# WotC setting search winner - Eberron



## Hecatol (Jul 25, 2003)

Gaming Report has put up some details about the WotC setting search winner:

GamingReport

Quick highlights:

- It is described as having a 'magically industrial edge'

- Includes cultures such as gnomes, dwarves, orcs and drow, plus new races called shifters and changelings. No mention of elves? 

- Dinosaurs and other lost-world creatures are also present.

- The setting uses d20 Modern's Action Point system.


----------



## JeffB (Jul 25, 2003)

After reading that article,  I think I'll pass.


----------



## BigFreekinGoblinoid (Jul 25, 2003)

Industrial feel AND Dinosaurs?  Doesn't seem to leave much room for Psionics as the speculation went... 

very interesting...


----------



## cildarith (Jul 25, 2003)

Uh. No thank you. Next please.


----------



## Hecatol (Jul 25, 2003)

The inclusion of 'trains and flying machines' has me feeling lukewarm about this. Sounds a bit like Warcraft, which I'm not a big fan of.


----------



## Wombat (Jul 25, 2003)

**BUZZ**

Thank you for not playing

This one sounds pretty ... vague...


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 25, 2003)

Cadillacs & Dinosaurs with the addition of "unique cultures" like... Dwarves!


----------



## Arken (Jul 25, 2003)

It sounds like a final fantasy game clone and not the best one ever at that.

I should know I submitted one too 

Seriously though I'll wait for reviews first, I find it very hard to imagine tht after all that fuss it would be poor, and in fairness the writer must be good. (one would hope)


----------



## Shadowdancer (Jul 25, 2003)

Industry and dinosaurs? Sounds like The Flintstones.


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Jul 25, 2003)

Shadowdancer said:
			
		

> *Industry and dinosaurs? Sounds like The Flintstones. *




And swashbuckling!  Don't forget that!

My personal feeling is that this will either take off like a rocket or sink like a stone.  I'm not seeing much of a middle ground from here.


----------



## Sinistar (Jul 25, 2003)

I don't have the books (except for the Monsternomicon), but with the exception of Dinosaurs isn't this Iron Kingdoms?

I think you are right BG. It is like fantasy games with gunpowder. You either like it or you don't. "Steampunk" doesn't really do it for me.

But who knows. Maybe the actual product will be better than the marketing press.


----------



## jester47 (Jul 25, 2003)

That was a really vague and horribly written report.  I would not base any opinions off of that piece.   I get the impression that it is somthing of a trainwreck between Wild Wild West, Dinotopia, Lord of the Rings, and Treasure Island.   Good or Bad or how much I can't say.

Aaron.


----------



## Nightstorm (Jul 25, 2003)

This is what I've been waiting for??? Man is it me or has this summer really sucked for gaming releases? I will have nothing to do with this one.


----------



## kenjib (Jul 25, 2003)

I hope they change the name.  Eberron might very well take second place after Warlords of the Accordlands for worst D&D/d20 setting name.

Didn't Wizards specifically state that they wanted nothing much beyond a medieval technology level for submissions?  Odd and perhaps a bit unfair that the winner of the competition would be one that broke the rules by going into the industrial age.


----------



## Dr. Strangemonkey (Jul 25, 2003)

Nightstorm said:
			
		

> *This is what I've been waiting for??? Man is it me or has this summer really sucked for gaming releases? I will have nothing to do with this one. *




Well, it isn't me.  Testament and AU alone were worth a month of heat.  And there have been some nice also rans.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 25, 2003)

Sounds like it could make for a really cool one-shot Planescape: Torment/Fallout style CRPG.  As for a pen and paper RPG campaign setting...I dunno.  Sounds a little too "LXG the movie" for my tastes.

Be interesting to see how it turns out though.


----------



## MacMathan (Jul 25, 2003)

Hmmm..  a bit vague. I will have to wait to see this one on the shelves. This summer has left me overloaded with new places to play between adapting to 3.5, Midnight, AU and Warcraft I am bewildered with my own options


----------



## SpuneDagr (Jul 25, 2003)

Ooh ooh! Let's all judge what we know almost nothing about! Me first!

I sucks. I hate it.
Who's next?

Seriously, though. Give it a chance, guys! You read one little article and rip the soul out of this guy's setting that he put a great deal of thought and work into. Give him the friggin' benefit of the doubt!


----------



## Xeriar (Jul 25, 2003)

I am not wowed.  It kind of worries me since if they wanted to hype the product, maybe they'd give it the one-liner?

Right now it looks rather poor, actually.  I suppose it's rather early but every other official D&D setting ever published is more intriging than this one at this point.


----------



## Xeriar (Jul 25, 2003)

kenjib said:
			
		

> *I hope they change the name.  Eberron might very well take second place after Warlords of the Accordlands for worst D&D/d20 setting name.
> 
> Didn't Wizards specifically state that they wanted nothing much beyond a medieval technology level for submissions?  Odd and perhaps a bit unfair that the winner of the competition would be one that broke the rules by going into the industrial age. *




Well it's probably more like magic replaces technology sort of thing - golem pulled trains, and so on.


----------



## trancejeremy (Jul 25, 2003)

> Seriously, though. Give it a chance, guys! You read one little article and rip the soul out of this guy's setting that he put a great deal of thought and work into. Give him the friggin' benefit of the doubt!




Well, it does sound like a kitchen sink world...


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 25, 2003)

Xeriar said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well it's probably more like magic replaces technology sort of thing - golem pulled trains, and so on. *



Sweet.  11,000 entries to find "Harry Potter meets the Flinstones."


----------



## DiamondB (Jul 25, 2003)

Bzzzzz.

Thank you, come again.

WotC passed up Midnight for this!!!

-------

Sorry,  my bad on the Midnight being a world submission.  It's actually Dawnforge (or something like that) as someone mentions later on in this thread.  I knew FFG was publishing a rejected world, just could remember which one.


----------



## trancejeremy (Jul 25, 2003)

Xeriar said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well it's probably more like magic replaces technology sort of thing - golem pulled trains, and so on. *




My submission had that, actually. 

In mine, there had used to be a high tech civilization. But it collapsed. But it left underground train tracks all over the place.

I actually got the idea from Mystara. They didn't have trains, but they had golems pulling vehicles.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 25, 2003)

Hecatol said:
			
		

> *other lost-world creatures are also present.*



Well I suppose we can begin the official countdown to the "Sleestacks got the shaft!" threads....


----------



## cildarith (Jul 25, 2003)

The real question is:

Will the collectable minatures for Eberron be compatible with my nephews' Thomas the Train set?


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 25, 2003)

Wait... the friggin' amazing Midnight setting started out as a submission to this WotC thing?

Boy, turning THAT down for THIS is, at first glance, an unforgiveably stupid mistake.

Of course, the final product *could* be exciting and cool


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 25, 2003)

*Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Kai Lord said:
			
		

> *
> Well I suppose we can begin the official countdown to the "Sleestacks got the shaft!" threads.... *




What's a sleestack?


----------



## Christian Walker (Jul 25, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> What's a sleestack? *




If you don't know, then Marshall, Will, and Holly won't tell you. Grumpy neither.


----------



## Creeping Death (Jul 25, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> What's a sleestack? *




Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the sleestack were the lizard men from the Saturday afternoon show called "Land of the Lost".  It is a story about a family that goes rafting and gets sucked into the distant past where dinosaurs roamed the earth.  There were apemen or at lease one that helped the humans, the dinosaurs were neutral (they just ate anyone they came across) and the sleestack were the lizard men that the family always fought with.


----------



## Maraxle (Jul 25, 2003)

Darn.  I was hoping for a setting that I might be able to get into.  Dinosaurs, drow, and trains just don't do it for me.  Add me to the unimpressed crowd.


----------



## Heretic Apostate (Jul 25, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> What's a sleestack? *




Land of the Lost 

Go to this page, and the lizard-like guy across from the guy-and-gal picture is a sleestack.

Really annoying.  They emphasized their lizard-ness with lots and lots of hissing, if I recall correctly.


----------



## gordonknox (Jul 25, 2003)

*Keith Baker*

Does anyone know any other projects done by Keith Baker?

Is Keith a part of the EN Community?  

It would be nice to congratulate him and see if he could share any other info about the setting.

Anyway, congrats Keith!

gk


----------



## Christian Walker (Jul 25, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Creeping Death said:
			
		

> *There were apemen or at lease one that helped the humans...*




Long live, Chaka!

I think there was one Sleestak that was friendly to the Marshalls. I can't remember his name, but I think he showed them how to use the Pylons found near that "lost city."

Damn, I think I want to buy a Land of the Lost setting book.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 25, 2003)

I was in the same seminar as the gamingreport.com guy.  

I think the concept art looks promising, and the idea of a "swashbuckling dark fantasy" (that's from the slide show we saw, although curiously omitted from the press release) in a world where magic is used in everyday life seems pretty cool to me.

My only complaint is that they didn't reveal enough about it; they should have waited until the setting was more developed before announcing any details.  Q&A was hampered severely, with Bill Slaviscek saying over and over "We can't reveal that yet."  I asked for one example of how the setting is both dark and swashbuckling, but Keith Baker wasn't permitted to answer, even though he said he could provide one.  

Teasers are fine in movie trailers, but in an interactive seminar, I feel that it's out of place and frustrating.  They barely exposed the tip of this campaign world, and may have misled some people.  For example, from the Q&A, I got the feeling that dinosaurs do not play a huge role in the setting. They are there because "dinosaurs are cool"  and "the MM has dinosaurs".  I also remember "This is not Dinotopia".  

Overall, I'm not sure whether I'm excited about this campaign world or not...I just didn't get enough info.   I do think it will be good, but I'm not sure if it will be for me and my group.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 25, 2003)

*Re: Keith Baker*



			
				gordonknox said:
			
		

> *Does anyone know any other projects done by Keith Baker?
> 
> Is Keith a part of the EN Community?
> 
> ...




Keith has done some work for Goodman Games.    http://www.goodman-games.com/index.php

I don't know if he has an account here.  I'll ask him if I see him.


----------



## Mythtify (Jul 26, 2003)

Ghostwalk actualy sounds more intersting than this.


----------



## Azure Trance (Jul 26, 2003)

I thought Land Of The Lost was when that family went camping in a Jeep Cherokee got swallowed by some earth quake, and thus entered Dinosaur-era. They had tin cans on strings for early warning, didn't they?


----------



## BigFreekinGoblinoid (Jul 26, 2003)

kenjib said:
			
		

> *...
> Didn't Wizards specifically state that they wanted nothing much beyond a medieval technology level for submissions?  Odd and perhaps a bit unfair that the winner of the competition would be one that broke the rules by going into the industrial age. *




This is a really good point. Maybe that's why his stood out from the others so much!  

Fairness aside, I'll be hoping it is a good setting. But then again, I'm a huge IK fan, so tech done right ( balanced and reliant on magic ) doesn't automatically turn me off.

gordonknox:  I think KB posted here sometime after the winner was announced, so he might eventually see your note. 

ahh here we go - it's K-E-I-t-h

[http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39787

Emiricol:  We have Midnight now and don't have to wait another YEAR! I'm glad Wizards passed it up!


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

To me, this setting sounds like the _most_ interesting direction I've ever seen D&D go.  Hopefully they keep up the "dark swashbuckling" and pseudo-magical-industrialism and don't let crappy novels burden the setting with parasitic baggage the way FR did.

I was very lukewarm about another official setting; now I'm starting to get a glimmer of excitement!


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Jul 26, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *Wait... the friggin' amazing Midnight setting started out as a submission to this WotC thing?
> 
> Boy, turning THAT down for THIS is, at first glance, an unforgiveably stupid mistake.
> 
> Of course, the final product *could* be exciting and cool   *




Wow..... Midnight is quiet simply the best setting I have ever seen. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.


----------



## JeffB (Jul 26, 2003)

The thing hat bugs me is they dropped support for many GREAT campaign settings, and when they finally get the cajones to do another one, it's......friggin dinosaurs, & trains?

I've got no problem w/ Steampunk, but this type of thing as their new flagship setting for the D&D game?


Will 4.0 have "improved train operation" and "greater dinosaur riding" feats & skills? 

*shudder*

I suspect WOTC better cut out the "we can't tell you"s and get some more info out there that explains some of these things, otherwise they might be in for a rude awakening come GenCon next year.

IMO of course...


----------



## Hungry Tiger (Jul 26, 2003)

Sinistar said:
			
		

> *I don't have the books (except for the Monsternomicon), but with the exception of Dinosaurs isn't this Iron Kingdoms?*




Well, the Iron Kingdoms are somewhat deliberately "darkety dark dark dark."  (That's the big turn-off for me.)  Eberron sounds somewhat more up my alley - dinosaurs are freakin' cool.  And I love magical/industrial tech.  

But I'll have to see whan more information is available.


----------



## JeffB (Jul 26, 2003)

New Magic Items for Ebberon

Conductors Hat of Brilliance

Belt of Triceratops Strength

Dagger of Ticket Punching

C'mon..everybody jump in


----------



## Mystery Man (Jul 26, 2003)

BiggusGeekus said:
			
		

> *
> 
> And swashbuckling!  Don't forget that!
> 
> My personal feeling is that this will either take off like a rocket or sink like a stone.  I'm not seeing much of a middle ground from here. *




Stone.


This will insure that the Forgotten Realms will be here for decades to come, so I'm delighted.


----------



## Christian Walker (Jul 26, 2003)

JeffB said:
			
		

> *The thing hat bugs me is they dropped support for many GREAT campaign settings, and when they finally get the cajones to do another one, it's......friggin dinosaurs, & trains?
> *




I've been looking for something new myself. A setting with a "Sky Realms of Jorune is Far Out!" feel to it. I've been gaming for a long, long time, and I'm eager to read a setting that's straight up fresh.

Not necessarily high-concept, but just a little out of the ordinary. Oathbound, maybe?


----------



## Corinth (Jul 26, 2003)

I reserve my right to change my opinion once more information comes out.  Until then, I don't liking this setting and this is why:

It broke the rules of the setting search by exceeding the technology level set in the criteria.
It looks like the setting hasn't thought through its premises; dinosaurs and Industrial Age technology do not mix well, much like steak and chocolate.
It looks like a bad knock-off of FFVII, FFVIII, _Xenozoic Tales_ (a.k.a. _Cadillacs & Dinosaurs_) and _Arcanum_.
It doesn't appear to allow for the gameplay that makes D&D the most successful and popular tabletop RPG in the world: the dungeon crawl.
It looks like it's far better suited for wargaming than tabletop RPG campaigns.

Again, an updated briefing that provides more details ought to allow me to revise my opinion.  However, it won't change my first impression: it not a proper D&D setting, so it sucks.


----------



## Zerakon (Jul 26, 2003)

*Re: Keith Baker*



			
				gordonknox said:
			
		

> *Does anyone know any other projects done by Keith Baker?
> 
> Is Keith a part of the EN Community?
> 
> ...




I know Keith through our mutual artist friend Lee Moyer. 

I know that Keith authored the module The Ebon Mirror  for Atlas, two Complete Guides for Goodman Games, and contributed to various works such as Denizens of Freeport.

He also was starting to help me with the backstory with my computer strategy game Star Chamber but then he had to go and place in the top 10 of this silly setting search thing... then when he won the freaking thing, I knew he wouldn't have any real time to devote to my game.    Ah well, I was happy for him anyway.  

Also, knowing Keith's talent, I know that this setting is going to be really cool.

-- Zerakon the Game Mage

_edited to add links to EN review pages of a couple of Keith's works._


----------



## Pants (Jul 26, 2003)

Corinth said:
			
		

> *
> It looks like the setting hasn't thought through its premises; dinosaurs and Industrial Age technology do not mix well, much like steak and chocolate.*



Why not?  It's fantasy.



> *
> It looks like a bad knock-off of FFVII, FFVIII, Xenozoic Tales (a.k.a. Cadillacs & Dinosaurs) and Arcanum.*



It does _kinda_ sound like that.



> *
> It doesn't appear to allow for the gameplay that makes D&D the most successful and popular tabletop RPG in the world: the dungeon crawl.*



I don't see anything in the entire teaser that gives this kind of impression.  Actually, dungeons in this could be kind of cool.  Empty, abandoned train stations and the like.



> *
> It looks like it's far better suited for wargaming than tabletop RPG campaigns.
> *



Again, I don't see how you can get this kind of impression from such little information.



> *it not a proper D&D setting, so it sucks. *



It's different so it sucks


----------



## JeffB (Jul 26, 2003)

Train Station Dungeons..hmmm....

[goofy mode on]

Infested with dread Hari Krishna Goblin tribe

Deadly Traps like the Turnstile (CR15 I should think)

Magic Item dispensers (sandwiches and coffee too!)

They are great places though for Bards to try and earn a living


----------



## Corinth (Jul 26, 2003)

Pants said:
			
		

> *Why not?  It's fantasy.*



Until I see more information, I'm dismissing this one as a piece of piss-poor world-building with little or no attempt at verisimlitude.  This means that I can't suspend my disbelief, so the setting fails as a work of fiction.  Genre doesn't matter.


> *I don't see anything in the entire teaser that gives this kind of impression.  Actually, dungeons in this could be kind of cool.  Empty, abandoned train stations and the like.*



The prerequisities for a civilization possessed of Industrial Age technology require that a lot of people that would otherwise be available in the creation or looting of dungeons be tied up in the acquisition of the scientific knowledge necessary to make that technology appear, the mass-production of that technology to all corners of said civilization, the acquistion of the raw materials needed to make this civilization run, the distribution of said materials needed to fuel it or the protection of any of that from enemies domestic and foreign.  We're looking more at the _Spycraft_ gameplay paradigm than the D&D paradigm right now, and that isn't what D&D players want out of D&D.


> *Again, I don't see how you can get this kind of impression from such little information.*



The application of previous historical and scientific education in this context--in terms of believable world-building--coupled with the application of the known facts of the business of the hobby--and how it compares to related media--led me to this conclusion.


> *It's different so it sucks  *



It's not broken, so don't fix it.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 26, 2003)

JeffB said:
			
		

> *I've got no problem w/ Steampunk, but this type of thing as their new flagship setting for the D&D game?*




This will no more be the "flagship D&D setting" than Dark Sun or Planescape was.  Its too high concept.  FR and Dragonlance will sell more, but depending on the presentation, Eberron could rocket from "novelty act" to "hella cool gaming experience."

Its definitely niche, but its a niche that sure as heck isn't filled by anything _else_ right now, so why not?

I can't imagine it luring me away from Dragonlance as my primary game setting, but it could definitely fill the spot left vacant after Dark Sun's departure.  FR fans will still get their FR books, and I look forward to holding DL in my hands, so if WOTC wants to throw something new into the pot I say more power to them.  My curiousity is certainly peaked....


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jul 26, 2003)

So, what was it, 18 months ago or so?  WotC trots out this Setting Search jazz.  I took one look and thought, "Medieval Fantasy?  Hasn't WotC tapped that vein out enough?  Not to mention all the D20 companies."  But what the heck, thought I, I'll give it my best shot.  Shoehorned an idea I'd been working on to fit this "medieval fantasy" hoodoo.  All was said and done, I and my contemporaries thought it was pretty butt-kicking.  It didn't make it through the first round.  Oh well, says I, the winner must be pretty good.

Read the Morningstar write-up.  Thought it was very cool, and stole many ideas for my homebrew.  Thought to myself, the winning setting must be great.

Saw (and bought) Midnight.  Loved it.  Thought, the winner must be the best thing since sliced bread.

Now I see this...Eberron?  Huh?  Steampunk technology, and a bunch of weird non-standard races?  _Bloody dinosaurs?_  What in the wide world of sports does this have to do with the submission guidelines?

They should have seen what I _wanted_ to send.  This just chaps my hide.  I don't care if this thing makes FR look like FATAL, I won't be buying this.  Behold the power of spite!


----------



## Aulayan (Jul 26, 2003)

I'd like to clear up one thing.

Midnight was not part of the setting search.  Midnight was in development before the setting search was announced.  It's the High Fantasy First-Ageish setting that FFG is releasing (either Morningstar or Dawnforge, I get the two confused easily) that they submitted to the setting search.


----------



## rounser (Jul 26, 2003)

I didn't enter the setting search, so no sour grapes here, but it's beyond me how a setting which seems at first glance to difficult to summarise 
*(a)* is going to sell, given that it's so cross-genre that you can't sum up the gist of it in a couple of sentences, and 
*(b)* made it past the early stages of the competition where you had to be brief about the concept.    

Maybe they're holding back the good bits.  I mean, FR looks terrible summarised on paper too, but the devil's in the details (I think it was sold on those cool spellbook articles Ed used to write, which captured the atmosphere of the world).


----------



## Gothmog (Jul 26, 2003)

Originally posted by Emiricol:


> Wait... the friggin' amazing Midnight setting started out as a submission to this WotC thing?
> 
> Boy, turning THAT down for THIS is, at first glance, an unforgiveably stupid mistake.
> 
> Of course, the final product *could* be exciting and cool




Well, if that was true, then yes, it would have been the dumbest mistake WotC ever made.  No other setting out there on the market today compares to Midnight, period.  But Midnight wasn't sent in for the campaign contest.  It was developed locally by a guy here named Jeff Barber, and I played in one of the Midnight games he ran in development.

The setting FFG submitted to WotC is called Dawnforge.  According to the most recent Game Trade magazine:

"Enter the age of legendary heroes, legendary magic, and legendary power!  Chosen as one of the 11 semi-finalists in WotC's setting search, Dawnforge is an exciting new campaign setting for the d20 system.  This core book features detailed information on the setting's geography, history, legends, villians, heroes, monsters, and magic, and includes a full-color fold-out poster map of the Dawnforge world.  Oct 2003." 

This new WotC setting leaves me completely cold.  I love dinos, but they seem thrown in just to be in the setting.  Steampunk is really a rather silly idea IMO, and combining it all in this setting seems really gimmicky.  Pass.


----------



## rounser (Jul 26, 2003)

Also, no hint of who the heroes and villains are in this world?  IIRC, the submissions seemed to stress that.  Swashbucklers isn't much of a hint.


----------



## jester47 (Jul 26, 2003)

Well, with all the good press I might take a look at midnight.

Aaron.


----------



## tmaaas (Jul 26, 2003)

I'm more than willing to wait until we get better and more accurate infomation about the setting before making a final judgment. In fact, I'm willing to wait until it comes out and then decide if I'm getting it or not based on actual reviews.

I suspect the setting will be much more than "dinosaurs and trains." From the reports from the folks at the seminar from GenCon, it seems that trains were mentioned as an example of "magical technology." Magical technology being the focus, trains just the example. 

I hope they can actually pull this off. In standard D&D, magic is mostly for combat. I'd like to see a setting which more fully explored its ramifications into all aspects of society.


----------



## Wombat (Jul 26, 2003)

Dr. Strangemonkey said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well, it isn't me.  Testament and AU alone were worth a month of heat.  And there have been some nice also rans. *




Testify it!   

_Testament_ is fantastic and AU looks to be just as sweet!


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 26, 2003)

jester47 said:
			
		

> *Well, with all the good press I might take a look at midnight.
> 
> Aaron. *




Good choice   



			
				tmaaas said:
			
		

> * I suspect the setting will be much more than "dinosaurs and trains." From the reports from the folks at the seminar from GenCon, it seems that trains were mentioned as an example of "magical technology." Magical technology being the focus, trains just the example. *




Then they did a horrid job promoting it, and should have waited rather than running off half-cocked with a lame introduction.  As to magical technology, that's sort of cool, but not much different than IK's steampunk or Dragonstar's idea of spellware.

I *will* take a look at it when it comes out, but based on what I know so far this one seems like a stinker.  Not to mention the fact that it apparently violated the guidelines, which might even be actionable if anyone cared to press the matter.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

FYI, the setting is not technologically advanced.  The technology is medieval level.  That was made clear in the seminar.  

Magic is being used in daily life rather than tech, so you do have very tall buildings being held up by magic, and some magical transport.  An example that was given is that on the Forgotten Realms a farmer uses middle ages technology to farm (plows etc.)  On Eberron, a farmer would use magic.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 26, 2003)

So, very very high magic world?  That kind of magic would require gazillions of mages with craft feats or high level spells, I'd imagine.  Did they get into that in the seminar?

And again, the way this was all presented was horrible


----------



## Aitch Eye (Jul 26, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> Not to mention the fact that it apparently violated the guidelines, which might even be actionable if anyone cared to press the matter. *




How? As WotC said at the time, it was a setting search, not a contest. The procedures might have resembled those of a contest, but the final three didn't get prize money, they got a contract to write a 100 page document that WoTC would own. They were being paid for the setting and their work as freelancers. The "winner" got a contract to do the full book.

(edit: Original post got eaten for several minutes before coming out with the end missing. This is what I rewrote while I thought it was gone.)


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 26, 2003)

Aitch Eye said:
			
		

> *
> 
> How? As WotC said at the time, it was not a contest, it was a search. The screening process might resemble the setup of a contest, but remember, the top three weren't getting prize money, they got a contract to write a 100 page document that WotC would own. The money came from them being paid for their setting and their work. The winner got a contract to do the full *




Because there's some money involved.  First of all, you don't need to be able to win to sue and settle.   Second of all, WOTC itself laid out guidelines and then, it MIGHT be interpreted,  selected a submission that violated its guidelines.  Any of the people who tailored their submission to the guidelines presented could (conceivably) pursue damages, particularly punitive damages.

When you are talking about lawyers, whether the case is valid or nor, or winnable or not, is often not a primary consideration.  

Anyway, it is all pretty far-fetched.  Not like that one line was the focus of the post   Just a comment.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

Doesn't the article quite clearly say this is _not_ steampunk?  Magical Industry is not steampunk.  Lots of typical and frankly fairly pathetic knee-jerk reactions on this thread; latching onto words that don't even seem to describe the setting, and denouncing the setting because of it.


----------



## Angcuru (Jul 26, 2003)

I shall simply say that publishing these books will be a waste of time, money, and trees. 

Who chose the final by the way?  Someone find him and poison his grape nuts.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *So, very very high magic world?  That kind of magic would require gazillions of mages with craft feats or high level spells, I'd imagine.  Did they get into that in the seminar?
> 
> And again, the way this was all presented was horrible  *




They did mention that not everyone was a spellcaster, and that there aren't loads of high level spellcasters like in the Forgotten Realms, so there is something else going on to explain how these magical things are crafted.

When asked if there would be new races and classes, the answer was "Yes".   I don't know if that refers to new core classes that can be taken at 1st level, or simply prestige classes, but it certainly sounded like the former.

They didn't get into any details at the seminar.  The stuff in the press release that gamingreport.com received was not mentioned or given to us during the seminar, so we (the general populace) didn't have any opportunities to ask questions about the action points or anything else referred to in that document.


