's planes to be any easier (or harder, to be fair) to adventure in, or create adventures for, than the regular 3.5 planes. Easier to get to, maybe, but then you're still left with a vaguely-described mass of fire and lava, or ice rivers flowing between ice mountains, or a well of inky blackness. The elemental, energy, and alignment planes of Eberron were nowhere near as interesting as Dolurrh, or Dal Quor, or even Syriana, just like the Elemental Plane of Earth paled in comparison to anywhere in the Nine Hells.
#14
bobiago
Jun 21, 2009 13:15:15 I always ended up using the planes' proximity/cotermination/manifest zones as plot devices, rather than them being desirable places to travel to. There were just always more interesting places to go in the World, before traipsing around other planes. I still haven't brought my PC's to Argonnessen or Frostfell, or indeed done more than scratch the surface of Khyber.

For that reason alone, the orbital nature of the planes made it very easy to visualize why this place at this time is experiencing this phenomenon, or represents this opportunity, etc... I realize that waxes and wanes can still happen, but it loses the clarity and simplicity of the model.

However, with the World Axis, I think Manifest Zones are a bit more intuitive.
#15
tallric_kruush
Jun 21, 2009 13:27:40
I always ended up using the planes' proximity/cotermination/manifest zones as plot devices, rather than them being desirable places to travel to. There were just always more interesting places to go in the World, before traipsing around other planes. I still haven't brought my PC's to Argonnessen or Frostfell, or indeed done more than scratch the surface of Khyber.

This is true of our games, as well. I've never really been tempted to travel the planes because there's always been something interesting happening in Eberron itself. That said, I've always enjoyed Eberron's cosmology more than any other setting. I'm eager to see how it's changed, and what remains the same.