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 26, 2003)

Corinth said:
			
		

> *Until I see more information, I'm dismissing this one as a piece of piss-poor world-building with little or no attempt at verisimlitude.  This means that I can't suspend my disbelief, so the setting fails as a work of fiction.  Genre doesn't matter.
> 
> The prerequisities for a civilization possessed of Industrial Age technology *




Where do you get "Industrial Age technology" from the Gaming Report piece? THey said "urban and industrial themes"; you can have an industrial theme with not a hint of Industrial Age technology. Exhibit A: Isengard, in the Two Towers.

As for "piss-poor world-building" -- wha-huh? It could be the worst mish-mash of world-building since Space: 1999, or it could be a masterpiece of such intricacy and skill that Tolkien would tip his hat. There's absolutely no way to tell (of course, either extreme is probably fairly easy to rule out).

Y'all have some incredible Jump (Conclusions) skill modifiers; I don't think that less-than-300-word report gives enough space for a running jump. 

Edit: James, you were there; what's your impression on how accurate and well-written the Gaming Report article is? That's not a WotC press release; it's an article written by a GR reporter. You can't blame WotC for any crappiness in the writing (you can blame WotC for any crappiness in the actual seminar, of course).


----------



## Myconid Sage (Jul 26, 2003)

DM: [To Players]"Ahh...yeah...like you see a Tyrannasaurus Rex riding a train, bening pulled by a stone golem."
Player 1: [to the DM], "Dude, this world rawks! My Mage-Farmer blasts his dino butt with a fireball."
Player 2:  [to DM and Player 1] "Hell yeah, _Steampunk and Eberron_ for life! My Dwarven Train Engineer readies is steam powered vibo-axe and waits for the charge. My Dwarf grumbles 'Your gonna pay for stealin' my train, your hide is gonna make me a pair of boots...."

Based on limited info, I say STONE!  It may be good, just a bad first press release, but Steampunk just ain't my bag baby!

Hey Tarrasque Wrangler, nice _Blazing Saddles_ line! LOL

[edit] Must learn to spell [/edit]


----------



## Pants (Jul 26, 2003)

Corinth said:
			
		

> *
> Until I see more information, I'm dismissing this one as a piece of piss-poor world-building with little or no attempt at verisimlitude.  This means that I can't suspend my disbelief, so the setting fails as a work of fiction.  Genre doesn't matter.*



Whatever floats your boat I guess.



> *
> The prerequisities for a civilization possessed of Industrial Age technology require that a lot of people that would otherwise be available in the creation or looting of dungeons be tied up in the acquisition of the scientific knowledge necessary to make that technology appear, the mass-production of that technology to all corners of said civilization, the acquistion of the raw materials needed to make this civilization run, the distribution of said materials needed to fuel it or the protection of any of that from enemies domestic and foreign.  *



That's what Dwarves are for  



> *We're looking more at the Spycraft gameplay paradigm than the D&D paradigm right now, and that isn't what D&D players want out of D&D.*



Do you know *all* the D&D players out there?



> *
> The application of previous historical and scientific education in this context--in terms of believable world-building--coupled with the application of the known facts of the business of the hobby--and how it compares to related media--led me to this conclusion.*



Ah, I see, you're just guessing.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 26, 2003)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> * Doesn't the article quite clearly say this is not steampunk?  Magical Industry is not steampunk.  Lots of typical and frankly fairly pathetic knee-jerk reactions on this thread; latching onto words that don't even seem to describe the setting, and denouncing the setting because of it.   *




That's 'cause it sounds friggin stupid


----------



## Angcuru (Jul 26, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> That's 'cause it sounds friggin stupid  *



*Agrees*


----------



## Christian Walker (Jul 26, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> That's 'cause it sounds friggin stupid  *




Hey! Don't be so quick to dismiss this.

What if the dinosaurs are like the ones from that TV show Dinosaurs? Now that would be cool.

"Not the mama!"


----------



## 2d6 (Jul 26, 2003)

Christian Walker said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Hey! Don't be so quick to dismiss this.
> 
> ...




and they could be like this -


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Edit: James, you were there; what's your impression on how accurate and well-written the Gaming Report article is? That's not a WotC press release; it's an article written by a GR reporter. You can't blame WotC for any crappiness in the writing (you can blame WotC for any crappiness in the actual seminar, of course). *




The gamingreport.com guy and other press members received a document from WOTC with info that wasn't given out to anyone else during the seminar.  The slide show didn't mention action points, for instance, and they didn't talk about them.  My conclusion is that some of the bullet points in the gamingreport.com report was from the press release they were handed by WOTC, or from questions they asked after the seminar.   I think they just passed on what they got for the most part, but I don't know what info he received, so I don't know if he did a good job reporting it or not.  It could be WOTC's writing, or something mangled by gamingreport. 

I doubt gamingreport misrepresented anything but it seems weird to me that WOTC downplayed the role of dinosaurs during the seminar, yet there is a bullet about lost world creatures.  It also seems strange that the slide show's statements about it being a "swashbuckling dark world" were not in the handout or the report.  The "dark" part seems to have been only in the slides, but seemed significant to me.

My opinion is that WOTC shouldn't have unveiled the setting until they had more information that they could release.  This is a very large campaign world in its infancy.  Why have a Q&A seminar when you can't answer most of the questions?

The handout btw is ok, but not big enough to give you a good feel for the world either.  It's concept art sketches with a few notes from an NPC.  The concept art is pretty good.  There is a "lightning train" and an airship powered by an elemental ring.  The concept art during the slide show ranged from the relatively mundane like a minotaur with some extra horns and ridges to the "wow what is that?".  Some of the creatures and places looked particularly original and cool.  

My impression of the world is that it is going to be an attempt to defy classification.  They claimed that Keith's submission was not like any of the other 11,000.  If they can pull off a combination of a world that is both swashbuckling and dark, with detailed social structures and new magic systems to support a high magic world, I think it will be successful and fun.  But we'll see.  They'll have to present it better in the future.


----------



## Pants (Jul 26, 2003)

2d6 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> and they could be like this -
> 
> ...



I'd play in the setting if I got to kill these!


----------



## Jody Butt (Jul 26, 2003)

Hmm...let's see...do I want

"Trains and Dinosaurs"

or

Dark Sun, Ravenloft, or Al Qadim


Tough choice.

What in the world was WotC thinking?


----------



## JLXC (Jul 26, 2003)

I read the gaming report site, I think the setting sounds "kewl and rad", with much kiddie appeal, and will not work.  It's just me, and I will change my opinion for better or worse as more info comes out.

At the least this new setting didn't grab any part of my interest.


----------



## 2d6 (Jul 26, 2003)

I don't know. If this were a one-shot or something that was going to be a limited product, i.e. core book plus a couple suppliments, it would be one thing. I hope that this setting does not replace FR as the primary supported setting for DnD, that just doesn't sit well with me, and I don't care how you spin spin the steampunk/dino stuff. To me, D&D was always about killing stuff and taking it's loot, in a euro-centric medieval
fantasy setting. I dunno, call me old-fashioned.


[edit] to remove a comment I couldn't support.


----------



## Mister Mojo (Jul 26, 2003)

Jody Butt said:
			
		

> *Hmm...let's see...do I want
> 
> "Trains and Dinosaurs"
> 
> ...




You know, JB, you can whet down _any_ campaign setting to abject silliness when being that reductive. Observe:

Dark Sun: "Cannibal halfings and constant dehydration"

Ravenloft: "Evil fog and lotsa angst"

Al Qadim: "D&D Meets _Aladdin!"_ 

Personally, I think there's just waaaaay too little information to make any kind of judgement about Eberron just yet. I'll wait and see, myself. Could be fun, could be tripe, or it could be fair-to-middlin'. Why immediately dismiss it? It's not like dinosaurs haven't been a staple of D&D and fantasy since time out of mind, and as for trains -- well, it's no less plausible than, say, a gelatinous cube (remember: "They're evolved to fit *graph paper*!"). Consider -- suppose some Dwarvish genius realized bound fire elementals represent a source of perpetual energy?

At this point, it could go any way -- so let's give it a chance.


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 26, 2003)

2d6 said:
			
		

> *Saying this is the new "main" setting for D&D just doesn't sit well with me, *




Luckily for you, I don't recall anyone ever saying this is the new "main" setting for D&D. It is *a* new setting for D&D. It's not replacing FR, or Greyhawk, or even Ghostwalk (let alone Ravenloft or Al-frikkin'-Qadim). 

If someone has said anything like, "it's the new main setting", I'd like to see the quote.


----------



## Aitch Eye (Jul 26, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Because there's some money involved.  First of all, you don't need to be able to win to sue and settle.   Second of all, WOTC itself laid out guidelines and then, it MIGHT be interpreted,  selected a submission that violated its guidelines.  Any of the people who tailored their submission to the guidelines presented could (conceivably) pursue damages, particularly punitive damages.
> 
> ...




Here are the guidelines WotC laid out:

"Wizards of the Coast, Inc. is searching for proposals for a new fantasy setting (“Fantasy Setting Search”). Such a setting may serve as a vehicle for novels, roleplaying games, card games, miniatures, and other entertainment products. In scope and flavor, your proposed fantasy setting should be similar to our existing settings, particularly Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance."

If a lawyer would take a case based on that, I suspect the primary consideration would be whether the client was paying up front. 

I seem to remember Valterra making some comments directly addressing the issue of similarity to FR and Dragonlance, but the news page archives don't go back that far, and I can't find it at GamingReport. Perhaps someone here has them on file? As I remember it, he indicated that it was more that you'd have a tougher time making it if you went beyond the baselines of standard D&D rather than it being completely banned. My memory could very well be faulty, though, so I'd like to see the quotes again.

However, from what little we've seen -- particularly taking Gargoyle's comments into consideration -- this setting could well be within the vague guidelines given in the original press release.

There'll be a "first glimpse" of the setting in the next _Dragon_, though they didn't give any info on what they mean by that.


I've been trying to formulate some more general comments, but I haven't figured out a way of doing it in any detail that wouldn't tend to make the arguments more personal than I like to get. So I'll just say that from the very tiny bit we've seen, it could well be interesting, and given that so-called standard D&D already has FR and Dragonlance lines being published, I think it's perfectly reasonable and possibly wiser (in principle, anyway) for Wizards to do something somewhat different...if it actually is really all that different. I don't think there's enough detail or certainty in the Gaming Report article to give an idea of the big picture, or to even remotely justify some of the assumptions being made about it, or the level of the negative reaction people are showing towards it.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Jul 26, 2003)

Wow, I can't believe how incredibly rude a lot of you on this thread are being.  You'll notice that this isn't a WoTC press release, it's something written by some guy named Dan Sivlis based on his impression from a seminar.  Could you even take two seconds to read the damn article before you spout off with your holier-than-thou condecension and eye-rolling emoticons?

It's amazing how the mere mention of a dinosaur-like creature being in the concept art has suddenly been morphed into "OMG they're gonna have swashbuckling dinosaurs pulling trains rofl wotc is super lame  "  Hey, look, there's dinosaurs in my Monster Manual!  Right there, on page 60.  Waaaaah, no fair, he broke the rules of the contest!!!!    

Jeesh.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 26, 2003)

I don't really care, and I certainly don't want WotC to get sued (hey, they make my favorite game).

But you haven't disproven any of my points.  I still doubt anyone would sue them - as I've said before - but it is not out of the realm of possibility.


----------



## senodam (Jul 26, 2003)

Well said Meepo. And just out of curiousity, has anyone considered we could be seeing something like Perdido Street Station here? It's certainly what popped into my mind. Just picture it- huge industrialised cities, ancient ruins beneath them that were once the palaces and temples of older races..and out in the wilds there are tales of huge lizards that can swallow a man whole. Could be cool, could be bad- let's wait and see.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 26, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> *Wow, I can't believe how incredibly rude a lot of you on this thread are being.  You'll notice that this isn't a WoTC press release, it's something written by some guy named Dan Sivlis based on his impression from a seminar.  Could you even take two seconds to read the damn article before you spout off with your holier-than-thou condecension and eye-rolling emoticons?
> 
> It's amazing how the mere mention of a dinosaur-like creature being in the concept art has suddenly been morphed into "OMG they're gonna have swashbuckling dinosaurs pulling trains rofl wotc is super lame  "  Hey, look, there's dinosaurs in my Monster Manual!  Right there, on page 60.  Waaaaah, no fair, he broke the rules of the contest!!!!
> 
> Jeesh. *




I did read it.  As has been said by others with more information than you, the poster seems to have information that was not available at the Q&A, as with perhaps a press release.

Now granted, as I've said before I'll give it a fair look when more is known and when it comes out, but based on what I've seen, yeah, *it looks friggin stupid!*  Here ya go -


----------



## Christian Walker (Jul 26, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> *...swashbuckling dinosaurs pulling trains...*




Oh great! Thanks a lot, pal. You just spilled the beans on my new setting.


Back to the drawing board.


----------



## BlackMoria (Jul 26, 2003)

I think the setting may suffer from being too different, too 'out there' to attract a strong fan base.  

Scarred Lands, Midnight, and others settings are different enough to generate a strong fan base but they are not so different within the scope of the heroic fantasy genre.  Someone doing FR could easily find the appeal of Midnight or Scarred Lands (among others) and jump in and find some familar elements while appreciating the differences.

My first impression is that jumping into this setting is going to be like jumping over a cliff.  I read the Gaming Report article and while there were familar words like drow, dwarves, dinosaurs, there was nothing familar in the feel that was being conveyed.

Which I believe will work against it, not for it.  The setting seems to its trying to be too different.  Unless is absolutely brilliant, the FR, Scarred Lands, Midnight, Greyhawk, etc  players are going to stay with their settings or will venture into other settings with familar themes and feels to them.

This setting seems so like...... well, Rifts in a rather perverse way and at some wonky level difficult for me to explain.   Could be just me but that is the first thought that sort of popped into my head.

Even if the setting is well done, it may be that fans wanting more 'familiar' ground will not like it. 

Using a art analogy.  WOTC asked for a 'Frazetta' - now they want to sell us a 'Picasso'.

edit: spelling


----------



## Aaron L (Jul 26, 2003)

I dunno. It could be colossaly bad, or it could be really neat.  I can picture a very cool setting from that short description, but I can also picture a horrible Flintstones meets the Jetsons meets the Princess Bride.

I'll  wait and see.  It just better not be steampunk.  I hate steampunk


----------



## Goobermunch (Jul 26, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *I don't really care, and I certainly don't want WotC to get sued (hey, they make my favorite game).
> 
> But you haven't disproven any of my points.  I still doubt anyone would sue them - as I've said before - but it is not out of the realm of possibility. *




So, Emiricol, you want someone to disprove your points, I’ll take a crack.

First things first, under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11, any attorney who signs a complaint makes a continuing certification that they believe that all papers, pleadings, and motions are not for an improper purpose and have sound support in fact an law.

In short, this case would never be filed.  It would never be filed because there is no basis in contract or tort law for a suit.  Your suit wouldn’t sound in contract because you can’t prove the terms of a contract.  The setting search is too vague to constitute an offer.  Furthermore, even if you did manage to assert that there was a contract, WotC reserved the right to make the decision based on personal taste.  As long as the selection committee didn’t act in bad faith (by rigging the contest), no court would find breach.

As for punitive damages, they’re not available in contract cases.  If you want to go down the road to tort damages, you’re going to have an even harder time of it.  You’ll have to show some kind of personal injury, even for a fraud claim.  Good luck there, because one of the elements your plaintiff will need to prove is that but-for WotC’s alleged misrepresentation, they would have won the contest.  I doubt you’ll have any luck on that front.

Oh, and finally, bringing a case purely for the purpose of harassment is a violation of the professional rules of conduct.  It’s the kind of thing that can cost you your license.

As for your non-legal points, I'll go back and start refuting them now.

--G


----------



## Bloodstone Mage (Jul 26, 2003)

Hmm...

Urban and industrial feel?

Sounds okay.

Dark swashbuckling?

Sounds cool.

Dinosaurs and similar creatures?

I think I'm gonna go buy Midnight.

Well, to be fair, I can't really make any judgments on this Eberron setting yet. It's still over a year until its actual release, and the report on it is so vague, and the Wizards people are so hush hush about it, that no information in the present article we get now could begin to accurately describe the setting.

Personally, I think Wizards is being like Jello Biafra in Election 2000. Jello Biafra is a musician, of the former band "Dead Kennedys", who ran for president in 2000 and is a Green party activist today. His goal for his campaign was to point out all of his radical views as much as possible so he could get a lot of attention. I believe Wizards might be doing the same. They say, "Trains, dinosaurs, and swashbuckling", and suddenly gamers everywhere are turning their heads and looking at the Eberron books. Not too bad of a publicity stunt, if it is one. Of course, I could be off by several thousands of miles. That is just a wild guess.

Anyways, that's my two cents.

Cheers!


----------



## Goobermunch (Jul 26, 2003)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> *As for your non-legal points, I'll go back and start refuting them now.
> 
> --G *




Well, once I weeded out all of your purely subjective statements, I came to the conclusion that your sole point is that the WotC has done a terrible job promoting Eberron.  The only thing I can state as a refutation . . . is that WotC isn't responsible for the abysmal preview on Gaming Report.

--G


----------



## Eridanis (Jul 26, 2003)

I didn't follow the link to the Gaming Report article, but if they don't include the art provided in the pamphlet I got to take a look at, then you might be missing out on the only concrete info we have so far on the setting. Cool sketches of flying machines, spired villas, new critters...it looked intriguing to me. I'm not going to jump to conclusions before we see more concrete info (which will be another six months away, I'm sure, as it'll be a  Summer 2004 release), but I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt until the book is near release.

At any rate, there is hardly enough info to generate any heat one way or another, it seems to me.


----------



## Goobermunch (Jul 26, 2003)

Hecatol said:
			
		

> *Gaming Report has put up some details about the WotC setting search winner:
> 
> GamingReport
> 
> ...




I realize people have already balkanized into two camps here.  I can see the folks who've decided based on a vague and sparse preview that this setting sucks.

To them, I say that I've read the same review and gotten a different feel.  Where you're invisioning a Final Fantasy-esque steampunk world, I'm seeing a gritty pulp influenced world where heroes explore ancient ruins and negotiate with secret societies in the back alleys of major cities.

I see a world where the cities are large and far apart, but where wizards have found a more efficient way of transporting goods an people than breaking it up into lots and packing it through the astral (via teleport spells).

I think of golem driven trains and envision daring duels fought on the roof of a pullman while dodging tunnels through cliffs.

I anticipate meeting dinosaurs while exploring the jungles of the lost continent.

I guess I got something different out of those 277 words than you.

For those who've decided to wait for some more information, I hope that you'll be pleasantly surprised.  I hope I will be too!  If not, well, nobody can force me to spend my money, least of all WotC.

--G


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 26, 2003)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well, once I weeded out all of your purely subjective statements, I came to the conclusion that your sole point is that the WotC has done a terrible job promoting Eberron.  The only thing I can state as a refutation . . . is that WotC isn't responsible for the abysmal preview on Gaming Report.
> 
> --G *




Well other than a single comment I made _in passing_, and then a reply to a reply, your conclusion is correct.  My  posts are and have been that it has been promoted very poorly.  

I've commented before that whoever handles WotC's Public Relations efforts ought to be fired, and that remains no less true now.  Had WotC's PR person or agency done any kind of a decent job this would not have happened (at least not yet - if the setting is weak, no amount of PR will change that).


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 26, 2003)

*Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Goobermunch said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I realize people have already balkanized into two camps here.  I can see the folks who've decided based on a vague and sparse preview that this setting sucks.
> 
> To them, I say that I've read the same review and gotten a different feel.   *




And therefore everyone else is wrong


----------



## ShadowX (Jul 26, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> And therefore everyone else is wrong  *




How did you get that from his post?


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 26, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				ShadowX said:
			
		

> *
> 
> How did you get that from his post? *




Context?  Precedent?  Phft.

EDIT: He's going off his *feeling* about it in equal measure to those he disagrees with.  As I said before, I'll evaluate it more when it comes out, but from what was stated in the article (based on WotC company communications) it sounds like something I wouldn't spend my money on.  I seem to be in agreement with a lot of people on the matter.


----------



## Dismas (Jul 26, 2003)

The article doesn't give enough info to make final picture.

To be it is bit like saying; mammal, brain, heart, lungs, liver and kidneys and expecting us to be able to picture what the animal looks like.

Based on peoples reactions on this thread, I am leaning towards Pro, basically because so many people are against it 

There have only ever been 2 campaign worlds that grabbed me from day 1 and those were Planescape and Birthright.

The only sensible thing to do is to wait till the product comes out and try to get some demo games.


----------



## kenjib (Jul 26, 2003)

Thanks for the clarification about it being tons of magical stuff rather than industrial technology.  If this is true, magic-as-technology is not my kind of thing, but I hope it turns out well and people like it.


----------



## Michael Tree (Jul 26, 2003)

senodam said:
			
		

> *Well said Meepo. And just out of curiousity, has anyone considered we could be seeing something like Perdido Street Station here? It's certainly what popped into my mind. Just picture it- huge industrialised cities, ancient ruins beneath them that were once the palaces and temples of older races..and out in the wilds there are tales of huge lizards that can swallow a man whole. Could be cool, could be bad- let's wait and see. *



Exactly.   With this sort of setting, the execution is what is important.  Anyone could throw together magical tech and dinosaurs and create a mediocre derivative setting, but from the praise we've heard from the judges, this setting is much more than that.

What I like about the setting is that it isn't yet another pseudo-medieval fantasy heroic-quest world.  There isn't an existing D&D setting that does swashbuckling well, nor is there one with interesting extensions of magic.


----------



## Gellion (Jul 26, 2003)

This world sounds pretty cool, i will check it out when it comes out in August 2004.


----------



## Dagger75 (Jul 26, 2003)

Okay read it, heard about air ships flying with elemental rings from some here, people using magic to farm fileds and huge towering cities.  Kind of a gritty industrial feel.


 Almost sounds a bit like Earthdawn.

 It had huge towering cities, it had steamships powered by elemental fire and water and flying castles made possible with elemental air.  

 Magic was very common and used by everybody.

 I liked Earthdawn, I will take a look at this.

 BUT

Swashbuckling AND Dinosaurs mentioned in the same game.  Hmm kinda like mixing Jack Daniels and Mountain Dew, some people found the taste interesting and liked it, others hated it and threw it at me.  We shall see.


----------



## beta-ray (Jul 26, 2003)

I agree with Meepo... There is a fair amount of rudeness here. I am glad I am not the author reading these boards. I will wait for more info before I make a judgement on whether it is for mne or not. Then perhaps I can begin to think that I feel it is stupid or not as well. *shrug*

Feels like I am reading Newsarama's boards...


----------



## Bran Blackbyrd (Jul 26, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *Cadillacs & Dinosaurs*



That's the first thing I thought too. 
It doesn't sound like my cup of tee, but I think it is ignorant to think that one could accurately gauge what the end product will be from what little info has been released so far.
I would say that I'll wait until it's on the shelves before I give it a thumbs up or not, but that would be pointless.
You see, I'm busy enough with a D&D campaign in my own homebrew world and two D20 Modern games in the "real" world (though all three games are on hiatus). For me to bother picking up another campaign setting it would have to be uber-kismet karmic-soulmate missing-twin perfect for me. 
Or have so many cool rules that I buy it and chuck the setting. In the end, if stip-mining a setting book for the rules is what you're going to do, then the flavor and quality of the setting hardly matters. Hence, I have a few FR books.

Giving it a pass or fail at this juncture is just sort of foolish, unless you hate dinosaurs because they ate your one million times removed great aunt when she was just a proto-mammal. 

If the setting ends up being a real loser hopefully they'll pull the plug instead of continuing to support it just in case someone buys it. They could just go to the next runner-up and give them a shot.
In the meantime, good luck to the person/people working on this, hopefully it will turn out great.
You never know, maybe the grognards of 2028 will be griping about what a crime it is that D&D's latest owners won't continue to support Eberron for D&D 8.0.

Edit:


SpuneDagr[/i][b]
Ooh ooh! Let's all judge what we know almost nothing about! Me first![/b][/quote]
Bingo! Sometimes it's like an online monkey cage around here. Let's see who can be the first to fling dung! Fling it far said:


> *
> Well I suppose we can begin the official countdown to the "Sleestacks got the shaft!" threads.... *



F$^&#*% ROFLMAO!



			
				Corinth said:
			
		

> *It broke the rules of the setting search by exceeding the technology level set in the criteria.*



That does sort of stink.



> *dinosaurs and Industrial Age technology do not mix well, much like steak and chocolate.*



What about dinosaurs and chocolate? There were Cadillacs and Dinosaurs chocolate bars. 



			
				Azure Trance said:
			
		

> *I thought Land Of The Lost was when that family went camping in a Jeep Cherokee got swallowed by some earth quake, and thus entered Dinosaur-era.*




That was a re-make. But you're on the right track. The original is redeemed by being unbelievably campy.
--

STONE? Is this some new geek way to say "ROCK!" that no one told me about?


----------



## Wolfspider (Jul 26, 2003)

I've never seen a bunch of moaners and whiners in my life.

Talk about overreacting and pre-judgement!

Jeez...I almost thought I had accidentally logged into RPG.net.

I just hope the author of this setting, someone who we should be congratulating, doesn't drop by and see this thread.

Does jealousy really run that deep?  

Whiner:  "MY setting was kewler than this.  Dinosawrz and choo-choos?!?  Ebberon sucks!"


----------



## DaveMage (Jul 26, 2003)

Gargoyle said:
			
		

> *
> 
> My opinion is that WOTC shouldn't have unveiled the setting until they had more information that they could release.  This is a very large campaign world in its infancy.  Why have a Q&A seminar when you can't answer most of the questions?
> 
> *




This pretty much sums up how I feel about this whole thing.

It won't even be released for another 12 months.

WotC may fear that if they give out too many details, someone would copy them and get it out faster.  They might be right.

Owell, if it's great, I'll buy it.  If not, I'll probably still buy it because I'm a sucker.


----------



## The Cardinal (Jul 26, 2003)

it sounds like the result of a computer program or some sort of comitee:

Jurassic Park + Harry Potter + semi-Anime design + orcs, elfs, dwarfs, and gnomes + Treasure Planet


Yep, truly original stuff...


----------



## apocalypstick (Jul 26, 2003)

I go into every campaign setting looking for stuff to steal for my homebrew, and this setting looks promising in that. For me, it's:

Magic applied to industrial- age Tech: Super-Cool. Thumbs Up.

Dinosaurs: Yick.

Take what you want, ignore the rest; I imagine that I'll be buying this to take a look at a new spin on D&D and find out what I can swipe out of it. Same as I did for FR, Kalamar, and... (come on, where's my IK???)... yeah, well, anyway.

Does anyone really run a camapign "straight out of the box," anyway?

Keep an open mind, people. I thought the film adaption of LXG would rawk until I actually saw it.


----------



## Mucknuggle (Jul 26, 2003)

> It looks like a bad knock-off of FFVII, FFVIII, Xenozoic Tales (a.k.a. Cadillacs & Dinosaurs) and Arcanum.




Hate to be picky, but FFVI is the steam punk one. VII and VIII have much higher levels of technology.

From that article it seems like this setting is FFVI - all the stuff that made that game good and made Dinosaurs + Steam Punk work for it.

Where's my Final Fantasy P&P?!


----------



## Maraxle (Jul 26, 2003)

Gargoyle said:
			
		

> *They claimed that Keith's submission was not like any of the other 11,000.*



This fact alone should have told them that it wouldn't be a popular concept.  If out of 11,000 of your most hardcore fans only one said "Trains & Dinosaurs would be cool", maybe you should stay away from Trains & Dinosaurs...


----------



## Anubis the Doomseer (Jul 26, 2003)

Thanks to all for reminding me of all the bad characteristics of gamer culture.  It doesn't sound like my sort of thing but I'm not going to call it crap or torpedo it a year before it comes out.

The thread has given birth to a new magic item: the knee-jerk of conclusion jumping.

- Ma'at


----------



## Lalato (Jul 26, 2003)

Christian Walker said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I've been looking for something new myself. A setting with a "Sky Realms of Jorune is Far Out!" feel to it. I've been gaming for a long, long time, and I'm eager to read a setting that's straight up fresh.
> 
> Not necessarily high-concept, but just a little out of the ordinary. Oathbound, maybe? *




I'm definitely with you on the Skyrealms of Jorune d20...  I wish someone would do something that "out there".

As an aside, Tekumel will be released soon from Guardians of Order.  That's another odd setting.

--sam


----------



## Aulayan (Jul 26, 2003)

The main reason I won't be buying or playing in this.

Drow.  More frelling drow.

The rest of it, it depends on how it's pulled off.  I'm pessimistic and don't think it'll be good, but I entertain the possibility it could be great.

But drow.  WotC and their drow.  Agh.


----------



## storyguide3 (Jul 26, 2003)

*Cut it some slack*

Its nice to see that reactionary dismissal of new ideas, months in advance and with little to no solid information, is not confined to Talkbacks on Ain't It Cool News.

Yes, it could suck. Or, it could rock. Right now, we have no idea which it will do. If it comes out and yo don't like it, don't buy it. With the exception of the other two finalists (which I beleive also belong to WotC) its not like this setting is keeping any of the other submitted concepts from seeing the light of day.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jul 26, 2003)

Not enough info; ask me to judge in a year.

Though I prefer my fantasy medieval, thank you, and "trains" do not exactly evoke a medieval feel for me -- but it is entirely too soon to judge this book by its non-existent cover.

It took me 15 years to pick up a FR product that wasn't a CRPG, though, so this isn't likely to be a release date purchase for me in any case ...


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

You're old fashioned!  If you want to do that, you've got half a dozen campaign settings out there already that cater to you.  Do we really need another one?


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jul 26, 2003)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *You're old fashioned!  If you want to do that, you've got half a dozen campaign settings out there already that cater to you.  Do we really need another one? *




IMO no, but no one asked me ...


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Jul 26, 2003)

Pictures:

http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=9471

Looks like the trains are hover-trains.

Some of the buildings look pretty cool, IMHO.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

Olgar Shiverstone said:
			
		

> *IMO no, but no one asked me ...  *



Sorry, forgot to hit quote instead of reply -- that is in response to a post on page 2...


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

Thanks, BG!  I'm getting a little more excited about this setting that more I hear!


----------



## Melkor (Jul 26, 2003)

2d6 said:
			
		

> *Saying this is the new "main" setting for D&D just doesn't sit well with me, and I don't care how you spin spin the steampunk/dino stuff. *




Who said this was going to be the main setting ? Not saying it wasn't said, I'm just wondering if you could link to a quote or press release.

I was very sceptical when I first read the info on gaming report, but I decided I would hold judgement until I have the book in my hands.....

Then I saw a link to the artwork, and that made the whole thing sit a bit better with me.....again, we'll see when we know more.


----------



## King_Stannis (Jul 26, 2003)

Dinosaurs and Industrial stuff. Two things that will never see the light of day in my campaign. 

Congrats to the winner for earning the $120,000. Shame on WotC for picking such an odd (but probably well done) world.


----------



## cerberus2112 (Jul 26, 2003)

*Kewl*

It looks like an entire world waiting to be explored!  Gee, just what I want in a campaign setting.  There is a city of towers, very neat looking flying ships, aztecs, barren wastelands.  It would be impossible to convey all of this in the little blurb gaming report gave us.  I have to agree with others who have said that the negative responses are a result of gaming report's poor coverage, not a poor job at all!


----------



## Goobermunch (Jul 26, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> And therefore everyone else is wrong  *




Actually Emiricol, I was simply showing that the gaming report preview is subject to more than one valid interpretation.  You read it and fell that Eberron will suck.  I read it and think that Eberron sounds intriguing.  That's all.

--G


----------



## HeavyG (Jul 26, 2003)

I dub this thread 

The Lemon Thread !!!


----------



## Goobermunch (Jul 26, 2003)

King_Stannis said:
			
		

> *Dinosaurs and Industrial stuff. Two things that will never see the light of day in my campaign.
> 
> Congrats to the winner for earning the $120,000. Shame on WotC for picking such an odd (but probably well done) world. *




I've got to say that everyone's jumping on the Dinosaur thing.  I don't really get the impression that dinosaurs are the center of the campaign.  From what I've read here, it's more like here's this great world with all this stuff.  Oh, and by the way, out there in the dark depths of the jungle of doom, there be dinosaurs.

--G


----------



## Tsyr (Jul 26, 2003)

If it wasn't for the dinosaurs, I would be all over a Magic-Is-Technology setting... It's a setting I've wanted to see for a while (And I generaly hate High Magic worlds)...

But Dinosaurs? Blech. I'll see how intergrated they are into the setting... If it's just a "They exist in some places thing", cool... They just wont exist for me. If they play some special roll... no thanks.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> *
> 
> WotC may fear that if they give out too many details, someone would copy them and get it out faster.  They might be right.
> *




You are correct.

Change that to "WOTC _does_ fear that if they give out too many details, a d20 company will copy them and produce something similar faster."

I'm paraphrasing, but Bill Slaviscek said as much at the seminar when talking about why they weren't releasing too much info.

I was amused by this.  No d20 company in their right mind will try to put out a setting that directly competes with one of WOTC's flagship settings.  I'd rather find my own niche.  Of course, there are d20 companies that aren't in their right mind, so maybe he's got a point.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I've got to say that everyone's jumping on the Dinosaur thing.  I don't really get the impression that dinosaurs are the center of the campaign.  From what I've read here, it's more like here's this great world with all this stuff.  Oh, and by the way, out there in the dark depths of the jungle of doom, there be dinosaurs.
> 
> --G *




That's the feeling I got.


----------



## Warduke (Jul 26, 2003)

I don´t particularly like dinosaurs in my fantasy games either, but it's an interesting feature. We don't have them thanks to that nice meteor hitting earth a while back. Maybe this world hasn´t had something similar happen? That would mean that they would still exist. 

If they are common it will give the setting another distinctive feature like Dark Sun where insects were used as beasts of burden and cattle.

If we've heard about Dark Sun in the same way I think the reaction would have been similar, they're both far from the fantasy europe settings that D&D had had up til then. I'm all for different, we already have enough standard settings.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 26, 2003)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> *
> Y'all have some incredible Jump (Conclusions) skill modifiers; I don't think that less-than-300-word report gives enough space for a running jump. *




I'm still trying to figure out how everyone went from "From the look of the artwork there are large dinosaur like monsters" to "there are dinosaurs and other lost-world creatures"

I mean, 'large dinosaur like monsters" covers a lot of ground.  They could be dinosaurs, sure.  They could be dire lizards.  They could be that world's  _dragons_, for pete's sake.

"Saying this is the new "main" setting for D&D just doesn't sit well with me, and I don't care how you spin spin the steampunk/dino stuff."

Who said that?  What did I miss?  Can I get a direct, verifiable quote or is it just more Chicken-Littling?

After looking at the concept art, I think it looks pretty damn cool.  The much b*tched-about "dinosaur-like creature" seems to be a bipedal riding lizard, which are nothing new or un-D&Dlike, and the art hardly suggests that hunting dinos is the order of the day.

I love the smell of lame conclusions in the morning.  It smells like...well, gamers, I guess.  Although I'm glad so many people were whining about it, it made me actually check out the setting. (No such thing as bad publicity, right?)

J


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Jul 26, 2003)

Aulayan said:
			
		

> *The main reason I won't be buying or playing in this.
> 
> Drow.  More frelling drow.
> 
> ...





Ditto.

All the other elements I can handle, it all depends how they are presented, but drow are to D&D what boy bands are to popular music. *yuck*


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 26, 2003)

...for all those so adamantly against Dinosaurs...there are Dino's in Greyhawk....


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

Maraxle said:
			
		

> *
> This fact alone should have told them that it wouldn't be a popular concept.  If out of 11,000 of your most hardcore fans only one said "Trains & Dinosaurs would be cool", maybe you should stay away from Trains & Dinosaurs... *




Yeah, they're taking a chance by bucking the trends.  However, it was good enough that it beat out thousands of other ideas, was unique, and well written.   I think it's going to be interesting.

BTW, the 'trend' worlds they mentioned that I remember were all "waterworlds", "worlds ruled by evil", or "broken, devastated worlds".  They didn't mention all of the trends.  They said that basically one of each of the trend worlds made it into the top 11, with Eberron being the only one that didn't fit one of these patterns, yet it still fit into the parameters of a D&D world, was a broad enough idea to be a sprawling campaign world, had medieval level tech, and met that difficult requirement that it had to be "the same as, yet different" from worlds like Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> "Saying this is the new "main" setting for D&D just doesn't sit well with me, and I don't care how you spin spin the steampunk/dino stuff."
> 
> Who said that?  What did I miss?  Can I get a direct, verifiable quote or is it just more Chicken-Littling?
> J *





They said that it will receive as much support as the Forgotten Realms, if not more.  But they never said in the seminar that this is the new "main" setting or that the other settings would no longer receive support.  They said, and I'm paraphrasing "it's just another major setting like Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms".


----------



## Mercule (Jul 26, 2003)

It could be a very well done setting.  I still probably won't buy it.

Why?

#1  It's apparently either technological or (more likely) magitech.  I hate mixing tech and magic.  I absol-frickin-lutely despise magitech.  Either one is an automatic black smudge on a setting.

This isn't an absolute prohibition.  I liked Shadowrun, Stephan King's Gunslinger books, and Guardians of the Flame.  The simple fact that that last one made the list should give some perspective on my tolerance to mixing magic and tech.

I refuse to buy FR products because the magic level is so absurdly high.  Obviously, anything with higher magic is a no sale to me.

#2 Dinosaurs.  If they are prominent enough to get noteworthy mention in the PR, then they are either _not_ just in the most remote of jungles or the WotC PR person... seeking polite phrasing... just isn't doing a very good job.


Now, my wife and I were chatting as I read this thread.  At first, she had the same reaction I did.  As we talked more, though, she came up with a cool idea.  She said it kinda sounded like the Gunslinger world and I have to agree.

IMHO, that's the best case scenario.  If it pans out that way, I'll probably pick up the book.  I wouldn't use it very often, but I could see it being interesting for a change of pace between serious games.  There might also be some good ideas in there in a context I could be interested in.

Obviously, we don't have enough info to say one way or the other, yet.  Also, I'm not saying the setting will suck.  I know there are lots of people who find magitech interesting.  I'm just not one of them.

I hope the setting sells well and encourages WotC and other publishers to put out more settings -- preferrably ones that I like and can raid for ideas.  I'm just not hopeful at this point.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

Twiggly the Gnome said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Ditto.
> ...




I hear ya.  Unfortunately, it seems like anything you dislike about content in the D&D core rules is going to be in this campaign setting.  If a monster is in the MM, it's going to be in there somewhere.  If a race is in the PHB, it's going to be in there somewhere.  Same with magic items and spells.  I'm not sure if that applies to prestige classes, which are optional, but I'm sure it doesn't apply to the Red Wizards.  

They want the world to conform to the D&D core rules.  Why that has to include drow, mind flayers, and gnomes, I'm not sure, but it probably has to do more with branding and marketing than with world design, which is a shame.  Sometimes a world can stand out by what it leaves out, (remember Talislanta:  No Elves) and it seems that Eberron won't have any advantages from that technique.  The drow on Eberron will most likely be different from other worlds, but will not be absent.

Edit:  On the plus side,  if you don't like them, you can leave them out of your campaign.  It's harder to include them when the campaign book says "There are no drow on Eberron." and gives no info on them.  So perhaps it is best for the majority that they are in.  Some people like them.


----------



## TiQuinn (Jul 26, 2003)

I agree that they should've waited until there was a bit more meat on the bone to announce this.  Right now it sounds like a hodge podge of ideas.  Why they couldn't reveal more details is beyond me.

All the same, I dig new settings...even the ones that I end up hating.  There's just something about the prospect of seeing something original or different that piques my interest.  I also think the "Wizards passed on Midnight for this?" comments have already become way too...um...hip for my tastes.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 26, 2003)

TiQuinn said:
			
		

> * I also think the "Wizards passed on Midnight for this?" comments have already become way too...um...hip for my tastes.  *




...especially when Midnight wasn't even sent in to WOTC.

But hey, if people repeat something loud and long enough, everyone will believe it.

J


----------



## Kevin O'Reilly (Jul 26, 2003)

_[Gripe on]_

Just to join in, because I also am a little perturbed by the amount of variance from the guidelines on the submission...

_[Gripe off]_

This world (almost) already exists. Ubquitious magic, shapeshiftes, magitech, steampunk trains... gunslinger heroes and anti-heroes... it's called *Mageknight*.

I am interested in how religion gets incorporated. The industrial revolution here on RealSide created alot of religious conflicts and the onslaught of Enlightment changed the many belief structures in absolute existance in Good and Evil.

Interested to see that.

Also... we still have a void for a Psionic World....*Publishers...Talk to me *


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 26, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I'm still trying to figure out how everyone went from "From the look of the artwork there are large dinosaur like monsters" to "there are dinosaurs and other lost-world creatures"
> 
> ...




Well, if you look at the pictures, the riding dinosaur is called a "Clawfoot".  And it's got this nice sickle-shaped claw on the foot, and the quote says "Clawsfoots are disturbingly fast, even with riders".

To me, that says Velociraptr.  So perhaps different names for the dinosaurs.

And that's not a bad thing.  Ancient cities, swashbuckling, dark magic, and technological magic?  Cool I say.  At least it's not another FR or GH clone.  Nothing wrong with those settings, but we don't need more of the same, and this is definitely different.

Time for a change I say.  I'm looking forward to finding out more.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 26, 2003)

TiQuinn said:
			
		

> *I agree that they should've waited until there was a bit more meat on the bone to announce this.  Right now it sounds like a hodge podge of ideas.  Why they couldn't reveal more details is beyond me.
> 
> All the same, I dig new settings...even the ones that I end up hating.  There's just something about the prospect of seeing something original or different that piques my interest.  I also think the "Wizards passed on Midnight for this?" comments have already become way too...um...hip for my tastes.  *



WotC didn't "pass" on Midnight.  It wasn't part of the competition.  It was a completely separate setting created by FFG.

And it was already in production before the setting contest even started, IIRC.

Banshee


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Jul 26, 2003)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> *Well, if you look at the pictures, the riding dinosaur is called a "Clawfoot".  And it's got this nice sickle-shaped claw on the foot, and the quote says "Clawsfoots are disturbingly fast, even with riders". *




I hear Clawfoot Riders got nerfed.


(sorry, couldn't resist, had to be the first!  )


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

Gargoyle said:
			
		

> *FYI, the setting is not technologically advanced.  The technology is medieval level.  That was made clear in the seminar.   *





Could you please cite references in our mediaeval period for trains?

Nick the Lemming, who really, really, really likes the sound of original cultures like Dwarves and Orcs. I'm just amazed that no-one's ever thought to use them before. No, really.


----------



## jasamcarl (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Could you please cite references in our mediaeval period for trains?
> ...




Uh, magical devices that serve the same function of trains. But then, you probably think the spell Teleport was inspired by Star Trek.


----------



## Kesh (Jul 26, 2003)

Mercule said:
			
		

> *Now, my wife and I were chatting as I read this thread.  At first, she had the same reaction I did.  As we talked more, though, she came up with a cool idea.  She said it kinda sounded like the Gunslinger world and I have to agree.
> *




This is _exactly_ what sprung into my mind. It's _Stephen King's Dark Tower d20_! 

It's going to be a lot more high-fantasy than his series, but the same brooding atmosphere can be done. I've already got some ideas, _if_ this is how the setting pans out.

Dinosaurs don't bother me, considering they exist in most other settings as well. They're just really big, nasty wandering monsters.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *Could you please cite references in our mediaeval period for trains? *



I'd like to see the references in our medieval period for 95% of the stuff that's in D&D first, if you don't mind.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Could you please cite references in our mediaeval period for trains?
> ...



A lot of people whining about very little information.

They said unique cultures....not unique races.  The halflings of Dark Sun had a unique culture.  As did the halflings of Birthright.  As do the gnomes of Dragonlance.  The setting could very well have many of the core races, but put unique spins on them that we haven't seen in WotC settings before.

Banshee


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

jasamcarl said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Uh, magical devices that serve the same function of trains. But then, you probably think the spell Teleport was inspired by Star Trek. *




Look at the pictures on rpg.net. There is, quite unmistakeably, a a train. It even has "train" written next to it (Lightning train, I think). Now please cite a mediaeval reference for trains.

Nick the Lemming


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 26, 2003)

BiggusGeekus said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I hear Clawfoot Riders got nerfed.
> 
> ...




I don't know.....the dino fan in this gamer thinks it might be cool to have a ranger with a Clawfoot animal companion 

The swashbuckling and industrial feel are very interesting sounding though.   In some ways, they make me think of Planescape a bit, by far my favorite setting.

I *have* seen people complaining about this setting being released instead of bringing back Dark Sun or Planescape, etc.  Well, though I absolutely loved both settings, they evidently didn't sell well enough to keep going.  Why would that necessarily be different now?

The fact that this setting will be different from anything WotC has ever done before should be a pretty good thing.

Banshee


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> I'd like to see the references in our medieval period for 95% of the stuff that's in D&D first, if you don't mind.   *




The reference I quoted mentioned that the world was limited to mediaeval technology. Trains are obviously not mediaeval. I couldn't care less what tech levels are in the rest of the D&D stuff; this particular setting is supposedly limited to mediaeval tech, and clearly isn't.

Nick the Lemming


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> The reference I quoted mentioned that the world was limited to mediaeval technology. Trains are obviously not mediaeval. I couldn't care less what tech levels are in the rest of the D&D stuff; this particular setting is supposedly limited to mediaeval tech, and clearly isn't.
> 
> Nick the Lemming *




...and you think that riding on Dragons is medieval? Face it. This is FANTASY. The setting can still be medieval without conforming to every tiny little detail.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Could you please cite references in our mediaeval period for trains?
> *





The setting also includes the spell _fireball_ and _burning hands_.  How dare they put flamethrowers in my D&D game!  The trains run on magic, sorry if that wasn't clear.  



> *
> Nick the Lemming, who really, really, really likes the sound of original cultures like Dwarves and Orcs. I'm just amazed that no-one's ever thought to use them before. No, really. *




As far as the reference to "unique cultures such as dwarves, gnomes..." blah blah, I have to say that your sarcasm is well deserved.  Whoever wrote that line at WOTC (because I can't believe gamingreport came up with it out of thin air) should have their head examined for completely ignoring the audience of their press release.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> *
> 
> ...and you think that riding on Dragons is medieval? Face it. This is FANTASY. The setting can still be medieval without conforming to every tiny little detail. *





I don't care what they ride around on; I don't care if they have X-wing fighters that they travel around on; what does make me laugh at them is that they claim that there's nothing above mediaeval tech, but they have things like trains. Whoever did the presentation for this setting should be taking around the back of the building and shot in the head several times (just to make sure), as they've made a complete balls-up of it. It's almost as if the people at WOTC responsible for what was released were playing Exquisite Corpse - one person wrote a line, then folded the sheet of paper over and passed it on to the next person, who wrote a line and passed it on...

Nick the Lemming


----------



## TiQuinn (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Whoever did the presentation for this setting should be taking around the back of the building and shot in the head several times (just to make sure), as they've made a complete balls-up of it. It's almost as if the people at WOTC responsible for what was released were playing Exquisite Corpse - one person wrote a line, then folded the sheet of paper over and passed it on to the next person, who wrote a line and passed it on...
> 
> *




I hope everyone is not as easily disappointed as you are.  It wasn't a very good introduction for the setting...but is it a death knell?  Is it suddenly some unholy abomination that must be staked and burned?  Sheesh!


----------



## Maggan (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Whoever did the presentation for this setting should be taking around the back of the building and shot in the head several times (just to make sure) *




Wow, you sure thake your gaming seriously. Are you that harsh when you DM as well?  

Cheers!

M.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

Maggan said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Wow, you sure thake your gaming seriously. Are you that harsh when you DM as well?
> 
> ...





No-one forgets to bring snacks more than once...  ;-)

Nick the Lemming


----------



## Enceladus (Jul 26, 2003)

*Ah well....*

After reading the info on this setting and looking at the scans at gamingreport it makes me wonder if they shouldn't start random drug testing at WoTC. 

Not that I was ever planning on getting this ever.


----------



## Scarbonac (Jul 26, 2003)

BiggusGeekus said:
			
		

> *Pictures:
> 
> http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=9471
> 
> ...






Christ, that looks like my homebrew!


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *The reference I quoted mentioned that the world was limited to mediaeval technology. Trains are obviously not mediaeval. I couldn't care less what tech levels are in the rest of the D&D stuff; this particular setting is supposedly limited to mediaeval tech, and clearly isn't.*



Clearly you didn't understand what I said.  I know trains aren't medieval.  Neither are many of the other standard conventions of D&D.  I find your complaint vacous unless you address that first.  D&D is not Harn.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> Clearly you didn't understand what I said.  I know trains aren't medieval.  Neither are many of the other standard conventions of D&D.  I find your complaint vacous unless you address that first.  D&D is not Harn. *





I never claimed that D&D was Harn, or even that this was desirable. Go back again and look at the original post I replied to. It stated that this setting did not possess tech above the mediaeval level. This is obviously arse. It doesn't matter what tech they have; I really don't care. But to claim that the tech they have is no higher than mediaeval when it obviously is is bollocks. It doesn't matter whether D&D has other forms of tech that are far beyond our own. The setting synopsis stated that tech was below a certain level, and yet it also includes tech that is above this level. What is so hard for you to understand about this point? Talking of how other conventions of D&D don't match up with mediaeval reality is besides the point and completely irrelevant. Do you understand yet, or are you going to post again without actually considering the point I was making? Just to eb safe, here it is again:

The original post claimed that the setting had tech that was no higher than the mediaeval period. It has trains, which weren't around in that period. Therefore, they're talking crap.

Now, what's so hard to understand there?

Nick the Lemming


----------



## d4 (Jul 26, 2003)

i'll reserve final judgment for when i can actually skim through the book at my FLGS, but as of right now, there's too many elements i don't like presented so far for me to consider picking this one up.

powerful and ubiquitous magic, magic-replacing-the-functions-of-technology, a theme of "dark" anything...

i'm pretty sure, based on what's been revealed so far, that those things are definitely in the setting. i'm not going to comment on the other speculations such as steampunk-level technology or the pervasiveness of dinosaurs since we don't know yet whether those rumors are true. (for the record, i think dinosaurs are cool and more settings should use them.  )


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> I never claimed that D&D was Harn, or even that this was desirable. Go back again and look at the original post I replied to. It stated that this setting did not possess tech above the mediaeval level. This is obviously arse. It doesn't matter what tech they have; I really don't care. But to claim that the tech they have is no higher than mediaeval when it obviously is is bollocks. It doesn't matter whether D&D has other forms of tech that are far beyond our own. The setting synopsis stated that tech was below a certain level, and yet it also includes tech that is above this level. What is so hard for you to understand about this point? Talking of how other conventions of D&D don't match up with mediaeval reality is besides the point and completely irrelevant. Do you understand yet, or are you going to post again without actually considering the point I was making? Just to eb safe, here it is again:
> ...





It's not tech, it's magic.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> It's not tech, it's magic.  *




It's a train. ;-P


----------



## d4 (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *It's a train. ;-P *



i have to agree with Nick here. it doesn't matter whether the train runs by a technological steam engine or if it draws energy from a bound fire elemental. it's still a train.

trains imply a certain level of organization and civilization that (for the most part) exceeds the standard pseudo-medieval / feudal mindset that pervades core D&D.


----------



## Pants (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> It's a train. ;-P *



That runs on magic


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

Pants said:
			
		

> *
> That runs on magic  *




Not on rails then?  ;-)


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Not on rails then?  ;-) *




No, not on rails.  Look at the picture.  It's flying, for crying out loud.  With lightning coming out the bottom of it.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> *
> 
> No, not on rails.  Look at the picture.  It's flying, for crying out loud.  With lightning coming out the bottom of it. *





Arse, I forgot it was a hovertrain. Just like in the middle ages. ;-)


----------



## d4 (Jul 26, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> *It's flying, for crying out loud.  With lightning coming out the bottom of it. *



again, i don't think that's relevant. it's still a train, and still implies certain things about the culture that built it.

it implies a level of organization that includes train stations, train schedules, and whatnot.

it implies a social class (presumably middle class) that can afford the train's services that's large enough to keep the train running. it implies widespread and common movement of people and goods across large distances. it implies these people have the freedom and the money to do such travel.

in short, trains imply a certain level of organizational technology and civilization _regardless_ of whether the train runs by steam engine or by magic.

that one picture of a train says to me this setting is not the pseudo-medieval / feudal setting implied in the core rules, but something much, much different and much, much closer to our own industrialized world.

and i don't care for that.


----------



## Carnifex (Jul 26, 2003)

d4 said:
			
		

> *
> again, i don't think that's relevant. it's still a train, and still implies certain things about the culture that built it.
> 
> it implies a level of organization that includes train stations, train schedules, and whatnot.
> ...




But the usual fantasy fare has *ships* that run along these lines. Surely, by basically making a flying ship that runs on magic, you are making the setting *more* magical and *less* technological? It has nothing to do with a culture's technology at all (though of course, until we actually see more on the campaign setting in question, it's hard to tel what 'tech' level is being used).


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 26, 2003)

d4 said:
			
		

> *
> again, i don't think that's relevant. it's still a train, and still implies certain things about the culture that built it.
> 
> it implies a level of organization that includes train stations, train schedules, and whatnot.
> ...