I'm thinking that planar travel could play a bigger role in our 4E Epic Tier adventuring than it did in our past games.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 akumadaimyo Jun 20, 2009 11:22:12	Is the Player's Guide any good? Does it look like they pulled a FR on us and changed the setting around?
#2 ellorin Jun 20, 2009 11:32:33	I thought there was already a thread on that...oh, whatever. I'm very pleased with the Player's guide. It's still the Eberron we know and love-most changes are pretty minor. EPG is also very good at keeping a player's perspective, avoiding certain spoilers like the nature of Kaius III. The PP seem quite interesting too. (You do realise that your question was a little vague...)
#3 Alex_ Jun 20, 2009 11:49:49	Is the Player's Guide any good? Does it look like they pulled a FR on us and changed the setting around? No FR scale changes. No time jumps. The biggest changes would be the addition of information that wasn't there before, but makes sense because it draws on established fluff and references elsewhere. Things like Syberis also being the Astral Sea and Khyber being akin to the Elemental Chaos. Dragonbron in Argonessen and Q'barra amongst Seren barbarians and Lizardfolk. Eladrin coming to Eberron and being enslaved by Giants, who then created the Elves and the Drow and hidden Eladrin cities who are trapped by the Mournland. Tieflings coming from many places, including a fallen kingdom that trafficed with fiends that was mentioned in Secrets of Sarlonna.
#4 superdeadsmurf Jun 20, 2009 13:11:40	Is it good? Short Answer, Yes. It's Awesome. Long answer - part 1 of my full review on my new blog. More to come next week. It'll be long.
#5 tallric_kruush Jun 20, 2009 16:10:46	As has been said, it's both good (the EPG) and relatively unchanged (the setting itself). No major changes have been made that weren't necessary, and those made were allowances for the new races to be included. I have gripes about the layout of the EPG, but nothing that would prevent me from giving a strong recommendation to buy it. If you intend to play in Eberron, it's a must-have, quality supplement.
#6 juion Jun 20, 2009 19:49:13	I haven't had any experience in Eberron before, but I picked up the book today just because the setting seemed really really interesting. I found it really interesting to read, really nice details on the history and general mood of the setting.
#7 stogoe Jun 20, 2009 20:39:16	As someone who bought the EPG specifically to scavenge mechanics, it's pretty good. I love the artificer, but there is way too much Dragonmarked stuff. Seriously, it's like half the book.
#8 tallric_kruush Jun 20, 2009 21:37:01	As someone who bought the EPG specifically to scavenge mechanics, it's pretty good. I love the artificer, but there is way too much Dragonmarked stuff. Seriously, it's like half the book. There's good cause for that. Unmarked PCs will be built using every 4E source available. The EPG is likely to be the only source for dragonmarked mechanics. At the most, an occassional Dragon article may supplement the EPG. The EPG is and will remain the definitive guide for dragonmarked PCs, so we needed two-thirds of the book's mechanics focused on 'marks. The ECG will round out the setting for those that read it.
#9 bobiago Jun 20, 2009 22:34:18	I was actually a little ticked off when I found out that they were just keeping the setting as it was without adding some new fluff to work with. I mean, I didn't need/want 100 years and a SpellPlague, but I was looking forward to the two-year jump and some new storylines/villains and a bit of fresh content to work with rather than a replay of the same old stuff I have been using for years. C'est la vie. The mob spoke/shrieked, and WotC listened, and we have what we have. That said, I have been happy to see the hints at the new fluff that they did work in. The Eladrin were worked in very nicely, and some of the hints we have gotten for the ECG imply some new items worked in there with only minor retcons. The 4e ECG has a lot of pages to expand on what were chapters 7,8 and 11 in the 3.5 ECG. I am very optimistic. The World Axis cosmology feels a little shoehorned in at the moment, but I'm coming around to that too. I feel like 4e cribbed a lot from Eberron in the first place, so the backward compatability is not much of a chore. So yeah, so far it's great.
#10 tallric_kruush Jun 21, 2009 10:44:29	I was actually a little ticked off when I found out that they were just keeping the setting as it was without adding some new fluff to work with. I mean, I didn't need/want 100 years and a SpellPlague, but I was looking forward to the two-year jump and some new storylines/villains and a bit of fresh content to work with rather than a replay of the same old stuff I have been using for years. C'est la vie. The mob spoke/shrieked, and WotC listened, and we have what we have. I hear you. I was not in favor of a timeline bump, but I didn't share an opinion on these forums. I can definitely see why such a step ahead would interest you. I think the darker tone of this 4E iteration, combined with a more fleshed-out overview of the setting (judging from Keith's ECG hints), will accomplish much of what you had hoped to see. Only time, and the release of the ECG, will tell, though. The World Axis cosmology feels a little shoehorned in at the moment, but I'm coming around to that too. I feel like 4e cribbed a lot from Eberron in the first place, so the backward compatability is not much of a chore. So yeah, so far it's great. I have a feeling this won't feel that differently, in practice. One thing in its favor is that the planes are much more "visitor friendly" in 4E than in 3E. Most of 3E's planes weren't very appealing places to adventure, in my opinion. I think the new cosmology will change that.
#11 Cyber-Dave Jun 21, 2009 10:52:48	I have a feeling this won't feel that differently, in practice. One thing in its favor is that the planes are much more "visitor friendly" in 4E than in 3E. Most of 3E's planes weren't very appealing places to adventure, in my opinion. I think the new cosmology will change that. I just think its important to point out, while that statement was true of 3e in general, and Forgotten Realms, it was not true of Eberron. Each and every Eberron plane was already worked out to be a place where PCs could visit, and adventure.
#12 tallric_kruush Jun 21, 2009 11:09:29	I just think its important to point out, while that statement was true of 3e in general, and Forgotten Realms, it was not true of Eberron. Each and every Eberron plane was already worked out to be a place where PCs could visit, and adventure. Perhaps that was the intent, but I never found it true in practice. What would really make you want to visit Risia, Fernia, or any of the elemental planes? Sure, you may create a solid plothook; but once your PCs get to Fernia they find a sea of lava and fire. More importantly, they find an environment that kills them by it's very nature. The same is true of many of Eberron's planes. This is realistic, in a sense, but not very enjoyable for many. While the lethal natures of the planes will likely remain to an extent, and justly so, I think they'll be downplayed quite a bit. I'll be far more likely to whisk my PCs away to Fernia to derail a Sulatar plot if I know the elements themselves won't kill them independently of what the drow themselves do. I may be playing up the inhospitability of the 3E planes, but not by a huge margin. I think an effort's been made to make them more interesting in 4E, and I think Eberron will benefit just as much as any other setting. Only a few of 3E Eberron's planes seemed suitable and/or interesting places to adventure. I hope and expect something different this time around. If I'm wrong, then it won't be too big a deal. I'll just keep my adventures firmly planted in Eberron itself.
#13 nthdegree256 Jun 21, 2009 11:24:45	I agree with tallric_kruush. I never found many of Eberron's planes to be any easier (or harder, to be fair) to adventure in, or create adventures for, than the regular 3.5 planes. Easier to get to, maybe, but then you're still left with a vaguely-described mass of fire and lava, or ice rivers flowing between ice mountains, or a well of inky blackness. The elemental, energy, and alignment planes of Eberron were nowhere near as interesting as Dolurrh, or Dal Quor, or even Syriana, just like the Elemental Plane of Earth paled in comparison to anywhere in the Nine Hells.
#14 bobiago Jun 21, 2009 13:15:15	I always ended up using the planes' proximity/cotermination/manifest zones as plot devices, rather than them being desirable places to travel to. There were just always more interesting places to go in the World, before traipsing around other planes. I still haven't brought my PC's to Argonnessen or Frostfell, or indeed done more than scratch the surface of Khyber. For that reason alone, the orbital nature of the planes made it very easy to visualize why this place at this time is experiencing this phenomenon, or represents this opportunity, etc... I realize that waxes and wanes can still happen, but it loses the clarity and simplicity of the model. However, with the World Axis, I think Manifest Zones are a bit more intuitive.
#15 tallric_kruush Jun 21, 2009 13:27:40	I always ended up using the planes' proximity/cotermination/manifest zones as plot devices, rather than them being desirable places to travel to. There were just always more interesting places to go in the World, before traipsing around other planes. I still haven't brought my PC's to Argonnessen or Frostfell, or indeed done more than scratch the surface of Khyber. This is true of our games, as well. I've never really been tempted to travel the planes because there's always been something interesting happening in Eberron itself. That said, I've always enjoyed Eberron's cosmology more than any other setting. I'm eager to see how it's changed, and what remains the same. I'm thinking that planar travel could play a bigger role in our 4E Epic Tier adventuring than it did in our past games.