I'd say your reading too deeply into that one picture. For all we know, the trains are confined to a single country. There are many other modes of transportation, and there's that picture of the dinosaur thingy mount. It looks to me like this is a very very diverse world at a technological standpoint...I'm interested, but I'm still hanging back to see more details.


----------



## Dismas (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Arse, I forgot it was a hovertrain. Just like in the middle ages. ;-) *




It's a land boat. If you have enough magic to make things fly, why wouldn't an enterprising merchant comission a flying boat to make transporting stuff easier.

In one of the Dying Earth stories Cugel creates a floating boat using special osip(?) wax and then runs a commercial land ferry.


----------



## Carnifex (Jul 26, 2003)

Dismas said:
			
		

> *
> 
> It's a land boat. If you have enough magic to make things fly, why wouldn't an enterprising merchant comission a flying boat to make transporting stuff easier.
> 
> ...




My thoughts exactly. Having a flying ship that runs due to magic doesn't indicate tech. It indicates a high-magic world.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 26, 2003)

Dismas said:
			
		

> *
> 
> It's a land boat.  *




No, it's a train. If in doubt, look at the words next to the picture. It says "train".

Nick the Lemming


----------



## Dismas (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> No, it's a train. If in doubt, look at the words next to the picture. It says "train".
> 
> Nick the Lemming *




So they call it a train, this is highly likely if they were commissioned by merchants that already used wagon trains (train being a middle english word) to transport goods overland.


----------



## Carnifex (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> No, it's a train. If in doubt, look at the words next to the picture. It says "train".
> 
> Nick the Lemming *




So what? This in no way actually means more advanced tech - all it needs is still just applying magic to make a shiop float. I still don't get how this makes it advanced technology rather than magic?


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> I never claimed that D&D was Harn, or even that this was desirable. Go back again and look at the original post I replied to. It stated that this setting did not possess tech above the mediaeval level. This is obviously arse. It doesn't matter what tech they have; I really don't care. But to claim that the tech they have is no higher than mediaeval when it obviously is is bollocks. It doesn't matter whether D&D has other forms of tech that are far beyond our own. The setting synopsis stated that tech was below a certain level, and yet it also includes tech that is above this level. What is so hard for you to understand about this point? Talking of how other conventions of D&D don't match up with mediaeval reality is besides the point and completely irrelevant. Do you understand yet, or are you going to post again without actually considering the point I was making? Just to eb safe, here it is again:
> ...




Yes, let's go back and refer to my original post that you replied to:



> FYI, the setting is not technologically advanced. The technology is medieval level. That was made clear in the seminar.
> 
> Magic is being used in daily life rather than tech, so you do have very tall buildings being held up by magic, and some magical transport. An example that was given is that on the Forgotten Realms a farmer uses middle ages technology to farm (plows etc.) On Eberron, a farmer would use magic.




WOTC told me at the seminar that the technological level is medieval.  I'm repeating what they said.  If you don't believe it, that is your prerogative.  What I don't understand is why you can't imagine trains that are designed around magic, instead of steam power or other forms of technology?  If your point is that you don't like magic functioning like technology does in the modern world, as a commodity that provides convenience, then I can understand that.  But to say that they're lying...I don't know why they would...

BTW, Bill Slaviscek refers to it as a "magical conveyance" rather than a train, and the handout refers to it as the "lightning rail" and not a train.  Even if they had referred to it as a train that ran on magic, I don't think I'd object.

edit: grammar/spelling


----------



## Bran Blackbyrd (Jul 26, 2003)

A certain level of civilization?
Trade caravan. There's your level of civilization. Use magic to make the carts float. What's the next logical step? Put covers over the carts or possibly armor it against attacks. What does that give you?
That's right, exactly what we saw in that picture that everyone says is a "train". (btw Dismas, Right on!)
It's all the smooth chocolatey taste of a seige cart combined with the peanut-buttery goodness of a merchant's supply wagons, now with the piquant seasoning of levitation magic.

If you can't summon up enough imagination to explain why something train-like is hovering around in a high-magic medieval *fantasy* world, then maybe chess is more your speed.
The last time I checked, people who played RPGs had a little bit more imagination.
This speculation is worse than useless and it looks totally infantile to the average on-looker. THIS is why geeks get such a bad rap for being so fanatical about stuff so trivial. It's a game for flumph's sake! One that has had less than 500 words of description released on it from a (at the very least) tertiary source. It won't be out for at least a year!
If you want to fight tooth and nail go into politics and get something important accomplished with all of that bile.


----------



## Dismas (Jul 26, 2003)

For all those that claim that the setting isn't what WotC asked for and those suggesting the possibility of lawsuits, I was able to find a copy of the setting search document, here is what WotC asked for:

_PROPOSALS FOR A NEW FANTASY SETTING

Wizards of the Coast, Inc. is searching for proposals for a new fantasy setting (“Fantasy Setting Search”). Such a setting may serve as a vehicle for novels, roleplaying games, card games, miniatures, and other entertainment products. In scope and flavor, your proposed fantasy setting should be similar to our existing settings, particularly FORGOTTEN REALMS and DRAGONLANCE. _

All they were looking for was a setting which they could exploit over numerous media.

Interestingly the only place I could find a copy of the search doc was on rpg.net (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php...page=20&highlight=setting search&pagenumber=2)


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

Leming: Rather than repeat the numerous arguments made since my last post, I will simply state that your claims are more vacous than ever.  Empty.  Devoid of meaning, substance or relevancy.  I never misunderstood your point, as you seem to think, I just find it pedantic and infantile.

If you want to ignore the stream of posts here and continue to make silly claims about WotC "lying" about the tech level, feel free.  Me, I'm going to feel free to know beyond any doubt that you have no idea what you're talking about.  As near as I can tell, you're only hung up on a couple of words used second hand to describe the setting by people who also don't know much of anything about it, but who made some very superficial (and probably bad, since they directly contradict stuff that was said clearly in the presentation) judgement calls.

But, like I said, you wanna pursue that, go ahead.  But it's clearly an insubstantial train of thought.  Pun intended.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 26, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> The original post claimed that the setting had tech that was no higher than the mediaeval period. It has trains, which weren't around in that period. Therefore, they're talking crap.
> 
> Now, what's so hard to understand there? *




Just out of curiosity, NickTheLemming, could you list for us the reasons why trains *absolutely could not* be medieval technology?  I have a suspicion that most or all of them will not apply to the trains in this setting.

If they are powered by magic, then they don't need steam engines and the necessary post-medieval technology to build them.

If they are levitating by magic, then they don't need rails and the necessary large-scale steel refining and manufacturing processes to create them.

With those two factors gone, the only thing preventing one from making a train is, well...there isn't one, really.  Besides those two things, a train is basically just a bunch of wagons hooked together.  And _wagons_ are certainly medieval technology.  The reason people didn't usually hook multiple wagons together is that they didn't have any reason to - it was easier just to hook the extra horses directly to the second wagon.  If you have an 'engine' (a word used by Shakespeare, I will note) that has the excess power to pull multiple wagons, on the other hand...

Is it the name 'train' (even though that also is a perfectly fine medieval word?)  Would you be happier if they called it a 'lightning caravan' instead?

J


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jul 26, 2003)

*Count me (proudly) amongst the Whiners!*

I never said this setting will suck.  I'd say it actually looks kinda neat, if appearing to owe a lot to sources mentioned previously.  

My problem, and the reason I am unfortunately prejudiced against this book, is that as a Setting Search entrant, I was told in the submission requirements, as well as several times by WotC employees via forums, that they were looking for some flavor of medieval fantasy.  I worked very hard to stay within those strict parameters, all the while thinking to myself, "Why does WotC want YET another medieval fantasy setting?".  But I pressed ahead, and turned in something that appeared to be a standard-issue fantasy world, but had what I felt were some interesting things going on under the surface.  DMs could have a field day with the premise, but to the PCs it would appear to be "just another fantasy world".  I didn't like the stringent limits the submission guidelines put on my writing, but I found my way of having my cake and eating it too.

Well, it turns out that they didn't want another medieval fantasy setting after all.  It turns out they wanted flying ships, vast cities, hovertrains, and dino-riders.  That's their right to publish whatever they want, but it leaves a very sour taste in my mouth that they didn't just open up the submission parameters to include things like that.  By their very admission, this setting was nothing like the other 11,000 entries.  Did this Baker guy know something the other 11,000 of us didn't know?  Did he find the magic internet chat forum where whoever was in charge of this Setting Search debacle said "Nothing screams 'medieval' to me like flying trains" and ran with it?

I hope this doesn't come across as sour grapes.  I'm sure this is going to be very well done.  Having seen some of Morningstar, I know that there were losing entries better than mine, so Mr. Baker gets the benefit of the doubt.  I'm P.O.'d at WotC for misrepresenting themselves.


----------



## Anubis the Doomseer (Jul 26, 2003)

d4 said:
			
		

> *i have to agree with Nick here. it doesn't matter whether the train runs by a technological steam engine or if it draws energy from a bound fire elemental. it's still a train.
> 
> trains imply a certain level of organization and civilization that (for the most part) exceeds the standard pseudo-medieval / feudal mindset that pervades core D&D. *




Considering a simple cure light wounds, let alone fireball, flying monsters and expensive (but safe) resurrection also reduces the pseudo-medieval reality of D&D to pure ridicule I think trains fit in nicely.

Cure light wounds - proof of the existance of divinity, no medicine, no atheism

Fireball - the gunpowder of the D&D, vast reduction in the need for mass armies of poorly trained soldiers.

Flying monsters - throw out all architecture based on two-dimensional conflict.  Castles cease to exist.

Resurrection - complete break down of feudal inheritance, and therfore feudal society

And last but not least: the existance of freelancing PC heroes who, within a year of wandering about, have enough money and magical might to destroy large sections of the aristocracy, instant creation of the middle class which destroys the fabric of medieval life.

- Ma'at


----------



## Maggan (Jul 26, 2003)

*Comments from Keith Baker*

At the end of the comments at Gaming Report, Keith Baker makes some comments of his own:

http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=9464&mode=thread&order=0

It's the one titled "Jump to conclusions much?"

The hilarious bit is that there are people accusing him and Rich Baker being relatives, and that that is the reason this setting won!

Or is it hilarious? On second thoughts, it's kinda sad.

If Keith Baker is reading this, I want to just say that I think it sounds interesting and that I will look at it before I make my purchasing decision.

Cheers!

M.


----------



## Aeolius (Jul 26, 2003)

d4 said:
			
		

> * trains imply a certain level of organization and civilization that (for the most part) exceeds the standard pseudo-medieval / feudal mindset that pervades core D&D. *




   And a gnome submersible powered by a captured water elemental would be what, then?   

  Me, I'm sticking with Greyhawk. 'Nuf said.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

*Re: Count me (proudly) amongst the Whiners!*



			
				Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *I'm P.O.'d at WotC for misrepresenting themselves. *



They didn't misrepresent themselves.  You simply didn't understand what they were looking for.  I don't find this setting at all incompatible with what they asked for, and I was hanging on their every word about what they wanted, having submitted three entries myself.


----------



## Dismas (Jul 26, 2003)

*Re: Count me (proudly) amongst the Whiners!*



			
				Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *My problem, and the reason I am unfortunately prejudiced against this book, is that as a Setting Search entrant, I was told in the submission requirements, well as several times by WotC employees via forums, that they were looking for some flavor of medieval fantasy.   *




The submission requirements, which I have posted early in this thread and is the official invitation, just mentions a fantasy setting, nothing about medieval, anything else mentioned should have been taken a hersay. Still they say that hindsight is 20/20.


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jul 26, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Just out of curiosity, NickTheLemming, could you list for us the reasons why trains absolutely could not be medieval technology?  I have a suspicion that most or all of them will not apply to the trains in this setting.
> 
> ...




Umm.

Take a look at the picture.  That thing has a frickin' cowcather on the front!  If it can fly over cows, and doesn't need rails, why would you need a cowcatcher?

This thing does not look like some example of divergent evolution.  It doesn't look like something an enterprising mage with no conception of what a train looks like would cook up off the top of his head.  It doesn't look like some wagons lashed together.  It looks like a frickin' steam locomotive jumped tracks and stayed in the air.  

I agree that a magical society could conceive of some inventions that might mirror our technological society.  But the locomotive as we know it happened here for a reason.  To say that there's flying trains without a really compelling reason not to just have flying freighters or a big-ass flying carpet or packing crates with wings on them or anything else that might have been imagined by real honest-to-God medieval people smacks to me of a writer just looking to throw in anything kewl without giving a thought to its origin.

EDIT: I'm willing to concede, however, that this might just be the fault of WotC's art department, and somewhere, Mr. Baker is saying to himself "What's with the cowcatcher?"


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 26, 2003)

*Re: Comments from Keith Baker*



			
				Maggan said:
			
		

> *The hilarious bit is that there are people accusing him and Rich Baker being relatives, and that that is the reason this setting won!
> 
> Or is it hilarious? On second thoughts, it's kinda sad.
> 
> ...




I think its pathetic and rude. And I would assume the reason a lot of these comments are being made is because it was a 'contest' where a LOT of people submitted...now we're getting the obvious "Well, my setting was better than that!" junk because people are jealous. 

Mr. Baker also mentioned the dinosaur thing is...*GASP!*...only part of a SMALL countries culture. There is way too little info to go around bashing this setting...hell, there's barely enough to SUPPORT it either. I'm simply interested at the moment...still neutral.


----------



## Dismas (Jul 26, 2003)

Aeolius said:
			
		

> *
> 
> And a gnome submersible powered by a captured water elemental would be what, then?
> 
> *




A gnomish Apparatus of Kiawalsh(sp?) knock off


----------



## 2d6 (Jul 26, 2003)

Melkor said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Who said this was going to be the main setting ? Not saying it wasn't said, I'm just wondering if you could link to a quote or press release.
> 
> ...




I can't support that comment with a link, So I will retract it. I agree that the artwork makes things a little easier, I hope they continue to support FR and not leave it to rot like GH.


----------



## Maggan (Jul 26, 2003)

*The writing is in the book*



			
				Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *
> 
> To say that there's flying trains without a really compelling reason not to just have flying freighters or a big-ass flying carpet or packing crates with wings on them or anything else that might have been imagined by real honest-to-God medieval people smacks to me of a writer just looking to throw in anything kewl without giving a thought to its origin. *




Well, since we haven't actually seen any writing about the setting apart from ad copy from blurry images on the net, I think it's a bit premature to pass judgement on the writer's intentions with the "lightning rail".

And there are several reasons to have some sort of catcher on a vehicle, apart from cows. Flying stuff, or maybe the trees are two miles high and they need to fly through the jungle, or  some other reason. Ramming other vehicles maybe?

Anyways, the setting reminds me of the swedish produced Chronopia setting. And the critiscisms are very similar as well. It seems to be a very touchy subject, flying boats and magical flying land vehicles, and pervasive magic use in the society. Doesn't feel very medievial to me, but hey, to me it's more important that it feels like fantasy.

It's very different from what I was writing on for the setting search (but didn't submit), and that feels great! I also got hung up on the "should feel like Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms" talk... 

Cheers!

Maggan


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 26, 2003)

Since there's been a lot of confusion, let me clarify.  To my knowledge, nobody ever said the setting should be medieval.

Zulkir, in the huge Q&A thread about the setting search when it was ongoing, said they weren't really looking for a "tech level" above medieval, although if the setting were good enough, that wasn't a hard and fast rule, just a guideline, so it could potentially be disregarded.  At the seminar, apparently, Bill Slavisek stated that the technology of Eberron was also medieval, but that the world was very different from traditional, as well as very high magic, including a number of magical constructs of various types.

I have yet to see anything that would give the lie to either of those statements.


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jul 26, 2003)

*Re: Re: Count me (proudly) amongst the Whiners!*



			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> They didn't misrepresent themselves.  You simply didn't understand what they were looking for.  I don't find this setting at all incompatible with what they asked for, and I was hanging on their every word about what they wanted, having submitted three entries myself. *




They said in the submission guidelines quoted above and several times on forums that they wanted something that had the flavor of Dragonlance, FR, and Greyhawk.  At first I thought this was ridiculous, but I came to understand that WotC and TSR made their bones in standard fantasy, and that still represents the largest chunk of the market.  While I thought it might spread them a little too thin, I understand the corporate mentality that says go with the proven winner, rather than stick your neck out.

Now, judging from what I've seen so far, you can a lot of things about this setting, but "If you like Greyhawk, you'll LOVE Eberron!" doesn't appear to be one of them.

It now appears (given some of the rhetoric bandied around on these boards and others) that their target market, namely people who like to play "standard fantasy", do not, in fact, want to play something that looks like Arcanum D20.  It seems like WotC reversed their mentality halfway through the setting search.  I'm not saying they're wrong to pick what might very well be the best setting in the contest, just that they shouldn't have said they wanted vanilla for months, wait until everyone entered, and then say they wanted chocolate after all.


----------



## Ranes (Jul 26, 2003)

> I love the smell of lame conclusions in the morning. It smells like...well, gamers, I guess.



_drnuncheon_

Spectacular Jump (to conclusion) modifiers abound, to paraphrase another poster who is wittier than I.

I've got the FRCS (and you thought it was just the way I walked). I purchased the book only for reference purposes but, if nothing else, it's a triumph of rpg book production (specifically, I am referring to the book's aesthetic impact).

I've examined and read excerpts from Ghostwalk, Ravenloft, Kalamar and decided against buying them, purely a matter of personal taste, obviously.

Skyrealms of Jorune, Tekumel, beautiful, rare things they are; captivating, neither hackneyed nor contrived...

Where was I? When this setting comes out, I'll decide whether or not to purchase it by looking through it and reading parts of it. Call my approach radical.

Until then, congratulations to the winner on his originality and good luck to everyone involved in its development.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 26, 2003)

Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *Take a look at the picture.  That thing has a frickin' cowcather on the front!  If it can fly over cows, and doesn't need rails, why would you need a cowcatcher?*




Obviously you know more about this train than we do, since you seem to know that it can fly over cows and that it doesn't need rails.  Care to fill the rest of us in?  Or are you just joining the rest of the jumpers?

We don't know how high the "lightning train" can fly.  If it hovers two feet off the ground, then cows may indeed be a problem even if it doesn't need rails - turning too quickly might cause it to jackknife and wreck.  Or maybe it has to travel along naturally occurring ley lines.  We don't know from the picture, do we?



			
				Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *But the locomotive as we know it happened here for a reason.  To say that there's flying trains without a really compelling reason not to just have flying freighters*




Look at the page before.  There _are_ flying freighters.

J


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jul 26, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Obviously you know more about this train than we do, since you seem to know that it can fly over cows and that it doesn't need rails.  Care to fill the rest of us in?  Or are you just joining the rest of the jumpers?
> 
> We don't know how high the "lightning train" can fly.  If it hovers two feet off the ground, then cows may indeed be a problem even if it doesn't need rails - turning too quickly might cause it to jackknife and wreck.  Or maybe it has to travel along naturally occurring ley lines.  We don't know from the picture, do we?*




It was my attempt at a comical observation, but let's get geeky anyway.  Let's assume this train is about the same size as a train from the early part of the 20th century, which the design seems to emulate.  Let's say, such a train is about 10-12 feet tall.  Given that scale, that train appears to be 5-6 feet off the ground.  Seems like that'd be enough of a clearance for your average holstein, and anyway you wouldn't want that nasty-looking cowcatcher hitting old Bessie mid-section, would you?  That'd be a b***h to clean off.



			
				drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Look at the page before.  There are flying freighters.
> 
> J *




I saw it.  So what would you need a train for then?  Necessity is the mother of invention.  Zappa, too.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jul 26, 2003)

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clark

But I suppose the opposite is true. Any magic is indistinguishable from sufficiently advanced technology. I can see where some people are coming from. Personally, I don't like technology in my games, and whether a train is powered by magic or powered by steam makes little difference to me. I don't know, whenever a friend of mine tells me about his Sunday night games where his gnome bought himself a flying car, I can't help but groan and tell him I don't really want to hear about it.

I know there's a market for this. I know several people who might start playing D&D to play this setting, and I like that. I hope it brings people to D&D who previously didn't play, because I think D&D has grown into a very good game that many people sell short because of previous incarnations (read 2nd edition).

I have to say that its good that this setting isn't some cookie cutter of a previously released campaign setting, because it might open the doors to other settings that I will be more interested in if it does well. So good luck to WotC in thier endevours.


----------



## Maggan (Jul 26, 2003)

*Trains, planes and automobiles*



			
				Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I saw it.  So what would you need a train for then?  Necessity is the mother of invention.  Zappa, too. *




Well, maybe the lightning rail is cheaper? More reliable but only able to fly six feet off the ground? Or belongs to a culture without access to the flying freighters? Or ancient artefacts that have been made obsolete by the flying freighters, but since the freighters were invented just a year ago, most people haven't been able to upgrade yet?

We have trains, planes and automobiles in our world, why shouldn't a fantasy world be able to contain the concept of lightning rails and flying freighters at the same time? It's not as if one idea excludes the other.

For me, it's gonna be hard to shake of the Dinotopia meets Falkensteing image, at least until I get more info than what's currently available.

Cheers!

M.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 26, 2003)

I asked Bill Slaviscek two questions before the D&D Q&A today about Ebberon...I'm paraphrasing his answers:

Q:  Do the dinosaurs play a significant role?

A:  They have their place, but they're not every place.

Q:  Is this setting steampunk...and what do you consider steampunk anyway?

A:  No it's not.  Steampunk involves mechnical technology, and Eberron is a magical world with medieval technology.

So maybe that helps clear things up a little, maybe not.  WOTC was smart enough not to do a real Q&A on Eberron today; James Wyatt commented that they can't answer our questions anyway so there wasn't much point.  This was a smart move, IMO, compared to yesterday:  If it's a secret, don't talk about it.

The other thing I remember from yesterday's seminar is that James Wyatt mentioned that there is a pantheon of deities, but there isn't as much divine intervention as in some worlds like the Forgotten Realms.  

Additionally I remember a comment about an effort to make the world so that there are lots of stories going on, and so that the world is not dominated by central campaign events.  So there will be lots of things going on in different parts of the world, like in the Forgotten Realms ("there are a thousand stories in the naked city"), rather than one or two really big campaign events like with the various cataclysms and wars in Dragonlance.  

They also plan on a line of novels that will come out shortly after the campaign.  I noticed an "Eberron novel outline" document on Bill S.'s hard drive....  

I got the feeling that they are making an effort to keep the novels from causing upheavals in the campaign setting, but I can't remember a specific comment on that.

That's probably all I can remember on Eberron from the couple of seminars I went to, sorry if I forgot anything or wasn't clear on something.  (runs off to play games and eat...)


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 26, 2003)

Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *Given that scale, that train appears to be 5-6 feet off the ground.  Seems like that'd be enough of a clearance for your average holstein, and anyway you wouldn't want that nasty-looking cowcatcher hitting old Bessie mid-section, would you?  That'd be a b***h to clean off.*




Maybe it's for something bigger than a cow (a dinosaur catcher?).  Maybe the cows fly.  Maybe the train is only 8 ft tall and hovers 2 ft off the ground.  Maybe it's a toy train.  Maybe it's made of Nerf (tm). Maybe they *really hate* cows.  Maybe it's necessary to collect the harmonic radiance of the ley line that the train travels on (via 'pyramid power') to power the rest of the train. Maybe it's an airfoil to keep the front of the train from rising too high and 'derailing'.  Maybe it's a dueling weapon.  Maybe it roasts marshmallows. Maybe the same guy who did the 'leather and spike' fetish gear for 3e got to the trains of Eberron too.  Maybe the artist tried it _without_ the cowcatcher and it looked even more modern and they decided that people would complain about it not only being a train but being a modern train.

(BTW, going over the picture again - if you're listening, NickTheLemming - I don't see the word "train".  Above the 'train' it says 'Booked passage through Wraxat and <unreadable> on the Lightning Rail.'  The caption to the left is talking about hairstyles and has nothing to do with the 'train'.)



			
				Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *I saw it.  So what would you need a train for then?  Necessity is the mother of invention.  Zappa, too. *




Yeah, why would any society have both air travel and land travel?  That's stupid, completely unbelievable, and utterly unrealistic.  WOTC should be dragged out behind the building and shot for making such a DUMB decision.  

J


----------



## s/LaSH (Jul 27, 2003)

Y'know, I've been playing in a rather unusual D&D world recently...

Gunpowder has been known for a thousand years. One theocratic empire uses blades with molecule-thin edges in its quest for world domination. There's a mechanical timepiece eight stories tall, with little mechanical men who come out every hour and announce the time. Atomic theory is old news. Heck, at one point a wise man built energy weapons to defend a city, but they didn't catch on for some reason. Way further out than Eberron, isn't it?

It's *twelfth-century Europe*.

(Actual sources: China. Aztec obsidian blades. China again (centuries beforehand, too). The rest is Greece (before even gunpowder, I think).)

The Incas didn't need steam engines (heck, they didn't even need the wheel!) to create a highly logistical empire of awesome size, at the exact same time that D&D is supposedly set in. Llama trains aren't exactly the same thing, but give the Inca decent technology (metallurgy and the wheel) and guess what they'd do with it? Technology and culture doesn't have to follow the Western European path, folks.

Eberron looks pretty cool to me, although I'll reserve judgement until I see more. I suspect there may be ideas to mine...

Does that flying ship have guns, or are they just structural supports like you'd see on any late Dark Age woodwork?

One final note: Wasn't this setting homebrewed *fifteen years ago*? (Please don't quote me on that, I don't know where I read it.) Maybe it's been retooled to seem more cohesive, I don't know. But I'm going to bet that this is pretty cool, rather than "OMG R0bit dinasaurs roxxorz!!1"


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 27, 2003)

s/LaSH said:
			
		

> *
> 
> One final note: Wasn't this setting homebrewed fifteen years ago? (Please don't quote me on that, I don't know where I read it.) Maybe it's been retooled to seem more cohesive, I don't know. But I'm going to bet that this is pretty cool, rather than "OMG R0bit dinasaurs roxxorz!!1" *




According to Keith Baker, it was not a campaign setting he had been running, but was designed specifically for the setting search.  He did draw on elements from several campaign settings he had run in the past for inspiration.


----------



## rounser (Jul 27, 2003)

> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clark
> 
> But I suppose the opposite is true. Any magic is indistinguishable from sufficiently advanced technology. I can see where some people are coming from. Personally, I don't like technology in my games, and whether a train is powered by magic or powered by steam makes little difference to me.



Exactly.  In fact, technology which is driven by magical forces rather than mechanical forces is even cheesier.  If you must have a train in swords & sorcery fantasy, make it a steam powered one - there's less cheese and suspension of disbelief issues.  

_"I'm off to meet the dinoriders!"  
"How you gonna get there?"  
"I'm gonna ride the magic train!"_

It also opens the door to questions as to why they don't use magic to do this and this and this as well (magical space shuttles, magical a-bombs, magical toasters and computers), and then suspension of disbelief tumbles when the reason is that they don't - just because.  In other words, open that can of worms and all sorts of questions need answering.

But then again, context is important.  We don't know if the magical fueled tech goes any further than trains, or a single nation or culture as is the case with the dinos, which might be forgivable....we'll see.


----------



## The It's Man (Jul 27, 2003)

Blimey, just the setting I needed to use this lines...

*Tony*: Where's Daddy?
_he notices the stiff_ Oh! Has he been...? 
*All*: Yes, after breakfast! 
*Tony*: Then he....won't be needing his seat reservation on the 10:15? 
*John*: Exactly! 
*Tony*: As, I suppose, as his eldest son, it must go to me...
*Davis*: Just a minute, Tony. There's a small matter of... murder! 
*Tony*: Oh but surely he just shot himself and then hid the gun! 
*L.P.*: How could anyone shoot himself and then hide the gun without first cancelling his reservation? 
*Tony*: Well, I must dash, or I'll be late for the 10:15! 
*Davis*: I suggest you murdered your father for his seat reservation! 
*Tony*: I may have had the motive, Inspector, but I could not have done it. For I have just arrived from Gillingham on the 8:13, and here is my restaurant car ticket to prove it! 
*Woman*: But the 8:13 doesn't *have* a restaurant car! 
*John*: It's a standing buffet only! 
*Tony*: Did I say the 8:13?--I meant the 7:58 Stopping Train. 
*L.P.*: But the 7:58 arrived at Swindon at 8:19 owing to annual points maintainance at...Winsborough Junction! 
*John*: So how did you make the connection with the 8:13 which left 6 minutes earlier? 
*Tony*: Simple, I caught the 7:16 Forworth Special, arriving at Swindon at 8:09. 
*Woman*: But the 7:16 only stops at Swindon on alternate Thursdays! 
*L.P.*: SURELY you mean the Holiday-Maker Special! 
*Tony*: Oh yes!, how daft of me!, of course, I came on the Holiday-Maker Special, calling at Bedforth, Comer, Bendetton, Sutton, Wallingham and Gillingham. 
*Davis*: THAT'S Sundays Only! 


*Tony*: DAMN!--Alright!, I confess. I did it, I killed him for his reservation! But you won't take me alive!!!! I'm going to throw myself on the 10:12 from Reading! 
*John*: Don't be a fool, Tony! Don't do it!...the 10:12 has the new narrow- traction bogeys!, you wouldn't stand a chance! 
*Tony*: Exactly!


----------



## jasamcarl (Jul 27, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> Exactly.  In fact, technology which is driven by magical forces rather than mechanical forces is even cheesier.  If you must have a train in swords & sorcery fantasy, make it a steam powered one - there's less cheese and suspension of disbelief issues.
> 
> "I'm off to meet the dinoriders!"
> ...




Of course, I could ask why, given the magic available in DND now, I can't do this and this and this. Whey are farms not irrigated by portals from the elemental plane of water? In fact, why is magic not being used as tech? The answer? A fantastical history simply says its not so. Face it, suspencion of disbelief is not the cornerstone for the Fantasy genre or DnD in particular. The appeal comes from evoking images in interesting way, not stringing them together in some dry, rule-based, reductionist attempt at 'reason'. Its a postmodern genre, get over it!!


----------



## rounser (Jul 27, 2003)

> Of course, I could ask why, given the magic available in DND now, I can't do this and this and this. Whey are farms not irrigated by portals from the elemental plane of water? In fact, why is magic not being used as tech? The answer? A fantastical history simply says its not so. Face it, suspencion of disbelief is not the cornerstone for the Fantasy genre or DnD in particular.



Actually, I was thinking along those very lines when I wrote that.  The difference is that a magical train or magical gun doesn't automatically follow the genre idioms of sword & sorcery fantasy, whereas a flying carpet or magical sword does.  We're willing to accept that wizards don't revolutionise agriculture in a faux-medieval S&S fantasy world for the same reason that we're willing to accept that James Bond's gadgets always suit the situations he's going to get into perfectly - it doesn't make sense, but it's in-genre, and therefore acceptable in terms of suspending disbelief if we understand that genre.

A flying carpet, with it's associations to magic and mythological basis, is accepted as genre correct material, if borrowing from Arabian Nights to a large degree.  Magical trains cannot draw on any such mythological resonance to counteract the technological anachronisms they suggest, and therefore challenge suspension of disbelief under the expectations and norms associated with swords & sorcery fantasy unless the context is clever enough to dictate otherwise.  It could well be - we haven't seen said context.


----------



## Kesh (Jul 27, 2003)

Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *
> 
> It was my attempt at a comical observation, but let's get geeky anyway.  Let's assume this train is about the same size as a train from the early part of the 20th century, which the design seems to emulate.  Let's say, such a train is about 10-12 feet tall.  Given that scale, that train appears to be 5-6 feet off the ground.  Seems like that'd be enough of a clearance for your average holstein, and anyway you wouldn't want that nasty-looking cowcatcher hitting old Bessie mid-section, would you?  That'd be a b***h to clean off.*




So, it's a dinosaur-catcher instead. 

{Edit} Darn you, drnuncheon! I missed your comment the first time.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 27, 2003)

What I find interesting about this setting, seems to be what is turning a lot of people off...

There have been constant threads about "If magic is so powerful and there's so many mages, then why doesn't [insert something more modern here] exist/happen/etc?" This setting seems to be taking that, and DOING it. I find that it doesn't hurt the suspension of disbelief, but HELPS it. Why? Because think of it this way.

This is extremely high magic from what we know. That means lots of powerful mages etc. Why WOULDN'T something be done to make travel faster? Why WOULDN'T something be done to make farming easier? Etc etc etc. I find it stupid NOT to use magic if its that abundant.

Now, that kind of high magic doesn't appeal to everyone, and I personally like low magic much more...but that's mainly because its easier to say WHY something doesn't happen since magic isn't so common.


----------



## rounser (Jul 27, 2003)

> There have been constant threads about "If magic is so powerful and there's so many mages, then why doesn't [insert something more modern here] exist/happen/etc?" This setting seems to be taking that, and DOING it. I find that it doesn't hurt the suspension of disbelief, but HELPS it. Why? Because think of it this way.



Can't say I've noticed the "constant threads" that you're referring to, but I will comment on why I disagree with your assertion.  It's because, at it's heart, D&D is trying to simulate a genre.  Sometimes it fails (paladins and assassins casting spells etc.) or exposes nonsense parts of fantasy (why don't monsters destroy towns, why not use magical lighting everywhere etc.).

But I think it is a huge mistake to take that as a reason to put the cart in front of the horse, and say that because our simulation sucks in some ways or exposes nonsenses in S&S fantasy, we should make the setting reflect the nonsenses and failures of our genre and system in order to make it consistent.  It leads to a crazy setting where D&D's idioms _and_ sword & sorcery fantasy's idioms are magnified and dwelled on until the cat chases it's tail, and that which was supposed to be simulated becomes irrelevant as the simulation begins to define it instead.  This leads to designs such as the 3.5 prestige classes that have names and no archetypes, and are there because of a failure in the rules, another example of the cart put in front of the horse.

It's more difficult to ignore these idioms as of 3E because they're spelt out in greater detail (X number of wizards per town, and explicit magic item creation), but they should be _ignored_ if one can, IMO, not put up on a pedestal and have all they imply extended until it defines the setting more than what they were originally trying to simulate does.  

(I hope that's intelligible; I'm having difficulty getting across the concept because it's a little convoluted, but hopefully you can make sense of it.)


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 27, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> (I hope that's intelligible; I'm having difficulty getting across the concept because it's a little convoluted, but hopefully you can make sense of it.) *




I see what you mean, and I don't completely disagree at all. Its just that the fact that this setting is taking a turn towards the "What if..." rather than ignoring it, is what interests me. I'm not really for or against it yet...but I'm definatly interested.


----------



## rounser (Jul 27, 2003)

> . Its just that the fact that this setting is taking a turn towards the "What if..." rather than ignoring it, is what interests me.



You're not alone.  I believe Monte Cook's Ptolus setting is partially the result of such logical extension of D&D idiosyncracies as well.


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jul 27, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> Maybe it's necessary to collect the harmonic radiance of the ley line that the train travels on (via 'pyramid power') to power the rest of the train. *




I hope that's not how it works.  Kevin Siembieda will throw a hissy.  You do not want to see a grown-up game designer throw a hissy.  It ain't pretty.



			
				drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> Maybe it's a dueling weapon. J *




I take it all back.  If Eberron has the long-awaited rules for train duelling, it just became a must-buy!


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 27, 2003)

Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I hope that's not how it works.  Kevin Siembieda will throw a hissy.  You do not want to see a grown-up game designer throw a hissy.  It ain't pretty. *




Because we all know that Kevin Siembieda invented ley lines, pyramid power, and the Internet.

Maybe it's WOTC's vengeance for The Primal Order?  

J


----------



## Gellion (Jul 27, 2003)

I dont see why everybody has to analyze things so much, cant Fantasy just be Fantasy.  It doesnt have to have an explaination for every single little thing in the world.


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jul 27, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Because we all know that Kevin Siembieda invented ley lines, pyramid power, and the Internet.
> J *




Actually, Rifts: New West has hovering trains that ride ley lines.  Eerie, huh?  We've all tapped into the Hack Game Designer Collective Unconscious!


----------



## 2d6 (Jul 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by Tarrasque Wrangler
> 
> 
> I hope that's not how it works. Kevin Siembieda will throw a hissy. You do not want to see a grown-up game designer throw a hissy. It ain't pretty.




I believe we have sunk to yet a new low


----------



## Goobermunch (Jul 27, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> No, it's a train. If in doubt, look at the words next to the picture. It says "train".
> 
> Nick the Lemming *




Pull your tongue out of your cheek, troll!

I've you're just a lurker, I apologize.  But you've only got 11 prior posts, and your name suggests that you are, in fact, mocking those who, in their lemming like way, have jumped on the anti-Eberron bandwagon.

I'll look at your comments in that light, since it makes me feel better about human nature.

--G


----------



## William Ronald (Jul 27, 2003)

Maybe it's because I am active in a  homebrew campaign, but Eberron does not really cry out as a must have purchase ... yet.

The initial publicity seems to be handled a bit badly.  We still do not know WHAT the basic concept of the world is yet.  Is it a dark setting with swashbuckling heroes, high magic, and an area with dinosaurs? Apparently at least some of this is true.  However, despite some fairly decent artwork, I still don't see why this setting is a "must-have" purchase.  It may well be a good setting.  Or a bad one.  I really don't have much information to make an informed decision.  Just impressions.

It is true that magic in D&D games has been used for such things as portals, flying carpets, and flying ships.  I think the train concept just seems a bit odd, but the questions remain as to WHY somethings are the way that they are in Eberron.

Also, I remember that there was a strong impression that the technology level  for setting submissions would be basically medieval.   Maybe Eberron has medieval technology with a few twists.  Most settings have a few areas or items that seem to defy many fantasy conventions.  Of course, there is a reason why such things exist.

Perhaps the Dragon magazine article next month will give a clearer indication about the true nature of Eberron.  For the moment, I tend to be somewhat doubtful that Eberron will catch on.


----------



## rounser (Jul 27, 2003)

> I take it all back. If Eberron has the long-awaited rules for train duelling, it just became a must-buy!



Not Eberron, but you've given me an idea...

*Steamduel*
*Proposal*
A post-apocalyptic world of darkness.  A world of fear, where only the strong survive.  But most of all, a world of railways, and the engineers who ride them.

Come to the future of D&D, where chaotic neutral undead half-dragon anarcho-gothic-punk necro-engineers swing chains and cast spells at each other from spikey steel engines on concurrent tracks. A world where the desperate survive only by laying rail for the demon tycoons in their endless struggle to monopolise freight and passenger transit to and from the Abyss.  A world where men kill for coal, and the only good cargo is dead cargo.

And remember -
The end of the line might come much sooner than you think.


----------



## William Ronald (Jul 27, 2003)

I think we need to tone down the debate a little.  Most of the moderators are away, so let's try to keep the discussion civil.

You may love Eberron from what you have seen.  You may hate it.  You may be somewat skeptical, or even indifferent.  However, I think some of the debate in this thread is getting a little too personal.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Goobermunch said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Actually Emiricol, I was simply showing that the gaming report preview is subject to more than one valid interpretation.  You read it and fell that Eberron will suck.  I read it and think that Eberron sounds intriguing.  That's all.
> 
> --G *




Actually, I read it and said, "WotC PR is horrid, and this sounds stupid but I'll check it out when it comes out".  You are the one who said I said "it sucks, knee-jerk, blah blah blah blah [insert judgements here]"


----------



## Qlippoth (Jul 27, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Maybe it's for something bigger than a cow (a dinosaur catcher?).  Maybe the cows fly.  Maybe the train is only 8 ft tall and hovers 2 ft off the ground.  Maybe it's a toy train.  Maybe it's made of Nerf (tm). Maybe they really hate cows. *





			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *
> Steamduel
> Proposal
> A post-apocalyptic world of darkness. A world of fear, where only the strong survive. But most of all, a world of railways, and the engineers who ride them.
> ...



How's about: *Steamduel:  No Cows*?


----------



## Gellion (Jul 27, 2003)

Cant we all just get along?


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> ...especially when Midnight wasn't even sent in to WOTC.
> 
> ...




Two people said that, one (me) as a question.  It hasn't been mentioned in pages on this thread.

EDIT: And the misconception was quickly corrected.  What this has to do with whether this setting "suxxors" or "ru|3z" I'll never know.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> *
> WotC didn't "pass" on Midnight.  It wasn't part of the competition.  It was a completely separate setting created by FFG.
> 
> And it was already in production before the setting contest even started, IIRC.
> ...




Yeah, this has only been cleared up about 10 times already


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

jasamcarl said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Uh, magical devices that serve the same function of trains. But then, you probably think the spell Teleport was inspired by Star Trek. *




IMHO, if the picture looks like a train, has a caption that says "train", and functions like a train... It's a train.


----------



## rounser (Jul 27, 2003)

> How's about : Steamduel: No Cows?



Perfect.  Brand management will love it.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

Bran Blackbyrd said:
			
		

> *If you can't summon up enough imagination to explain why something train-like is hovering around in a high-magic medieval fantasy world, then maybe chess is more your speed.
> The last time I checked, people who played RPGs had a little bit more imagination. *




Awe, man!  I wasn't part of that study!  That blows.  Did the participants get t-shirts?


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: Re: Count me (proudly) amongst the Whiners!*



			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> They didn't misrepresent themselves.  You simply didn't understand what they were looking for.  I don't find this setting at all incompatible with what they asked for, and I was hanging on their every word about what they wanted, having submitted three entries myself. *




Dude, I wish I'd submitted Jorune.  Only everything was run by _magic_ !  Whoah, dude.  Trippy, maaaan.  Hee hee hee!  What?


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Maybe it's for something bigger than a cow (a dinosaur catcher?).  *




Very good point.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 27, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> IMHO, if the picture looks like a train, has a caption that says "train", and functions like a train... It's a train. *




Can someone please point out this mysterious 'train' caption again? I looked and I can't find it. 

J


----------



## 2d6 (Jul 27, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> IMHO, if the picture looks like a train, has a caption that says "train", and functions like a train... It's a train. *




isn't this meta-gaming?  I mean your character doesn't know it's a train right? this is midieval times after all.


----------



## rounser (Jul 27, 2003)

"Lightning Rail" sounds more like "Monorail" to me.


----------



## Ycore Rixle (Jul 27, 2003)

I was at the Q&A yesterday but arrived after the slideshow.  I did pick up the flyer.

From the flyer and the answers at the Q&A, I have the impression that this could be a very cool world.  I plan on looking at the book when it comes out and making my purchase decision then.

Two things that worry me:

1. As already pointed out, the caption doesn't call the train a train.  It calls it a Lightning Rail.  However, there aren't any rails.  This worries me, but it is the kind of oversight that I can easily see corrected in the final version.  Also, maybe there are rails that just aren't pictured.  There is also the question: mechanical technology developed trains - why would magical technology develop the (almost) exact same solution to the travel and transport problem?  In other words, I would like to see a magical travel and transport system that looks different from a train that is floating above a line of pylons.

2. Action points. I like new mechanics when they introduce something new to the game, but to me the Action Points of D20 Modern can easily be duplicated in D&D by spells, feats, or domain powers (eg Luck domain).  Now, I didn't see anything myself about Action Points, I only read it on gamingreport.com, so maybe they aren't really in there.

Three things I like:

1.  I like magic technology.  It makes sense to me, and I am really looking forward to seeing some Raise Dead hospitals (finally).

2. I like the fact that it is different.  I like the fact that it is adult and not a toned down Scrappy Doo setting developed in a misguided attempt to recruit more youth. I like the somewhat dark tone, different from other WOTC settings.  I like the fact there are ruins, there was a war, there are distinct cultures in different lands, and that the masked female elven ambassador pictured has a 'gruesome entourage' (although we don't get to see them).

3. I like the map.  It looks like an interesting continent.

It is far too early to make any conclusions about this setting.  It looks interesting and refreshing, and that is a good enough start for me.

I really hope WOTC has great success with this for the same reason I hope every d20 publisher has great success: I love the game, and I love seeing new products for it.  The more money consumers spend, the more publishers will publish, and the bigger my book collection gets.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 27, 2003)

Ycore Rixle said:
			
		

> *There is also the question: mechanical technology developed trains - why would magical technology develop the (almost) exact same solution to the travel and transport problem?*




Levitate is cheaper to put on an item than fly.  If you can make a bunch of things levitate and attach them to one thing that flies, you are making more efficient use of your magical resources (gp and xp) than you are if you make them all fly individually.

Really, trains make a lot of sense - _if_ you have something that is basically capable of pulling multiple wagons.  You don't get much advantage at all by hooking up several wagons and putting all the horses to pull them on the front end, but if you had something powerful enough to pull a wagon, and had power left over, you'd get an advantage by hooking another wagon on.

J


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

Frankly, if it is a high-magic setting (and has the middle class to support it yadda yadda), I can't think of a reason why not to come up with covered, armored, linked wagons.  A wagon train!  But I digress  

However, the fact is that even in our own Real World transporting by ship is the cheapest transit available, and usually most efficient.  Just not the fastest.  So most merchant activity would be via flying boats, not floating trains (or lighting whatevers).

Who would use the trains?  Merchants carrying low volume/high value goods, travellers wealthy enough to take the fast way but not wealthy enough (or not urgent enough) to teleport, and perishable goods, as well as military supply lines.

Too bad that damned article was such a lame duck, and as has been said many times before, too bad WotC has such an inept PR person/department/agency.

So yeah, I can think of a bunch of reasons to have pseudo-industrial age trains in a super-high-magic world.  I can also see how the description given is on the surface NOT my cup of tea. I continue to await publication or a lot more information before making my final judgement, but I'm dubious (as if there was any doubt)


----------



## jasamcarl (Jul 27, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> Can't say I've noticed the "constant threads" that you're referring to, but I will comment on why I disagree with your assertion.  It's because, at it's heart, D&D is trying to simulate a genre.  Sometimes it fails (paladins and assassins casting spells etc.) or exposes nonsense parts of fantasy (why don't monsters destroy towns, why not use magical lighting everywhere etc.).
> 
> But I think it is a huge mistake to take that as a reason to put the cart in front of the horse, and say that because our simulation sucks in some ways or exposes nonsenses in S&S fantasy, we should make the setting reflect the nonsenses and failures of our genre and system in order to make it consistent.  It leads to a crazy setting where D&D's idioms and sword & sorcery fantasy's idioms are magnified and dwelled on until the cat chases it's tail, and that which was supposed to be simulated becomes irrelevant as the simulation begins to define it instead.  This leads to designs such as the 3.5 prestige classes that have names and no archetypes, and are there because of a failure in the rules, another example of the cart put in front of the horse.
> ...




So you are basically saying that any straying from genre would constitute a betrayal of some 'genre' reason unless they went into inane detail to explain why this and why that? 

I have news for you; DND does not simulate fantasy, but merely evokes it. First and foremost it acts as a game with real mechanical rewards costs. But beyond that I would say this; most players and dms don't really give a damn about coherence and details beyond having set rules for aforementioned rewards and costs. The appeal in creating hybrid fantasy (as oppossed to sci-fi settings) is not to justify the coexistence of themes and conventions, but merely to see how they interact. The wierdness and irrational play on genres is what makes such settings popular and truly 'fantastic'. Creating literalist detail and obvious coherence destroys that, and robs readers/players/dms from making up their own minds about how things should be done. Its the inconsistencies of the Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk which make them popular as settings and not merely modular material. This looks to do the same. As long as the setting can maintain this type of mystique while evoking SOMETHING, it will have more going for it than uninspired 'rational' settings like Kingdoms of Kalamar and its ilk.


----------



## rounser (Jul 27, 2003)

> Its the inconsistencies of the Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk which make them popular as settings and not merely modular material.



Okay, this makes no sense to me in the context of what we're discussing.  Variety within the bounds of a genre and blatantly breaking the assumptions of a genre are two different things.  Stretching to gunpowder is one thing (and arguably genre-supportive because it gives pirates their canons, swashbucklers their pistols and tinkers something to blow up, so long as it's kept not too widespread); to trains is another.

Where do FR and GH veer from swords & sorcery fantasy in a widespread manner, jasamcarl?  Neither of them have anything nearly as challenging as a train except in the cracks and certainly not widespread (Murlynd's six-shooters maybe, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks definitely...FR's tanks in one corner of the world that then got completely ignored another).  The nearest widespread comparable use is in Dragonlance with it's Tinker Gnomes and their anachronistic inventions such as TV analogues, but such inventions are kept in check because they're largely impractical and expensive, almost never work, are played for laughs, and are largely considered a rather lame part of that setting.


----------



## beta-ray (Jul 27, 2003)

King_Stannis said:
			
		

> *Dinosaurs and Industrial stuff. Two things that will never see the light of day in my campaign.
> 
> Congrats to the winner for earning the $120,000. Shame on WotC for picking such an odd (but probably well done) world. *




Yeah shame on them! They really should have picked something seen all the time and not well done!


----------



## Bran Blackbyrd (Jul 27, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Awe, man!  I wasn't part of that study!  That blows.  Did the participants get t-shirts? *




I will concede that you are justified in being awed by me.
Unfortunately the participants did not get t-shirts.
The nerf crossbows however were lovely.


----------



## mythusmage (Jul 27, 2003)

BigFreekinGoblinoid said:
			
		

> *Industrial feel AND Dinosaurs?  Doesn't seem to leave much room for Psionics as the speculation went...
> 
> very interesting... *




Ah, the Psychokenetic Velociraptor Construction Worker Prestige Class. Sells the setting for me.


----------



## Maggan (Jul 27, 2003)

*Damn that lame PR!*



			
				Emiricol said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Too bad that damned article was such a lame duck, and as has been said many times before, too bad WotC has such an inept PR person/department/agency.
> *




Yeah, to bad that that lame PR has only generated seven pages of comment in this thread, two in another, a lot of (offensive and aggressive, unfortunately) chatter on GamingReport and at least one four pager on RPG.net.

My mind reels at thought of the effect good PR would have!  

Cheers!

M.


----------



## Staffan (Jul 27, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *Where do FR and GH veer from swords & sorcery fantasy in a widespread manner, jasamcarl?  *



But why would they want to make another setting that's just like FR or GH? They already *have* those. Supporting two settings with only superficial differences makes no sense, because they will appeal to the same people and split up the customer base. Supporting two *different* settings makes more sense.


----------



## Bran Blackbyrd (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: Damn that lame PR!*



			
				Maggan said:
			
		

> *
> My mind reels at thought of the effect good PR would have!
> *




Not much is my guess. The best PR is that which isn't identifiable as PR...


----------



## mythusmage (Jul 27, 2003)

*A Few Thoughts*

"Any sufficienly advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."
---Alan Kellogg

My first thought on reading the precis was, "Keith Baker is a fan of mine. Cool." (Keith, I could use a new iMac, contact me via email so we can work out the details.)

The Athenians of Pericles' time had railroads. They were getting so much silver ore out of their mines they needed a faster way to transport it to the smelter. So they put carts on wooden rails. Later they advanced to hand wrought iron rails. A small scale operation that grew into its final form over the course of centuries.

On the subject of why they don't use magic for tons of modern stuff. I recall a Bill Cosby bit (back from when he did stand-up) titled, "The Chicken Heart That Ate New York City". A parody of and salute to the horror shows on the radio of Bill's childhood. At the end, with the chicken heart headed his way, Bill smears Jello on the living room floor and sets the sofa on fire, just as mom and dad come home from a night out.

To keep this 'relatively' short, dad ends up sprawled on the floor with a broken arm. It comes out (after a bit of questioning) that there's a giant chicken heart on the radio coming. To which dad asks, "Then why don't you turn it off?"

[click]... ...'I never thought of that.

Folks, you're 21st century moderns (I least I think you are.), you have background and knowledge someone from a 16th century fantasy world wouldn't. Folks from such a world aint gonna think of the same sorts of things you would. People, when I was the age a number of you are, Darpa Net was a military secret and long distance phone calls were priced at _dollars_ a minute. Much of what you take as background lore is still unexplored territory to me.

Unless magic is strictly limited, and in a way that cannot be overcome by advances in knowledge and learning, it will change a world in ways that cannot be predicted. Figure out how to make _Levitate_ permanent and variable in strength through a set of controls, and you've got frieght lifts, elevators, transport pallets and what not. (Yes, they were using elevators back in the 16th century to lift heavy loads to the top of construction projects. A labor shortage, thanks to the Black death and other diseases.) A levitating cart would still be as hard to move as a the wheeled version (inertia, you know) but at least you wouldn't have to worry about the dang wheels or lifting the load into the cart in the first place.
(Onto the pallet, yes, but that's a shorter trip.)

I end this with a comment to Emiricol.

It has trains. Good. I like trains. Trains are cool. Moved by ley lines or Iron Golems, fine by me. Dwarfs as Scottish engineers, elves as card sharks, and orcs as marauding injuns, I can get into that. I could get into a stone giant choo-choo with an apatosaurus catcher, and a cloud giant conductor. You don't like trains. Suffer.

Who said you have to like it? You've made your comment, now get on with your life. You don't need to comment on every comment made to refute yours. People disagree with you, get over it.

I expect you'll respond to this. Feel free. I don't expect it to be cogent, well reasoned, much less coherent. All I expect it will do is confirm my opinion of you. So I shall ignore it as being one of Emiricol's empty whines. The day you post a constructive, _informed_ complaint on these boards is a day I shall be most pleasantly surprised. So kvetch and niggle over inconsequential details. I've seen it before, and from professionals; you would have to work at it to achieve the status of rank amateur.



> Fellow Poster: What is the defining feature of the Pyramid Newsgroups?
> 
> Me: Ceaseless nitpicking over inconsequential details to the point the original poster is about ready to tear his hair out.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 27, 2003)

Emiricol said:
			
		

> *However, the fact is that even in our own Real World transporting by ship is the cheapest transit available, and usually most efficient.  Just not the fastest.  So most merchant activity would be via flying boats, not floating trains (or lighting whatevers). *




You're presuming that the ratio of costs between real-world trains and real-world ships is the same or similar as the one between the lightning rail and the flying ship.  What if it's more akin to trains vs airplanes?  Then, the flying ship is faster but more expensive, and the heavy cargo is more likely to go by land.

J


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jul 27, 2003)

Hi all! 

I looked at the photos and read the scant details at Gaming Report and was amazed at some of the downright rude; pessimistic and ignorant comments that followed.

I must say I was shocked and disappointed that ENWorlds discussion continued in a similar fashion from some quarters.

I hope Keith Bakers comments have gone some way to alleviate the rampant misguided speculation.

From what little we have been told about the setting I am certainly interested to see more. I also think the look of the teaser material is great; thats something I hope they continue with for the core rulebooks (obviously with standardized text and so forth for the main body of information).

Keep your chin up Keith. Don't let the b*****ds get you down. He who laughs last...


----------



## Wisdom Penalty (Jul 27, 2003)

Everything thing U.K. just said.

W.P.


----------



## jasamcarl (Jul 27, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> Okay, this makes no sense to me in the context of what we're discussing.  Variety within the bounds of a genre and blatantly breaking the assumptions of a genre are two different things.  Stretching to gunpowder is one thing (and arguably genre-supportive because it gives pirates their canons, swashbucklers their pistols and tinkers something to blow up, so long as it's kept not too widespread); to trains is another.
> 
> Where do FR and GH veer from swords & sorcery fantasy in a widespread manner, jasamcarl?  Neither of them have anything nearly as challenging as a train except in the cracks and certainly not widespread (Murlynd's six-shooters maybe, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks definitely...FR's tanks in one corner of the world that then got completely ignored another).  The nearest widespread comparable use is in Dragonlance with it's Tinker Gnomes and their anachronistic inventions such as TV analogues, but such inventions are kept in check because they're largely impractical and expensive, almost never work, are played for laughs, and are largely considered a rather lame part of that setting. *




My point is that inconsistincies of any type do not matter. FR and GH were only used as examples of bottom up world building which have unintuitive geography, cultural mixes, etc that are explicitly justified within the text, unlike the pseudo-historical bs you will find in a top-down setting such as KoK.

As to 'genre' consistency, my point was simply that once fantasy became predictable and cliche to the point where you can call upon some standard of 'realism', its no longer fantasy, but just a nerdy pulp excercise.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 27, 2003)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Pull your tongue out of your cheek, troll!
> 
> I've you're just a lurker, I apologize.  But you've only got 11 prior posts, and your name suggests that you are, in fact, mocking those who, in their lemming like way, have jumped on the anti-Eberron bandwagon.*



*

Nope, I've used the name Nick the Lemming for about 5-6 years now. Check google for newsgroup posts under the name, or if you have any new Earthdawn stuff or Eden prods stuff (latest Con X or the Hack! cardgame), you should find me under playtesters. I just haven't bothered to post here much before. There are certainly other fora where I have been more prolific (See the Harn board in particular, where I'm one of the mods), and email lists in yahoo groups (I'm also a co-mod in the Fading Suns list). No apologies needed though, and no harm done.  

To others who've been talking about "it's magic, that explains everything", then please consider this situation: If everyone in the setting drove cars, carried cell phones, flew in planes, had computers, had travelled into space and landed on the moon, watched tv incessantly, and did everything else that we do today, but the writer of the setting said that it was magic rather than electricity that powered everything in tiny cells, would you say that you were in a setting with mediaeval level tech, or a modern day setting with a twist?

Nick the Lemming*


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: Damn that lame PR!*



			
				Maggan said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Yeah, to bad that that lame PR has only generated seven pages of comment in this thread, two in another, a lot of (offensive and aggressive, unfortunately) chatter on GamingReport and at least one four pager on RPG.net.
> 
> ...





Considering how much of the comment has been very negative, I'm not sure about that being a good thing, the phrase about all publicity etc noywithstanding. Let's face it, if you opened up a restaurant and on the opening night got massive reviews everywhere aying how crap it was, you wouldn't be saying how great your PR is, would you?

Nick the Lemming


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 27, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *To others who've been talking about "it's magic, that explains everything", then please consider this situation: If everyone in the setting drove cars, carried cell phones, flew in planes, had computers, had travelled into space and landed on the moon, watched tv incessantly, and did everything else that we do today, but the writer of the setting said that it was magic rather than electricity that powered everything in tiny cells, would you say that you were in a setting with mediaeval level tech, or a modern day setting with a twist?*




On the other hand...

If you reach the moon in a carriage borne aloft by mighty eagles, if your wizards summon spirits that perform their arcane calculations for them, if you fly in mighty galleons borne aloft by powerful spells, if the evil wizard contacts his henchmen through images in crystal spheres...

...then you're pretty obviously in a fantasy setting, aren't you?  Even if they're performing the same functions as the Apollo program, computers, airplanes, and cell phones, they're doing it in a way that is distinctly magical.

Of course, this is getting even more ridiculous as a comparison, since we've seen no evidence of cars, computers, TV, space travel, or cell phones in the new setting.  But hey, since when do facts matter?  I'm beginning to doubt that you even looked at the promo material, since you've been completely wrong about it in the past.

For some reason it doesn't surprise me to learn that you're a Harniac, since this setting appears to be about as different from Harn in its concept and base assumptions as you can get - and for some reason a lot of Harn fans get very defensive about their setting.

J


----------



## WanderingMonster (Jul 27, 2003)

I think this thread has ceased being productive.  Maybe we could all show some restraint and let it die before it (inevitably) gets shut down.   I had some ideas pertaining to the concept of Eberron, but I'll sit on them for a day until things get less personal.


----------



## JoeGKushner (Jul 27, 2003)

Saw the little hand out.

Looked it over.

Not enough information.

Will save comments until book is out.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 27, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> On the other hand...
> 
> If you reach the moon in a carriage borne aloft by mighty eagles, if your wizards summon spirits that perform their arcane calculations for them, if you fly in mighty galleons borne aloft by powerful spells, if the evil wizard contacts his henchmen through images in crystal spheres...*



*

If all of that happened, then I wouldn't have any problem. If however the TV looked like a TV, the cell phone looked like a cell phone, the hover train looked like a hover train....





			Of course, this is getting even more ridiculous as a comparison, since we've seen no evidence of cars, computers, TV, space travel, or cell phones in the new setting.  But hey, since when do facts matter?  I'm beginning to doubt that you even looked at the promo material, since you've been completely wrong about it in the past.
		
Click to expand...



I never claimed that there were cell phones etc - I was using a reductio ad absurdum to show my point. And since I've told people on here and on other fora where to go to see the piccies, the reports etc, so say that I haven't looked at them myself is a little stupid, isn't it?




			For some reason it doesn't surprise me to learn that you're a Harniac, since this setting appears to be about as different from Harn in its concept and base assumptions as you can get - and for some reason a lot of Harn fans get very defensive about their setting.

J
		
Click to expand...


*

Why should I be defensive about Harn? It's a great setting, and cerainly nothing to be defensive about. Why would you pick that one game out though, and ignore my mention of Earthdawn, Fading Suns, Conspiracy X, Hack!, or even some of the other games I have and play - Star Wars, Runequest, Deadlands, Cthulhu, Shatterzone, Atlantean Trilogy, Sovereign Stone, Blood Shadows (Just looking at one pile near me here). Most of these settings are also as far from Harn as you can get, but strangely I don't appear to be dissing them, now do I? Or are you just trolling?

Nick the Lemming


----------



## Myconid Sage (Jul 27, 2003)

Well I think Eberron is split into two groups, the love it or the hate it camps. Not a lot in between! Me, I'll stick to my boring and predictible FR and Greyhawk's pseudo Medieval feel. Because to me that is what DnD is. Eberron is not what I think of as DnD. Perhaps people would have been more warm to it if it didn't have the DnD label?


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 27, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> I never claimed that there were cell phones etc - I was using a reductio ad absurdum to show my point. *




I suppose that depends on what your point is.  If you're trying to make a point about fantasy settings in general, fine - but then again, this discussion is about Eberron in specific, and whether it has a higher than medieval level of technology.  Since we've seen no indications of anything you mention besides the lightning rail, considering the rest of them as an argument is rather worthless, isn't it?



			
				NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *And since I've told people on here and on other fora where to go to see the piccies, the reports etc, so say that I haven't looked at them myself is a little stupid, isn't it? *




You're obviously not looking at the same ones I am.  Where's that 'train' caption again?



			
				NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *Why should I be defensive about Harn?  *




I have no idea, you'd have to tell me. It's just something I've noticed in more than one Harn fan.

J


----------



## Dave Blewer (Jul 27, 2003)

Eberron looks pretty interesting to me...

If I may take this moment to share my particular success story...

My setting proposal Sundered Skies is going to be published
By Pinnacle!

It's not going to be D20, I am writing it for the sublime Savage Worlds , a system that suits my particular playing style much better.

I didn't write Sundered Skies up specifically for the setting search, but until I bought Savage Worlds, it was D20.  

The Skies got a lot of support on this forum for which I am very grateful.

Thanks!


----------



## Maggan (Jul 27, 2003)

*Hamburgers? They serve hamburgers? They suck!*



			
				NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Considering how much of the comment has been very negative, I'm not sure about that being a good thing, the phrase about all publicity etc noywithstanding. Let's face it, if you opened up a restaurant and on the opening night got massive reviews everywhere aying how crap it was, you wouldn't be saying how great your PR is, would you?
> ...




Yeah, but at this time the restaurant hasn't opened yet, has it? It's getting some negative and some positive reponses based on a second hand source claiming they serve hamburgers, and a brochure showing some of the flashy interior.

Which evidently included hamburgers, which means that the restaurant serves bad food, if I am to follow the logic?

So, I think the restaurant has nothing to fear from this, because they can easily explain that hamburgers by themselves does not constitute evidence of a bad cuisine (which seems to be the case here). And most people will find this approach reasonable, which will make it easier to feed out more PR, due to name recognition.

Back to Ebarron.

If the setting, when it is released, receives nothing but bad PR, and reviews that claim it stinks, and is the anti-lord of fantasy because of the inclusion of hi-tech magic items, then it's gonna be difficult for it to shake it. 

But opening night is a year from now, so I wouldn't be too worked up if I was WotC. If I was Keith Baker I would be worked up and feel unjustly treated by some online posters, but WotC... nah! Hopefully they've learned a bit from handling the 3rd edition rollout, and the 3.5e rollout... hopefully.

Cheers!

M.


----------



## Maggan (Jul 27, 2003)

*FR and Greyhawk*



			
				Myconid Sage said:
			
		

> *Well I think Eberron is split into two groups, the love it or the hate it camps. Not a lot in between! Me, I'll stick to my boring and predictible FR and Greyhawk's pseudo Medieval feel. Because to me that is what DnD is. Eberron is not what I think of as DnD. Perhaps people would have been more warm to it if it didn't have the DnD label? *




Possibly, and if they had come out saying "this will replace FR and GH" I would have questioned their sanity, so far I'm with you on the D&D feel of the setting.

But like Staffan pointed out, we will have FR, GH and Eberron, at the same time. So now those who think FR and GH is D&D can play that, and those that think those settings are boring and are looking for something more... different, need not leave the path of WotC to get their gaming fun.

Even though top notch settings are produced by other companies, I think it's nice that WotC supplies something that is not FR or GH for those that don't buy 3rd party stuff/d20. Which as far as I've heard is the overwhelming majority. Sadly enough, cause there are so much good stuff out there that's not WotC.

Cheers

M.


----------



## AdamBank (Jul 27, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *If you reach the moon in a carriage borne aloft by mighty eagles, if your wizards summon spirits that perform their arcane calculations for them, if you fly in mighty galleons borne aloft by powerful spells, if the evil wizard contacts his henchmen through images in crystal spheres...*




I'd play your game in a minute!


----------



## Maraxle (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: Hamburgers? They serve hamburgers? They suck!*



			
				Maggan said:
			
		

> *If I was Keith Baker I would be worked up and feel unjustly treated by some online posters, but WotC... nah!
> *



If I were Keith Baker, I'd be happy that I got $100k regardless of whether the setting sells or not...


----------



## Aitch Eye (Jul 27, 2003)

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> *Keep your chin up Keith. Don't let the b*****ds get you down. He who laughs last...  *




I'll second (or, really, third) this. I'm sure Mr. Baker is willing to answer criticisms of his setting, but it must be frustrating to not be able to counter criticisms of other people's versions of his setting because he can't release information. I still can't work out what he's done to deserve rudeness, outrage, snide dismissal, and lies about his family connections either. Some of the criticisms of WotC have stepped way over the line as well.

If Mr. Baker happens to read this thread (and manages to keep going this far), I just want to let him know that the snippets we've seen have got me really looking forward to seeing the full setting, and that I wish him the best of luck with this.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: Damn that lame PR!*



			
				Maggan said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Yeah, to bad that that lame PR has only generated seven pages of comment in this thread, two in another, a lot of (offensive and aggressive, unfortunately) chatter on GamingReport and at least one four pager on RPG.net.
> 
> ...




Yeah, me too.


----------



## mythusmage (Jul 27, 2003)

I like _The World Builder's Guidebook_. If there turns out to be a close genetic relationship between Rich and Keith Baker I can only account it a good thing. (Genius running in families and all that.)


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> You're presuming that the ratio of costs between real-world trains and real-world ships is the same or similar as the one between the lightning rail and the flying ship.  What if it's more akin to trains vs airplanes?  Then, the flying ship is faster but more expensive, and the heavy cargo is more likely to go by land.
> 
> J *




I could see that, too, where the flying ships take the role of planes.  It just seems that a ship can carry more than the train, but is slower, but again that's comparing it to the real world ship n train.


----------



## Kichwas (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: A Few Thoughts*



			
				mythusmage said:
			
		

> *"Any sufficienly advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."
> ---Alan Kellogg*



This just shows that the author of that quote doesn't know how to think with the non-rational right side of their brain -where magical thinking stems from.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: Re: A Few Thoughts*



			
				arcady said:
			
		

> *This just shows that the author of that quote doesn't know how to think with the non-rational right side of their brain -where magical thinking stems from. *




Why do you say that?  (And why would you?)


----------



## Scorpio (Jul 27, 2003)

Wow-this is a like a Butcher's Convention!...We'll see how this turns out, it *did* have some interesting artwork....in the meantime, I can tell you for sure that one of the 'runner-ups', _Morningstar_ WILL be awesome....
BTW,The name is coincindental!


----------



## Dismas (Jul 27, 2003)

mythusmage said:
			
		

> *I like The World Builder's Guidebook. If there turns out to be a close genetic relationship between Rich and Keith Baker I can only account it a good thing. (Genius running in families and all that.) *




Keith has already put that accusation to bed. He is no realtion to Rich Baker.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 27, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I suppose that depends on what your point is.  If you're trying to make a point about fantasy settings in general, fine - but then again, this discussion is about Eberron in specific, and whether it has a higher than medieval level of technology.  Since we've seen no indications of anything you mention besides the lightning rail, considering the rest of them as an argument is rather worthless, isn't it?*



*

You don' t think that hover trains count as higher than mediaeval tech then? There are also the skyscrapers and it has been described in places as industrial, but the very fact that there are hover trains in the setting tends to suggest something that is not mediaeval, don't you think? Could you please tell me how my argument is worthless? I'd also look up the definition of reductio ad absurdum if I were you, since you don't seem to understand it.




			I have no idea, you'd have to tell me. It's just something I've noticed in more than one Harn fan.

J
		
Click to expand...


*
Well, forgive me for being blunt, but it's you that appears to have the fixation on Harn...

Nick the Lemming


----------



## JeffB (Jul 27, 2003)

Myconid Sage said:
			
		

> *Well I think Eberron is split into two groups, the love it or the hate it camps. Not a lot in between! Me, I'll stick to my boring and predictible FR and Greyhawk's pseudo Medieval feel. Because to me that is what DnD is. Eberron is not what I think of as DnD. Perhaps people would have been more warm to it if it didn't have the DnD label? *




Agreed on all points.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: Hamburgers? They serve hamburgers? They suck!*



			
				Maggan said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Yeah, but at this time the restaurant hasn't opened yet, has it? It's getting some negative and some positive reponses based on a second hand source claiming they serve hamburgers, and a brochure showing some of the flashy interior.
> 
> ...




I think a more apt analogy would be a restaurant that claims it'll be vegetarian, but then has a menu that offers hamburgers. Or one that says it'll have unique dishes like french fries...

Nick the Lemming


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 27, 2003)

Scorpio said:
			
		

> *Wow-this is a like a Butcher's Convention!...We'll see how this turns out, it *did* have some interesting artwork....in the meantime, I can tell you for sure that one of the 'runner-ups', Morningstar WILL be awesome....
> BTW,The name is coincindental!
> *





Do you have any details of Morningstar?

Nick the Lemming


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Jul 27, 2003)

*Re: Re: Hamburgers? They serve hamburgers? They suck!*



			
				NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I think a more apt analogy would be a restaurant that claims it'll be vegetarian, but then has a menu that offers hamburgers. Or one that says it'll have unique dishes like french fries...
> 
> Nick the Lemming *





For the 3087235982735th time, that was from the Gaming Report article.  If a restaurant reviewer says the restaurant has unique dishes like french fries, is that the restaurant's fault?

Besides, if you'd read Keith Baker's comments instead of trolling,  you'd see that he's offering his own unique spin on the french fry.


----------



## Scorpio (Jul 27, 2003)

Hey Nick, 
You can start at Goodman Games' preview at http://www.goodman-games.com/4100preview.php ;
this is a unique setting that brings out the best that the game offers- I've seen hundreds of 'settings' and only a handful have ever caught my attention as really _different_!


----------



## Pants (Jul 27, 2003)

I don't see why people are getting hung up on the 'unique cultures' comment.  They way I interpreted was that the staple races of D&D would have a unique twist to them.  Maybe Dwarves are no longer xenophobic mountain dwellers with Scottish accents and a penchant for ale.  Maybe they're something else.
My point is that passing off our statements and interpretations as fact when we haven't even seen the end result is foolish.  Claiming that 'they lied about the setting' when we know so very little about it is foolish.  Especially when the very people who are making this book have proven some of our hypothesis false.  Personally, I am going to take the creator's word on this over someone's interpretation of a blurry promo picture.
You don't like the way the setting sounds or maybe the basic premise of it doesn't appeal to you?  Fine, I can't make you like it.  Me?  I am just going to wait and see.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Jul 27, 2003)

Never in my life have I found agreed so fully with pants.

Just look at my police record!


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 27, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *You don' t think that hover trains count as higher than mediaeval tech then?*




I guess that depends on how they work, doesn't it?  Is a flying carpet 'higher than medieval tech'?  How about a flying galleon?  If those are OK, then why not a flying wagon, or several flying wagons hooked together?  If those are not OK, why not?



			
				NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *There are also the skyscrapers*




Salisbury Cathedral has a spire 404 feet tall - about 40 stories.  The spire was finished in 1320.  Medieval enough for ya?



			
				NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *and it has been described in places as industrial,*




"a *magically* industrial edge" is what I see.  One could describe Spelljammer as being "magical space exploration", but it was hardly high-tech.

Of course, that's also from a report that said "Strong presence of lost-world creatures such as dinosaurs", which we have since learned is inaccurate, so you need to take it with a grain of salt - if you're not looking for reasons to trash the setting, that is.



			
				NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> * but the very fact that there are hover trains in the setting tends to suggest something that is not mediaeval, don't you think?*




It may evoke a later-than-medieval image in people's heads.  But that doesn't mean that there is later than medieval technology, does there?

J


----------



## rounser (Jul 27, 2003)

> If those are OK, then why not a flying wagon, or several flying wagons hooked together? If those are not OK, why not?



Flying carpets, ships and chariots, even an entire flying hunt all have mythological basis, and therefore fit very easily in people's conceptions of what is especially "correct" to be enchanted to fly in swords and sorcery fantasy.  A flying wagon perhaps less so, but a wagon belongs in a medieval type setting too.  A train doesn't....at least, not without some convincing context to convince the readers' suspension of disbelief otherwise.

The issue, then, is not that it's a magical _hovering_ train; simply the fact that it appears to be a train.  As I mentioned earlier, a magic train strikes me as cheesier than a mechanical one.  If you _must_ have a train in a swords & sorcery fantasy setting, make it the real McCoy, IMO.  I believe there was a Dungeon Magazine adventure some time ago which had a prototype dwarven train in it.  I could buy that, because dwarves are tinkerers, and it's conceivable that their culture could go industrial in some corner of the world - but not mainstream.


----------



## EricNoah (Jul 28, 2003)

Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *Behold the power of spite! *




Not to pick on one poster, but yeesh, this really sums up much of this thread.  

I'd like folks to please ease up on the accusatory tone, blanket generalizations, conspiracy theories, random cries of "you're a troll!" and so forth.  If you can, great, this thread can live.


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 28, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *I could buy that, because dwarves are tinkerers, and it's conceivable that their culture could go industrial in some corner of the world *




_Which_ dwarves? What dwarven culture are tinkerers? Are the dwarves of Eberron like that?


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> Which dwarves? What dwarven culture are tinkerers?



Under the stereotypical Tolkienesque view of dwarvish culture, they forge armour, they mine, they like to toil over forges - that's their thing, apart from hoarding precious metals - so arguably they have industrial overtones already.  Gnomes subverted the inventor/tinker role thanks to Dragonlance, an idea that was later assimilated to FR, but it's easy to envision dwarves going proto-industrial in the cracks of a D&D world, perhaps harnessing steam power and gunpowder to a limited extent.  Note that this is different from sending such stuff mainstream (more than a prototype train or two hidden away underground wouldn't be much to my liking, and as such was the limit of such technology in that Dungeon adventure), and making it a standard form of travel.

While on the topic, I think I'd associate gnome technology more with clockwork-style mechanics, Rube Goldberg devices, da Vinci inventions and hydraulics, and dwarven technology with steam power and gunpowder technology.  Dwarven steampowered war-juggernauts, arquebuses and powder grenades seem "right", somehow.  A gnome would probably invent the printing press, whereas a dwarf would probably invent the steamroller and proto-submarine.


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 28, 2003)

Scorpio said:
			
		

> *Hey Nick,
> You can start at Goodman Games' preview at http://www.goodman-games.com/4100preview.php ;
> this is a unique setting that brings out the best that the game offers- I've seen hundreds of 'settings' and only a handful have ever caught my attention as really different! *




Cool! Thanks for letting me know. I'll have a good look later and see what I think. I'm always in the market for a decent setting to plunder. 

Nick the Lemming


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 28, 2003)

Pants said:
			
		

> *I don't see why people are getting hung up on the 'unique cultures' comment.  They way I interpreted was that the staple races of D&D would have a unique twist to them.  Maybe Dwarves are no longer xenophobic mountain dwellers with Scottish accents and a penchant for ale.  Maybe they're something else. *





I have to say that this aspect is one that really pisses me off - the settings all had to include the usual races, in which case none of them are likely to be that original, or they have to go through the tack of being completely unrelated to the usual fantasy Dwarf, Elf etc stereotype, in which case they get picked on for doing weird things (What do you mean, Dwarves are more at home on the oceans than anywhere else and hate being underground?), with absolutely nothing in common with the stereotypes, which will only piss people off. Wouldn't it have been a much better idea just to have new races than have to use either the name or the current stereotype (Eg, the above might be called Dwarves in this setting, which will upset people because they're obviously un-Dwarflike - a much better solution would just be to call them something else if they're that different to the norm).

Nick the Lemming


----------



## Goobermunch (Jul 28, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> 
> You don' t think that hover trains count as higher than mediaeval tech then? There are also the skyscrapers and it has been described in places as industrial, but the very fact that there are hover trains in the setting tends to suggest something that is not mediaeval, don't you think? Could you please tell me how my argument is worthless? I'd also look up the definition of reductio ad absurdum if I were you, since you don't seem to understand it.
> 
> ...




Nick,

Technology is not a thing in itself.  It is a means to an end.  By its nature it implies the application of science to an end.  Technology and magic can accomplish the same ends via different means.

I can go to the store, buy a mag-lite and some batteries and have a portable lightsource.

My character can cast light on the end of his staff and have a portable lightsource.

The ends are the same.  It's the means that matter.

[OT]And I do want to apologize about the troll comment.  I honestly believed that you were being tongue-in-cheek and poking fun at people.[/OT]

--G


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 28, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> Flying carpets, ships and chariots, even an entire flying hunt all have mythological basis, and therefore fit very easily in people's conceptions of what is especially "correct" to be enchanted to fly in swords and sorcery fantasy.  A flying wagon perhaps less so, but a wagon belongs in a medieval type setting too.  A train doesn't....at least, not without some convincing context to convince the readers' suspension of disbelief otherwise. *




But we're not talking about what is "correct" by anyone's impression of sword and sorcery.  Nick has made some accusations that he cannot back up: he has repeatedly said that the world has non-medieval technology, and he's implied that the setting is somehow bad, or in opposition to what WOTC said they were looking for.

What he apparently means is "something that looks like a train doesn't fit in with my idea of heroic fantasy".  That's fine, that's an opinion.  But to say that a society capable of making flying galleons could not make flying wagons because that's "technology" is pretty silly IMO.

J


----------



## Spatula (Jul 28, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *I have to say that this aspect is one that really pisses me off - the settings all had to include the usual races, in which case none of them are likely to be that original, or they have to go through the tack of being completely unrelated to the usual fantasy Dwarf, Elf etc stereotype, in which case they get picked on for doing weird things (What do you mean, Dwarves are more at home on the oceans than anywhere else and hate being underground?), with absolutely nothing in common with the stereotypes, which will only piss people off.*



Yeah, just like the non-stereotyped races in Dark Sun pissed everyone off.


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> But we're not talking about what is "correct" by anyone's impression of sword and sorcery. Nick has made some accusations that he cannot back up: he has repeatedly said that the world has non-medieval technology, and he's implied that the setting is somehow bad, or in opposition to what WOTC said they were looking for.



That's Nick's stance; take that up with him.


> What he apparently means is "something that looks like a train doesn't fit in with my idea of heroic fantasy". That's fine, that's an opinion. But to say that a society capable of making flying galleons could not make flying wagons because that's "technology" is pretty silly IMO.



It's not about the "could".  You "could" do all sorts of things with magic that could totally obliterate the pseudo-medieval feel of a swords & sorcery fantasy world.  It's about the "does it fit".  If you can't see the difference, then I consider that a bit silly too. 

I've already outlined why flying galleons are somewhat less likely to challenge suspension of disbelief than flying wagons - see above.  Flying ships are a staple of swords & sorcery fantasy; flying wagons, considerably less so - chariots usually get that treatment instead.  Regardless, flying wagons are much more acceptable than flying trains, because wagons are medieval tech, and trains aren't.

I think Eberron will need a convincing context for lightning rails to overcome such obstacles, and it may well have one.  Dark Sun, which was sort of post-apocalyptic dark future swords and sandals crossed with swords & sorcery, had a convincing context for what it presented.  Eberron may well have one too, but lightning rails will have to be "explained" (as to why they're there, not how they operate) in a way that in FR, Halruua's flying ships might not (since they're arguably a bit of an S&S cliche even).


----------



## Neo (Jul 28, 2003)

Well I for one quite liked the look of the photographed flyer, the images looked interesting and alternative.

I'll be checking the world out for sure.


----------



## Paka (Jul 28, 2003)

I sent some entries into the WOTC Setting Contest.  I am eager to see the guy who won.

Maybe we should wait until this thing comes out, when we have some textual evidence, THEN we can have a nasty thread in which people call each other names for having different opinions.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 28, 2003)

Paka said:
			
		

> *I sent some entries into the WOTC Setting Contest.  I am eager to see the guy who won.
> 
> Maybe we should wait until this thing comes out, when we have some textual evidence, THEN we can have a nasty thread in which people call each other names for having different opinions.   *




Too late.


----------



## shadow (Jul 28, 2003)

Geez, for the love of God!  Everyone is getting so worked up over a setting that they haven't even seen yet!  All we've seen are some pictures of the concept art, and nothing else.  Perhaps the "train" is confined to a particular advanced magic kingdom.  The setting may rock, or it may suck.  It's far to early to judge yet!

As far as realism goes, GET A LIFE!  It always annoys me how some historical inclined players get so worked up over what would and wouldn't be possible with "medieval technology".  D&D never was meant to simulate medieval life.  Gary Gygax even wrote it himself in the introduction of the original DMG (or maybe PHB, I forget).  Anyway, I could point out hundreds of reasons why Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, or Dragonlance aren't "realistic", but why bother?  They're meant to be fantasy.  This is just as bad as these physics nerds that have to ruin every science fiction movie by pointing out all the physics flaws in it.

The irony of every thing is that I remember when the search was announced last year, everyone was bemoaning the fact that there were already to many "Tolkien-inspired Euro-fantasy settings."  Many posters wanted something different and unique.  Well, it looks from what I've seen, that the setting will, indeed, be different and unique.  Now everyone is griping that the setting is "too different", or it deviates to much from the standard "medieval" setting.

Personally "techno-magic" sounds kind of cool to me, but really it's to early to tell if Eberron will be cool or not.  As a fan of the Final Fantasy games, the whole idea of magic and technology sounds neat.  I suppose it is all really a matter of taste.  Some people like grim, gritty, and tragic fantasy.  I do not.  I enjoy heroic high fantasy, with larger than life heroes.  I've heard praise for Midnight, but after tooking a look at it I didn't like the setting at all. (Although I admit that it was well written.)  I though that it was too dark, and had too much of "Alas, evil rules the world.  You are a legendary, but ultimately doomed hero.  You can't  win."  Some people love the setting.  IT'S JUST A MATTER OF PERSONAL TASTE!  Is there anything wrong with enjoying high fantasy and magical technology?  Then why is everyone complaining!?


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> As far as realism goes, GET A LIFE! It always annoys me how some historical inclined players get so worked up over what would and wouldn't be possible with "medieval technology".



For goodness sake, *it's not about realism*, it's about what's genre appropriate by default when there's no explicit context to support it which is *completely and utterly a different issue*.   You've leaped into this discussion half-cocked and insultingly, and you don't even have a grasp on the conversation.  If you can't understand why magical hover cars aren't appropriate in some people's conception of a D&D world, and why that has *nothing whatsoever to do with being "historically inclined" except as it relates to default assumptions about swords & sorcery fantasy technology levels and how they relate to suspension of disbelief*, then you need to re-read the posts above.

The Forgotten Realms aren't "realistic" by any stretch of the imagination, but neither does it largely deviate from swords and sorcery territory at all (although there are a few in the cracks, such as the aforementioned tanks).  They're not historically accurate either.  Time to rethink your argument.


----------



## shadow (Jul 28, 2003)

> For goodness sake, it's not about realism, it's about what's genre appropriate by default when there's no explicit context to support it which is completely and utterly a different issue




In other words?  

But who is to say what genre is appropriate for fantasy, and which one isn't.  For example, from all the fantasy that I've read (outside D&D based novels), I've never have heard of spell slinging priests.  Or at least, not in the same way as D&D.  So for me I've always had trouble reconciling the cleric class my assumption of a fantasy world.   Everyone's idea of what should constitute "fantasy" is different.  Some people's idea of fantasy is based on final fantasy games, or Steven King's Dark Tower series.

I'll admit, Eberron sounds quite different from standard sword and sorcery D&D, but I think this could be a good thing.  I'm getting a little sick of standard generic sword and sorcery worlds.  Eberron is just going to be an option for players looking for something different than Forgotten Realms.


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Jul 28, 2003)

I wonder if Planescape, Dark Sun, and Spelljammer were complained about this much when they were first announced.  Where you see "default assumptions about swords & sorcery fantasy technology levels and how they relate to suspension of disbelief," I see "more of the same."  The truly groundbreaking settings, in my view, are the ones that do something to shake up the status quo.


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> But who is to say what genre is appropriate for fantasy, and which one isn't. For example, from all the fantasy that I've read (outside D&D based novels), I've never have heard of spell slinging priests. Or at least, not in the same way as D&D. So for me I've always had trouble reconciling the cleric class my assumption of a fantasy world.



Spell slinging priests go back to the Conan books, and for a more recent (if somewhat self-referential) example, the Riftwar series.  The cleric class is a D&Dism based vaguely on Bishop Odo, but an easily accepted D&Dism because it slots quite easily into swords & sorcery fantasy tropes of medieval arms and armour, crusaders, priests, prayer, spirituality, healing magic, miracles and god worship.

I agree that the cleric class is a gamist thing, and a "not exactly" priest, and is somewhat uncomfortable archetype, but it's definitely not out-of-genre.  


> Everyone's idea of what should constitute "fantasy" is different. Some people's idea of fantasy is based on final fantasy games, or Steven King's Dark Tower series.



Swords & sorcery fantasy defaults to an amorphous set of assumptions which are tied to pulp swords & sorcery fantasy and mythology.  If the reader accepts the conceits of the genre, they can be used without explanation or challenge to suspension of disbelief (such as the concept of what a wizard is, and what he or she does, and why wizards are usually associated with medieval style settings).  I think that you're painting yourself into a corner if you're trying to pretend that trains are something people associate with swords & sorcery fantasy, or that there's little concensus that they don't belong there without a explicitly defined and convincing context - which we haven't been provided with yet, but may well receive.


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> Where you see "default assumptions about swords & sorcery fantasy technology levels and how they relate to suspension of disbelief," I see "more of the same." The truly groundbreaking settings, in my view, are the ones that do something to shake up the status quo.



As I've said before, we haven't seen the context yet.  Spelljammer gave you one for kobolds in space, which made it easier for some people to swallow.  My point is that Eberron will probably need one for the lightning rails too, and we haven't seen it yet, and if it doesn't provide a convincing one (complete with why magic isn't used to do B, C and D as well, because they've opened that can of worms with this creation) then I probly won't dig the concept, and forsee quite a few people seeing it the same way.  That's not to say it won't have one, and a good one at that - it's just that it just can't rest on it's laurels without an explanation in the same way that FR's Halruuan flying ships can.


----------



## 2d6 (Jul 28, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> *I wonder if Planescape, Dark Sun, and Spelljammer were complained about this much when they were first announced.  Where you see "default assumptions about swords & sorcery fantasy technology levels and how they relate to suspension of disbelief," I see "more of the same."  The truly groundbreaking settings, in my view, are the ones that do something to shake up the status quo. *




Actually, I seem to remember several folks at a now closed hobby shop complaining about Spelljammer as a concept back in the day.

Anyway, I think this is an issue of holding a "contest" asking for one thing, then a year later releasing tidbits that seem to indicate that the product doesn't match what one would expect from the "contest". I also don't think that the comments should be construed as an attack on K. Baker's design skills, I believe that it just goes back to the "contest" and the expectation. That's the obvious.

I think that if Eberron was just announced without the whole search thing, The reception would much warmer. 

Hey, gotta pad my post-count somehow right


----------



## shadow (Jul 28, 2003)

> I think that you're painting yourself into a corner if you're trying to pretend that trains are something people associate with swords & sorcery fantasy




I never said that some people associate trains with _sword & sorcery_ .  I said that everyone has a different idea of _fantasy _.  The two words are different.  Fantasy is anything that involves the supernatural or otherwise normally impossible.  Hence fantasy can cover a wide base of ideas.  Sword & socery is one specific sub-genre of fantasy which set in a world approximately medieval European technology.  I agree that most people wouldn't associate trains with sword & sorcery, but fantasy as a genre isn't limited to sword & sorcery.

Let's see, many of the later Final Fantasy games have featured trains.  In Final Fantasy 3 (6 in Japan) you had the Phantom Train, in Final Fantasy 7 you had the gloomy "train graveyard" (which made a great "dungeon", rather than the stale idea of some evil abandoned temple).  Harry Potter juxtaposes magic with trains, as well as flying cars.  All of the aforementioned things have been very popular.  Is there anything wrong with this type of fantasy?

Although the Ebberon setting may stray somewhat from the classic D&D sword & sorcery style fantasy, this isn't the first time D&D has done this.  Dark Sun featured post-apocalyptic barbarians, very little metal, and the constant risk of dehydration.  Not exactly the classic medieval.  Spelljammer featured spacefaring ships, aliens, and of course the Giff.  Ravenloft, wasn't sword & sorcery since it borrowed featured societies  and technology that were quite a bit more advanced than medieval that of medieval Europe.  Nor could Al-Qadim be considered sword & sorcery for a lot of people since the culture and period it emulated was very different from what most people consider sword & sorcery.  And finally the much venerated Planescape has little to do at all with sword and sorcery.  The weird monsters, exotic locations, philosophy, and constant street slang make it very different from it's D&D sword & sorcery roots.  Yet all of these settings have their hard core fans.  They prove that the D&D rules aren't just limited to a classic sword & sorcery setting.



> Anyway, I think this is an issue of holding a "contest" asking for one thing, then a year later releasing tidbits that seem to indicate that the product doesn't match what one would expect from the "contest". I also don't think that the comments should be construed as an attack on K. Baker's design skills, I believe that it just goes back to the "contest" and the expectation. That's the obvious.




I agree.  I doubt there would be as much controversy if WotC released the setting without having it as the "winner" of a "contest".


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> I agree that most people wouldn't associate trains with sword & sorcery, but fantasy as a genre isn't limited to sword & sorcery.



However, D&D _is_ a swords & sorcery style fantasy game.  When a D&D setting deviates from the swords & sorcery fantasy assumptions, there usually has to be a compelling context in order for people to accept the deviation, such as the one Dark Sun has (dark future world, swords & sandals themes etc.), the one the Living Jungle campaign had (apply D&D to jungle tribes, lost world themes and primitive tech level) and so on and so forth.  Again, we don't have the context for magical trains yet, and they'll probably need a convincing one.  Harry Potter has a convincing one, for instance, in that it's superimposed fantasy themes on a contemporary setting, and contemporary settings have trains, natch.


----------



## Spatula (Jul 28, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> *I wonder if Planescape, Dark Sun, and Spelljammer were complained about this much when they were first announced.  Where you see "default assumptions about swords & sorcery fantasy technology levels and how they relate to suspension of disbelief," I see "more of the same."  The truly groundbreaking settings, in my view, are the ones that do something to shake up the status quo. *



Agreed.


----------



## jokamachi (Jul 28, 2003)

*Beat out Midnight???*

Is it true that Wotc passed up Midnight for Baker's setting? I don't mean to bash the winner by asking, but I was deeply impressed with Midnight. Charges of nepotism aside, Baker's setting must really have something to it to beat out such a powerful contender. In the future, Wotc's PR folks should seriously rethink their presentation strategy; I didn't glean much of a mission statement from what they presented.


----------



## William Ronald (Jul 28, 2003)

jokamachi,

This was already covered, and Midnight was not part of the setting search.


----------



## Dismas (Jul 28, 2003)

*Re: Beat out Midnight???*



			
				jokamachi said:
			
		

> *Is it true that Wotc passed up Midnight for Baker's setting? I don't mean to bash the winner by asking, but I was deeply impressed with Midnight. Charges of nepotism aside, Baker's setting must really have something to it to beat out such a powerful contender. In the future, Wotc's PR folks should seriously rethink their presentation strategy; I didn't glean much of a mission statement from what they presented. *




Wow, to urban legends in one post 
As other people have point out, Midnight was never submited to the Search and Keith Baker is no releation to Rich Baker.


----------



## mythusmage (Jul 28, 2003)

*Re: Re: Beat out Midnight???*



			
				Dismas said:
			
		

> *...and Keith Baker is no releation to Rich Baker. *




To be technical, no _close_ relation to Rich Baker.

After all, everybody, at the greatest remove, is a 50th cousin of everybody else.

(Yes, Teflon Billy is a relative of yours)


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 28, 2003)

A lot has yet to be said for the setting but as I sat and listened to the guys at Gencon talk about it, Earthdawn came to mind.


----------



## mythusmage (Jul 28, 2003)

*Anyway...*

...the problem here is a lack of context. In a sense it's like trying to describe a platypus based on eggshells, hair, and a piece of beak. I can see people identifying each as belonging to, respectively, a snake, a mammal, and a duck. Insufficient data for a meaningful answer in other words.

I can only hope that some people have learned to reserve judgement henceforth. Furthermore, that those same peole, and others, have learned to restrain from commenting when emotions have clouded reason and bollixed their skill at composing an argument.

On the other hand (slipping into self promotion mode), it has helped set a feature of my _Dragon Earth_ setting.

{Thread hijack! Thread hijack! Thread hijack!}

*The First Trains*

It has long been thought that Hero of Alexandria, despite his protests, was the inventor of the construct locomotive, and the first to use such to pull a train of wagons on an iron rail. The recent discoveries on the site of the archeological dig at Myceneaen era Sparta has forced a substantial re-evaluation of this.

There a number of small brass constructs  -some still registering magically, though very faintly- has put the date back for the invention of the magical construct to the Late Bronze Age*. 

While small, no more than a pound each, they are well made, articulated, and from the wear patterns on the joints show signs of having been active at one time in the past. Contrary to reports in some circles, these were not inanimate dolls, but functioning devices. Though from their design it is doubtful they were but to any use but amusement.

Five of the six are obviously Egyptian in design, being constructed in the form of five of the six major Egyptian gods. The last is Myceneaen, indicating that at one time a Myceneaen sorcerer learned the art of making constructs. This last is thought to be a representation of King Menelaus of Sparta, the famous leader of the Greek forces in the Trojan War. Menelaus was not available for comment, having been reincarnated soon after his death.

It is known that by the time of Classical Greece larger constructs were being made (as large as 100 pounds in weight), though the huge constructs sometimes referred to as golems would come much later, in the Late Medieval period.

Concurrent with the Mycenean Sparta discoveries has come a series of discoveries at the ancient Athenian silver mines. There two bronze constructs in the form of carts has been found. Both linked together with ropes, with the second tied by rope to an ore cart. All three sitting on iron rails. The whole radiating weak magic. The rear of the ore cart had been crushed beneath a cave in, so any speculation regarding additional cars must remain speculative. Initially thought to be from the Late Roman period -when the mines played out and were abandoned, further investigation has shown the train dates from the Periclean Age. The why of the abandonment of what had to be a valuable resource was answered when the weakly animated skeleton of a demon was found past the rock and debris that had crushed the rear of the ore cart. The demonic spirit, a long time convert to Christianity, was pathetically grateful for his rescue, and more than happy to 'pass on' so he could be with his god.

Further investigation and the re-evaluation of previous finds has shown that the Athenians were using constructs to pull ore carts at their silver mines. With a comprehensive infrastructure for the manufacture, maintenance, and use of 'lococarts' (as one wag dubbed them) in the transportation of silver ore from mine to smelter.

The question has arisen as to why the Athenians didn't transport the ore in the lococarts. From my study of the constructs it would appear they were not designed to carry things, but to pull. For one, they were to small, for another, too expensive, to make them worthwhile as cargo carriers, but they were strong enough to pull at least one fully laden ore cart, and possibly more. The presence of hemp fibers in the debris back of the ore cart and the fact there were two lococarts pulling the train would seem to indicate the presence of additional entrained ore carts. But the wreckage found in the space where the demon had been imprisoned was too fragmentary to be reliably reconstructed.

So, as you can see, trains long predate Hero's invention for the transportation of tourists from Alexandria to Memphis.

Mythusmage.

*Professor Arneson's discovery of bronze rods and linkages at 3rd millennium bce Shirrup-pak in central Sumer indicates a more advanced bronze technology than previously known, but in no way proves the existance of magical construct at that early time. For one thing, no one has yet found any spells or other magics from the period that would necessarily precede the development of construct magic. Nor is there any record of magical constructs. This in a society where most anything of note was inscribed for posterity or the tax rolls. The presence of constructs in ancient Sumer (and fairly large ones if the bits and pieces speak true of the parent device) would certainly change our view of that culture and its use of magic. But Arneson has yet to prove his case.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 28, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> That's Nick's stance; take that up with him.*




Er, what do you think I've _been_ doing?

J


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 28, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *However, D&D is a swords & sorcery style fantasy game.  When a D&D setting deviates from the swords & sorcery fantasy assumptions, there usually has to be a compelling context in order for people to accept the deviation, such as the one Dark Sun has (dark future world, swords & sandals themes etc.), the one the Living Jungle campaign had (apply D&D to jungle tribes, lost world themes and primitive tech level) and so on and so forth.  Again, we don't have the context for magical trains yet, and they'll probably need a convincing one.  Harry Potter has a convincing one, for instance, in that it's superimposed fantasy themes on a contemporary setting, and contemporary settings have trains, natch. *



Rounser, I think you're now the one painting himself into a corner.  The very existence of Spelljammer, Planescape, Dark Sun, and a variety of other campaign settings that date back to -- what, the mid-80s?-- show that D&D is _not_ a swords and sorcery style fantasy game, at least not exclusively.  I can't imagine a way to paint those as appropriate settings from a genre perspective, but dismiss out of hand that this will be.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 28, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Beat out Midnight???*



			
				mythusmage said:
			
		

> *To be technical, no close relation to Rich Baker.
> 
> After all, everybody, at the greatest remove, is a 50th cousin of everybody else.
> 
> (Yes, Teflon Billy is a relative of yours) *



And everyone is supposed to be connected by no more than seven degrees to Kevin Bacon too.  Actually, I'm at six, so if you know me, you're in!


----------



## Carnifex (Jul 28, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Beat out Midnight???*



			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> And everyone is supposed to be connected by no more than seven degrees to Kevin Bacon too.  Actually, I'm at six, so if you know me, you're in!   *




How really quite worrying...


----------



## WizarDru (Jul 28, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *Spell slinging priests go back to the Conan books, and for a more recent (if somewhat self-referential) example, the Riftwar series. *




I assume by self-referential, you're referring to the fact that the Riftwar series was, itself, based on the author's D&D campaign (which it was)?


Since some posters may have missed the link, here is Keith Baker's reply on rpg.net to some of the initial comments, similar to what has been said here:



> *Originally Posted by Keith Baker*
> _Hey folks -- actual Keith Baker here (as opposed to the mysterious "KB". I've got no intention of getting into drawn out flames here, and among other things, those of you who have said it are quite right -- I've got my 100 smackers, so I certainly can't complain. But, I just wanted to make a few points that I think are being overlooked.
> 
> * The game isn't coming out for over a year. Wizards provided what they have provided as a TEASER, specifically NOT mentioning the most unique elements of the game, because they don't want five other companies to make similar settings. Yes, there are dinosaurs in the game. No, that does not mean that because dinosaurs are shown in the preview that dinosaurs are a major part of the world... Goodman Games has already done a fine job with Broncosaurus Rex. Instead, it's like this: Dinosaurs are in the MM. They are part of D&D. In Eberron, there is a *small* part of the world where dinosaurs have been incorporated into a culture. It's not even a big country, guys. The only point is that it's taken something from the MM and tried to give it a logical place in the world -- hey, if there are dinosaurs in the same space as civilized humanoids, this might happen -- as opposed to leaving them as random monsters. But for crying out loud, it's not Dinotopia (or Cretasus, for that matter).
> ...


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> Rounser, I think you're now the one painting himself into a corner. The very existence of Spelljammer, Planescape, Dark Sun, and a variety of other campaign settings that date back to -- what, the mid-80s?-- show that D&D is not a swords and sorcery style fantasy game, at least not exclusively. I can't imagine a way to paint those as appropriate settings from a genre perspective, but dismiss out of hand that this will be.



Not so; they're all swords & sorcery with a twist, some more convincing than others.  I find it easier to "buy" the twist Dark Sun has than Spelljammer.  *As I keep repeating to no avail,* we haven't seen Eberron's twist yet, or the reason for existence of things such as lightning rails, *but there will need to be one for players to accept it,* because it doesn't just stick to standard S&S tropes as FR and GH do, just as there is one for the existence of the non-standard swords & sorcery stuff in Spelljammer.  Additionally, there are varying degrees of convincing people that combining standard swords & sorcery fantasy D&D with dark future material or kobolds in space is a good idea, as evidenced perhaps by the different degrees of success of these settings.


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> I assume by self-referential, you're referring to the fact that the Riftwar series was, itself, based on the author's D&D campaign (which it was)?



Yep.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 28, 2003)

Not to no avail, I agree with you whole-heartedly.  But, then again, I disagree with you that Spelljammer, Planescape or Dark Sun are mere "twists" on a familiar genre; those essentially are completely different genres within fantasy.  Or at least I'd classify them as such.  Certainly Spelljammer is as different in its own way from Tolkien than Stephen King's Dark Tower books are.

EDIT:  And certainly, I'd disagree with your apparent assessment of adherence to genre conventions being directly correlated to the success of the setting.  Especially since "standard" D&D itself isn't truly sword & sorcery, but a hybrid of S&S with a more Tolkien-esque, epic fantasy.


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> those essentially are completely different genres within fantasy. Or at least I'd classify them as such. Certainly Spelljammer is as different in its own way from Tolkien than Stephen King's Dark Tower books are.



Well, I guess it depends how broadly you define swords & sorcery fantasy.  Spelljammer still has magic, monsters, wizards, elves, dragons, dwarves, and a semblance of medieval tech levels with warriors swinging swords and related weaponry.  The twist is the ships in outer space thing, but it definitely still builds on core swords & sorcery ideas.  That's why I'd file it firmly under "swords & sorcery fantasy with a twist" (and one that you may or may not like at that).


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 28, 2003)

See my edited in P.S. comments in my last thread.  I'm not sure I'd even agree that D&D is attempting to be sword & sorcery, although that's clearly a major element of the game, and always has been.  Then again, epic "Tolkien-esque" fantasy has always played just as big a role, and the two don't necessarily combine easily, except that we've become very used to it after three decades of "the D&D genre."


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

> . I'm not sure I'd even agree that D&D is attempting to be sword & sorcery, although that's clearly a major element of the game, and always has been.



Come on, it was built to reflect the work of Leiber, Moorcock, Howard, Vance, Tolkien etc. It's got swords & sorcery classes, magic, races, monsters, tech levels and setting assumptions.  D&D is like a bunch of standard pulp swords & sorcery fantasy ideas put in a blender and set to "liquify".  *Of course* D&D is swords & sorcery fantasy.  What else could it possibly be?  It's not generic fantasy, that's for sure - it's way too straightjacketed for that.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 28, 2003)

I've never heard Tolkien described as swords & sorcery before.   He's a very different genre than the pulp-ness of the other authors you list.  Your definition of the genre is extremely loose, as near as I can tell -- presence of monsters, magic, and a vaguely medieval tech level = sword & sorcery?  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





  I don't buy that.


----------



## rounser (Jul 28, 2003)

I'm surprised you haven't; to most people Tolkien seems to be the very definition of swords & sorcery fantasy.


> Your definition of the genre is extremely loose, as near as I can tell -- presence of monsters, magic, and a vaguely medieval tech level = sword & sorcery?  I don't buy that.



I find it difficult to relate to your narrow definition of swords & sorcery fantasy, just as you find it difficult to relate to the "extremely loose" nature of mine.  I find it very difficult to believe that you don't associate monsters, magic and a medieval tech level with something that's looking very much like it might be a swords & sorcery fantasy setting, too - guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.


----------



## Maggan (Jul 28, 2003)

*Fantasy fantasy?*



			
				rounser said:
			
		

> *I'm surprised you haven't; to most people Tolkien seems to be the very definition of swords & sorcery fantasy. *




I'm beginning to get confused. I thought "swords & sorcery" was another name for the "fantasy" genre?

So, for me "swords & sorcery fantasy", is just "fantasy fantasy".

The only other distinctions of fantasy I regularliy run into is "high fantasy" and "low fantasy".

Where does sword & sorvery fit in as regards to the high versus low? I'd guess it's more high than low, but I'm not sure anymore.

Cheers!

M.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 28, 2003)

Who are these "most people" you refer to?  Tolkien is very clearly not the same genre as Robert E. Howard or Fritz Leiber, and I've _never_ come across anyone who's claimed such, at least if they were at all familiar with fantasy literature to begin with.

And if your definition of S&S is that broad, then I don't see the point of your whole discussion.  There's nothing in the teaser we've seen for the setting as yet that would contradict such a loose definition of the genre.  Then again, I'm struggling to imagine what would contradict it except for really oddball settings, like the aforementioend Dark Tower.  Such a loosely defined genre isn't a very helpful definition, because it's too inclusive.  If you say something is swords & sorcery, that doesn't evoke much more than the vaguest response with such a loose definition.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 28, 2003)

*Re: Fantasy fantasy?*



			
				Maggan said:
			
		

> *I'm beginning to get confused. I thought "swords & sorcery" was another name for the "fantasy" genre?*



That's apparently rounser's position here too, which brings that grand total of people I've met who define S&S as such to 2.    Swords & Sorcery is a specific brand of fantasy driven by pulp magazines, and includes authors of the Fritz Leiber, Robert E. Howard, Lin Carter, etc. brand of writing.  In many ways, the success of Tolkien's epic fantasy was the end of classic S&S -- very little has been published in a true S&S tone and formula since the 50s or 60s.

For reference, pick up any book on "how to write science fiction and fantasy" -- your local library should have several, I'd think.  All of them clearly differentiate the sub genres.


----------



## schporto (Jul 28, 2003)

I'm wondering if it could just be DnD in current times.  Greyhawk, FR, etc are all supposed to be set in 'medieval' times.  OK.  Take those add 1000 to 1500 years to get to today.  But in a world with magic why would you ever develop steam power.  Heck get the mage to permanently magic you wagon and you have a car for life.  Hey that's cool.  What if we joined em up.  Then we'd have a caravan.  Ohhhh join a bunch up and now we have a flying train.  Heck I'd think just a few hundred years of magic would produce many advances that would more than mimic our current society.  So there wouldn't be computers as we know.  But phones could be magically made with message, permanance, and a little imagination.  (Craft a magical wire that will carry a message use activated.  Connect wire to wire at the switch board.)
And yeah the sword and sorcery could still exist.  Although we'd probably bump back from 'today' to maybe 1700s?  1800s?  To make it so the population not covering nigh every bit o' the planet.  
Heck I've never understood how you could have some council of mages that didn't advance magical science more then it has been.
-cpd


----------



## Maggan (Jul 28, 2003)

*Thanks*



			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *
> 
> For reference, pick up any book on "how to write science fiction and fantasy" -- your local library should have several, I'd think.  All of them clearly differentiate the sub genres. *




I'll keep a look out for it, even though I'm not sure that they are that common in swedish libraries.  

Cheers!

M.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 28, 2003)

Here's a snippet from an article I found at Suite101 that defines fairly well the various subgenres of fantasy...


> Heroic Fantasy (Sword and Sorcery) deals with a totally invincible hero or one that fights as a mercenary. The hero is proficient with a weapon and has no special abilities except strength and courage. The plot is purely entertainment with no major themes. Books most familiar in this area are the "Conan" books by Robert Howard, "Eternal Champion" books by Michael Moorcock and "Fafhrd and Gray Mouser" books by Fritz Leiber.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 28, 2003)

schporto said:
			
		

> *But in a world with magic why would you ever develop steam power.  Heck get the mage to permanently magic you wagon and you have a car for life.*




Slowly sliding off-topic here, but I've always thought the reason magic won't/can't replace technology in a D&D-eque setting is twofold:

1) it takes special training (and in many worlds, talent) to learn how to cast spells and craft permanent items,

(and possibly the more important one

2) it costs you part of your life force to make a permanent item

What this means is that you can't get mass production of anything magical - each item has to be individually crafted and paied for in life.  You can't teach a person part of the process - like, say, how to attach a wheel to an axle - and have them do it, so you basically can't industrialize on a large scale.  

With a clever wizard, you could industrialize production of mundane items, although it would be tremendously expensive.

J


----------



## Lalato (Jul 28, 2003)

Unless, of course, some intrepid (and possibly evil) wizard found a way to create permanent items while using other people's life force.  All you need then is a bunch of slaves.

Now if this setting included slave-based magic item creation... that would be really cool... and EVIL!!!!  

--sam


----------



## TheAntiSummit (Jul 28, 2003)

*Lightning Rail*

I havent even finished reading the ninth page of this really really long thread, but something I just wanted to say was that alot of people are picking on the lightning rail, and a lot of people are defending it, but nobody really knows what it is.  I just wanted to point out that the picture is of "THE Lightning Rail", not "A Lightning Rail".  Nobody said there will be train stations and schedules and conductors.  Maybe there is only one.  Would people still hate that?  Would it stil be so bad if there was only one of these monstrous contraptions tearing through the jungles and kidnapping people, maybe belonging to a major villain of the setting?  What if no one else knew its secret?  Or if some people don't even believe in it, they think it is just a legend, but it's in the setting just to demonstrate the different view of magic in the world of Eberron, as opposed to the world of Toril?  My only complaint has nothing to do with Eberron itself, I actually think it sounds really cool, and I think I am the first person to say that when it comes out I will buy it first , and then check it out and make my own decision.  My complaint is that I have been adamant about not converting to 3.5, and since I want to play this I am going to have to.


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 28, 2003)

*Re: Lightning Rail*



			
				TheAntiSummit said:
			
		

> *My complaint is that I have been adamant about not converting to 3.5, and since I want to play this I am going to have to. *




Why? It ought to work fine with 3e rules. There might be some oddities with new creatures (e.g., DR), but it shouldn't be too hard to backwards convert.


----------



## MarauderX (Jul 28, 2003)

*No thanks.*

I think this was tried once with an OD&D supplement that featured flying gnomes vs. flying goblins, all done in 1942 style airplanes, all fueled by...fireballs.  Who remembers it?  C'mon, I know someone does...

...cause it sucked.  Didn't like it one bit.  I bought thinking it would be great for a party of 21st level flying PCs (in OD&D levels, that is) to caught in a fire fight of sorts... only D&D isn't set up for 3D, nor are battlemats meant for huge fight scenes...which made it suck more.  I am getting that familiar feeling just looking at the artwork, let alone what I read, and thinking I will pilot well away from the tumultuous storm that is bound to be generated by this setting.


----------



## Maggan (Jul 28, 2003)

*Top Ballista?*



			
				MarauderX said:
			
		

> *I think this was tried once with an OD&D supplement that featured flying gnomes vs. flying goblins, all done in 1942 style airplanes, all fueled by...fireballs.  Who remembers it?  C'mon, I know someone does...
> *




Was it Top Ballista? Gotta check that one out again, it sounds... awful!  

Cheers!

Maggan


----------



## der_kluge (Jul 28, 2003)

I really have no desire to read through 17 pages on this topic, but I'll add my own impressions of this world here:

*yawn*

And ditto to pretty much everything that was said on the first 3 pages.


----------



## KeithBaker (Jul 28, 2003)

*Hey all!*

While I post extremely rarely, I do follow the boards whenever I can. Thanks to everyone who has sent positve thoughts my way, and to those who hate already Eberron, perhaps you'll change your mind when you learn more (and perhaps not -- that's certainly your right). I'd love to address specific concerns or questions, but for now I'm caught in the veil of secrecy. A few quick notes:

Rounser: I agree with your general point, and there are clear reasons for the more unusual features of Eberron. It's not just a random mish-mash of things thrown together.

Dave: Congratulations on Sundered Skies and Pinnacle! I look forward to seeing it.

I'm also looking forward to Morningstar. I've done some work for Goodman Games in the past year, and from the little I've heard and the few times I've interacted with Mr. Kennan, I think it's going to be great. 

-Keith


----------



## s/LaSH (Jul 28, 2003)

Hey, Baker in da house! Or whatever one says in such circumstances.

I know this is pointless speculation (this thing's probably better protected by NDAs than the Bismarck by sheet metal), but is anyone else vaguely reminded of Gormenghast? That's fantasy, to the best of my knowledge (I've read the last book, didn't like it, should probably read the others though and some of the concepts are cool).

Gormenghast meets Dark Sun... hmmmmm...


----------



## mythusmage (Jul 29, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Slowly sliding off-topic here, but I've always thought the reason magic won't/can't replace technology in a D&D-eque setting is twofold:
> 
> ...




1. Have the state sponsor wizard education. Would pay for itself with all the low level dweomercrafters paying tax on their income.

2. A, the item lasts essentially forever. B, you get better.

"Hi Bob. I just made  a 'globe of directions to the nearest restaurants' for the city, so I'm off to learn about ogre rules bocce ball."

Now there's an idea, libraries dedicated to serving the needs of wizards looking for some way to replace lost XP.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 29, 2003)

*Re: Hey all!*



			
				KeithBaker said:
			
		

> *While I post extremely rarely, I do follow the boards whenever I can. Thanks to everyone who has sent positve thoughts my way, and to those who hate already Eberron, perhaps you'll change your mind when you learn more (and perhaps not -- that's certainly your right). I'd love to address specific concerns or questions, but for now I'm caught in the veil of secrecy. A few quick notes:
> 
> Rounser: I agree with your general point, and there are clear reasons for the more unusual features of Eberron. It's not just a random mish-mash of things thrown together.
> 
> ...




Thanks for stopping by, Keith.  Hopefully when the product is further along WOTC will allow you to talk more freely, and hopefully you can find the time to give EnWorld a few scoops.  As you can see, there is a lot of excitement and interest.  I think the setting search is the best thing WOTC has done since the d20 license, and I wish you the best of luck.  (And yeah I'm green with envy)


----------



## Henry (Jul 29, 2003)

Gargoyle said:
			
		

> *Q&A was hampered severely, with Bill Slaviscek saying over and over "We can't reveal that yet."  I asked for one example of how the setting is both dark and swashbuckling, but Keith Baker wasn't permitted to answer, even though he said he could provide one.
> *




That was you?! Darn it, I missed you!  I was the quy who asked the question about the differences between it and the Realms if both were considered "high-magic."


I overall liked the concept for the setting, but as with the other 5,000 gaming products out there, I doubt I'll get to use it, and hence won't likely buy it. The presentation was not very good at getting the feel across (what with the "In a world of Magic and adventure..." flavor text interspersed in with the concept art). 

I got the feel that it was more "D&D meets 1930's Pulp" than "Swashbuckling" as they kept saying. Keith himself said that the world owes a lot to John Carter of Mars more than other influences. But they stressed that one undercurrent of the setting was "magic from a common point of view," rather than "magic defined by high-level wizards duking it out." If the commonality of magic reduces the number of high level NPC's in a setting, I'm all for that.


----------



## Henry (Jul 29, 2003)

*Re: Count me (proudly) amongst the Whiners!*



			
				Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> *I hope this doesn't come across as sour grapes.  I'm sure this is going to be very well done.  Having seen some of Morningstar, I know that there were losing entries better than mine, so Mr. Baker gets the benefit of the doubt.  I'm P.O.'d at WotC for misrepresenting themselves. *




TW, I don't mean to insult, only to add information. If this has already been mentioned and I missed it, I apologize.

At the seminar, Keith revealed that he had submitted eight entries. Of the eight, this one was his "lark" or fun entry - the one he thought would never get made, but he submitted it for the heck of it. He was at first stunned that THIS was the entry they were interested in.

(Keith, correct me if I'm wrong.)


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 29, 2003)

mythusmage said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 1. Have the state sponsor wizard education. Would pay for itself with all the low level dweomercrafters paying tax on their income.*




Well, _if_ wizardry is an 'anybody can do it'.  A lot of fantasy settings posit that a certain 'talent' is necessary as well as the training.

Even if it is a skill that can be taught to anyone, there's a lot of reasons why "the state" might not be able to sponsor wizard education, too: funding, lack of ability to enforce the edict, the wizards being unwilling to share their secrets with 'just anybody'...



			
				mythusmage said:
			
		

> *
> 2. A, the item lasts essentially forever. B, you get better.*




True...but then there's the guys who didn't spend their time making items, and they've gone on and mastered more powerful spells...that's going to sting the pride a bit for many people.  (And if that guy is casting spells for hire, he might have just as much money as the crafter.)

J


----------



## MarauderX (Jul 29, 2003)

*Re: Top Ballista?*



			
				Maggan said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Was it Top Ballista? Gotta check that one out again, it sounds... awful!
> 
> ...




That was it, thanks for filling in that fuzzy spot in my memory.  From that thing alone I decided D&D + goofy magic technology don't really go unless you keep it very, very subdued.


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 29, 2003)

Henry said:
			
		

> *
> 
> That was you?! Darn it, I missed you!  I was the quy who asked the question about the differences between it and the Realms if both were considered "high-magic."
> 
> ...




I had planned on hanging around after the Ennies, but we were very tired so Heather and I crashed almost as soon as it was over.   It wasn't a very social GenCon for us, unfortunately.   For some reason we just had to go to bed early every night and sleep late.  (Must be that we were away from our kids, and normally stay up late and wake up early)

On Eberron, I'll probably buy it because I'm such a completist and because I'm sure at the very least it will have ideas and mechanics that I can plunder for my home brew.   But running a full-fledged Eberron campaign and buying the whole line of products?  There is not enough information for me yet.  However, it has caught my interest.  The biggest thing I look for in a new campaign world is that it has an alien feel to it.  If I were transported there, I would want to know immediately that I am not in the FR, Greyhawk, or planet Earth.  That's probably why the only published setting I've really enjoyed running was Dark Sun.


----------



## schporto (Jul 29, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well, if wizardry is an 'anybody can do it'.  A lot of fantasy settings posit that a certain 'talent' is necessary as well as the training.
> 
> ...



Some fantasy settings do say that anybody can be a wizard.  It just takes a long time.  Not for the get rich quick side.  
As for being miffed that the other guy is doing better.  Hell I'm not that bummed that I'm not the world's greatest programmer.  I'm not the best at my job.  Most people I know aren't the best at their job.  (OK one person might be able to argue they are but that's it 1)  So yeah you might be jonseing cuz that other wizard can cast something really cool.  And the minor league baseball players are strugling to break into the bigs.  Shrug.  That's life.
Now for industrialization of the process, I think you could.  So there's the manufacturers who assembly line the physical object together.  Done.  Then you have one mage magic the lights.  Another magic the flying part.  etc.  Or maybe combine their powers in a ritualistic way and you have a process where they many would lose less of the experience doing those things.
And just a quibble - I thought making magic items drained experience, not life force.  So you suddenly aren't as experienced, but you'll still live as long as you would have.  It seemed the way you worded it would end up killing you of old age faster.
-cpd


----------



## mythusmage (Jul 29, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well, if wizardry is an 'anybody can do it'.  A lot of fantasy settings posit that a certain 'talent' is necessary as well as the training.
> 
> ...




I can see a country not wanting to pay to train prospective wizards; short sightedness, lack of talent, paranoid wizards, etc. But for an empire that wants to keep its citizenry happy and productive, a sizable mage class could be just the thing.

Whereto crafting wizards versus casting wizards, how do you think the latter got all that free time? Made some items for sale, earned enough to hire apprentices to make more (which he then sells through his chain of shops) and earns enough through magic item sales and teaching fees to take long sabbaticals to hunt down old magics and cutting edge dweomercrafting.

(Now there's an idea: Advanced Class, Wizard. Prereq: Ability to use arcane spells, Knowledge (Library Science) 4 ranks.)


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 29, 2003)

mythusmage said:
			
		

> *I can see a country not wanting to pay to train prospective wizards; short sightedness, lack of talent, paranoid wizards, etc. But for an empire that wants to keep its citizenry happy and productive, a sizable mage class could be just the thing.*



Oh, absolutely.  I wasn't saying it wasn't a good idea, just that it wasn't an inevitability, and it would be easy to justify a setting going either way depending on a variety of factors.



			
				mythusmage said:
			
		

> *Whereto crafting wizards versus casting wizards, how do you think the latter got all that free time?*




Free time? I'm talking about the guy who makes his money as the wizard you go to when you need a spell cast.  The one who you go to because your sorcerer doesn't want to waste a slot on _identify_.  The one who the 'NPC spellcasting costs' table in the DMG (well, now in the PHB) is for.  That guy.

Even assuming he only casts 1 or 2 spells a day, that's a couple of hundred gold - and he can conceivably cast many, many spells in a day, depending on demand.

J


----------



## teitan (Jul 29, 2003)

I just read the first four or five pages of the thread and to me it sounds like a vocal minority ranting and raving for one of two reasons...

1. Their setting submission was better, they thought it was a contest and are so mad that this guy broke some non-existent rule of this "contest" that they are going to have SOUR grapes and be angry even if this setting winds up outselling FR and DL combined and is the best thing since monkeys throwing pooh. Just to point out, NOWHERE did it say anything about technology levels in the guidelines we were requested to follow. Valterra said that WOTC wasn't looking for some higher technology world specifically and such a setting would have a difficult time breaking into the top 10.

2. They just want to see the older settings brought back except there is a problem with that... those older settings didn't sell as well as TSR, WOTC and now Hasbro would like. Remember that Hasbro changed the way FR books are done and almost removed the heart of the setting from it. Also, maybe WOTC has plans to bring back these older settings and just haven't revealed them yet. I don't remember the DLCS being announced until after this search was started, though I could be wrong. Honestly though, I don't think there is a lot of prophet to be had in relaunching these lines for HASBRO's bottom line. WOTC maybe, but HASBRO no. 

I think some of the smaller companies should license these settings, let WOTC do the main book and publish it. Maybe WOTC could do one off books, who knows. But geesh, let it go...



Jason


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jul 29, 2003)

I think it could be very very cool. Could end up being a favorite setting of mine.

I do agree it may risk being a mish-mash, however. Dark settings don't appeal to me much, Swashbuckling doesn't appeal to me much, but dinos and trains and 'industrial age' stuff definately do. So we'll see what happens.

And it may just be the cynic in me talking, but I think a good 80% of the hatred to this setting is 'sour grapes' form not winning the contest themselves with their obviously better submission.  Not all of it, of course, but these knee-jerk reactions scream 'I hate this because it's not mine and mine is better!' to me. 

I didn't win either, but I still think the setting has potential. And really, at this point making a love it/hate it judgement is premature at best. Either you like it's potential, or you don't. 

I'll also second the 'they did a crappy job of explaining it.' This makes me feel like I've seen a movie preview, which, for a setting, is lame. It's a teaser, not an information session, and that seems to be a total slap in the face. They could've at least given us  firm grip on what the world is like...


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 29, 2003)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> *I do agree it may risk being a mish-mash, however. Dark settings don't appeal to me much, Swashbuckling doesn't appeal to me much, but dinos and trains and 'industrial age' stuff definately do. So we'll see what happens.*




Trying to decide whether the world is a mishmash or not from what we've seen is like trying to extrapolate Greyhawk from one-line descriptions of the GDQ series ("So what, the whole setting is about giants and drow and fishmen? That's lame.") or the Forgotten Realms from the cover art of R.A. Salvatore's collected works.


----------



## Emiricol (Jul 29, 2003)

Based on what I saw, it sounds like something I'd have no interest at all in.

But I'll say again - WotC's PR folks did a crappy job (yet again), particularly in managing the perception that this is steampunk when they asked for "traditiona" and "medieval".  Also, the "review" was vague at best, and the setting is a year out. 

So, it is waaaay to early to say whether it will be a waste of time yet or not.  Anything at this point is raw conjecture and personal feelings (I won't even grant them the status of opinion yet) based on little information from WotC and a writeup that  was far from being in-depth enough to draw a real conclusion.

I can understand how some people would feel some hostility to WotC based on what little we knkow so far, and how some people would see a lot of potential in the setting, but I've come to the conclusion that it is just too early to tell.

Let the flames and mean-spirited replies to bits of quotes taken out of context begin!


----------



## blackshirt5 (Jul 29, 2003)

Dave Blewer said:
			
		

> *Eberron looks pretty interesting to me...
> 
> If I may take this moment to share my particular success story...
> 
> ...




That setting does look awesome; what's the Savage Worlds system like, perchance?

Also, just as a note, I think Ebarron(sp?) looks interesting, and I'll wait until I hear more to pass judgment on my purchasing or not.

But then again I'm a member of the great Baker/Smith conspiracy, so...


----------



## kenjib (Jul 29, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well, if wizardry is an 'anybody can do it'.  A lot of fantasy settings posit that a certain 'talent' is necessary as well as the training.
> 
> ...




Another factor is that rulers likely would not want so much power available to the general populace.  Everyone having wizard abilities would be a massive, threat to the status quo, as well as the security of the populace.


----------



## blackshirt5 (Jul 29, 2003)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Not to pick on one poster, but yeesh, this really sums up much of this thread.
> 
> I'd like folks to please ease up on the accusatory tone, blanket generalizations, conspiracy theories, random cries of "you're a troll!" and so forth.  If you can, great, this thread can live. *




I Can't Believe You'd Be Such A Troll, Eric! 

*Runs off into corner to hide and pet Elminster* Don't worry my pet; no actual GOOD idea will EVAR(sp) supplant your world!  EVAR!


----------



## Iron_Chef (Jul 29, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Christian Walker said:
			
		

> *
> I think there was one Sleestak that was friendly to the Marshalls. I can't remember his name, but I think he showed them how to use the Pylons found near that "lost city."
> *




His name was Enoch, and you could tell him apart from the others because he wore a red and gold outfit---I think he had red eyes, a slightly more expressive face and was more golden colored, too. Didn't he represent the sleestaks from the past, before they became somewhat degenerated and dullwitted? He was way smarter than the others, I remember that.


----------



## TheAntiSummit (Jul 29, 2003)

*Mass Production of Magic Items*

Just a thought about magical mass production- since magic item creation doesnt have to work the same way in every world, it's possible that the limits of such things could be pushed back.  If a magic item can bestow a magical spell on a person, why not on another item?  Maybe a group of mages together can create a magical factory, enchanting it to bestow its magic onto other items?  For example, the local wizards guild gets together and contracts the carpenters guild or the masons guild to build them the shell for this factory.  Then they all help with casting this super duper fly spell on the equipment, and then they have the cobblers guild bring them 100 pairs of boots every day.  They put the boots in the now magical equipment and poof! you have your mass produced boots of flying.  This probably can't last forever, so after a month or however long the magic in the equipment lasts ebfore being expended and dispersed into all the boots, the wizards guild comes back from vacation or whatever they did during the down time to regain the experience it costs them to enchant the factory, and does it all over again, renegotiating their lease while they are at it.  It might sound dumb, but it's possible, and in a society that has dealt with magic for hundreds or thousands of years, it seems a logical progression  (to me at least).


----------



## NickTheLemming (Jul 29, 2003)

teitan said:
			
		

> *I just read the first four or five pages of the thread and to me it sounds like a vocal minority ranting and raving for one of two reasons...*



*

Since I'm one of those that's been quite vocal, I'll answer these two points from my perspective.




			1. Their setting submission was better, they thought it was a contest and are so mad that this guy broke some non-existent rule of this "contest" that they are going to have SOUR grapes and be angry even if this setting winds up outselling FR and DL combined and is the best thing since monkeys throwing pooh. Just to point out, NOWHERE did it say anything about technology levels in the guidelines we were requested to follow.
		
Click to expand...



I didn't send in any setting, and never had any intention of doing so. I think those that have complained about the tech level have either been complaining that it claims to have mediaeval tech when it has hover trains (My position), or that the original guidelines mentioned that they were looking for something in a similar vein to FR, GH etc, and everyone assumed that a higher tech level than that would not be welcomed (Position held by some others). 






			2. They just want to see the older settings brought back except there is a problem with that... those older settings didn't sell as well as TSR, WOTC and now Hasbro would like. I think some of the smaller companies should license these settings, let WOTC do the main book and publish it. Maybe WOTC could do one off books, who knows. But geesh, let it go...
		
Click to expand...



I'm not that interested in FR and GH to be honest. I can remember the first GH stuff, and quite enjoyed it at the time, but I've moved on since then. I want something else, not GH and FR. I'm quite interested in several of the other settings that didn't win (Earthforge and Morningstar look interesting), and other new settings that have appeared (Midnight). I'd like to see more of the original submissions appear, and possibly be published by other companies (Preferably without the heavy reliance on D20, like the Sundered Skies book that's being released for SW).

Nick the Lemming*


----------



## Larry Fitz (Jul 29, 2003)

I got to meet Keith when he came by our booth, my first impression is that he's intelligent and affable, and that he hates not being able to freely discuss a setting he is clearly very excited about. 

I understand Nick the Lemming's complaint about the anachronistic train, bear in mind that what makes it anachronistic is the cow-catcher. If it does not run on rails (or even on the ground) it does not need a cow catcher. It can turn left and right, and can be more than 5 feet off the ground, so the cow catcher will be more of a cow killer unless it hovers just above ground level. It's presence indicates knowledge of and reference to rail-riding trains. However "level of technology" should refer to manufacturing techniques, not overall effects. In the Civil war there were aerial spies (done with tethered balloons). If the lightning train is not mass produced in factories they have not significantly jumped the technology bounds.


----------



## BiggusGeekus@Work (Jul 29, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WotC setting search winner - Eberron*



			
				Iron_Chef said:
			
		

> *His name was Enoch, and you could tell him apart from the others because he wore a red and gold outfit---I think he had red eyes, a slightly more expressive face and was more golden colored, too. Didn't he represent the sleestaks from the past, before they became somewhat degenerated and dullwitted? He was way smarter than the others, I remember that. *




Yeah, he time-traveled too.  But the Land of the Lost was his distant future, not the distant past of the humans.  I remember a kind of cool love-hate relationship.  Enoch liked having someone intelligent to talk to, but he hated the notion that his race fell so far and the world would eventually be dominated by apish humans.


----------



## teitan (Jul 29, 2003)

NickTheLemming said:
			
		

> *
> I'm not that interested in FR and GH to be honest. I can remember the first GH stuff, and quite enjoyed it at the time, but I've moved on since then. I want something else, not GH and FR. I'm quite interested in several of the other settings that didn't win (Earthforge and Morningstar look interesting), and other new settings that have appeared (Midnight). I'd like to see more of the original submissions appear, and possibly be published by other companies (Preferably without the heavy reliance on D20, like the Sundered Skies book that's being released for SW).
> 
> Nick the Lemming *




Well, general statements don't apply to everyone and it wasn't my intention to imply such. I can understand your arguement HERE but ....

Thanks for presenting a logical response instead of a raving madman...

Jason


----------



## mythusmage (Jul 30, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> Oh, absolutely.  I wasn't saying it wasn't a good idea, just that it wasn't an inevitability, and it would be easy to justify a setting going either way depending on a variety of factors.
> 
> 
> ...




Agree that it's not inevitable. After all, the Athenians never thought to use their 'railroad' for anything other than transporting ore. But you only need the right combination of events to kick things off.

As to casting for pay. That's for the apprentices. Heck, the more students you have, the more small magics they can do and the more money you make as a 'consultant'. Think of it as a variation on the surgeon/intern relationship post medical school.

As for that losing life force stuff for making magic items. Is there an inworld reason for it? As opposed to a metagaming one that is.

I mean, I can think of far better ways to limit magic item creation. Rare and expensive items for example. Or arduous procedures. But nothing so 'gamist' as XP loss.

I say dump the dang thing and come up with something better if you don't like tons of wands of healing wandering around.

Heck, if Kingdom A wants to hire wizards to make fireball wands for it, more power to them. I'm sure Kingdom B will come up with a counter.

"I did so want to fill you in on our research into mass disjunction, but my staff talked me out of it."


----------



## rounser (Jul 30, 2003)

Perhaps the insufferable implications of "why don't they use magic to do this and this and this" are simply because there's too many spellcasters and magic items in default D&D 3E.  Middle Earth doesn't have these problems because there's only a handful of wizards (and they're all inhuman divine caretaker types) and there's too many other important things for them to spend their time on.  In a way, these questions about "why don't they use magic to do these other mundane tasks" are a D&Dism!


----------



## William Ronald (Jul 30, 2003)

> Iron Chef posted:
> 
> His name was Enoch, and you could tell him apart from the others because he wore a red and gold outfit---I think he had red eyes, a slightly more expressive face and was more golden colored, too. Didn't he represent the sleestaks from the past, before they became somewhat degenerated and dullwitted? He was way smarter than the others, I remember that.




He was from the past, and entered the era that the Marshalls were in via one of the crystal-activated gateways.   There was also another member of the race, from the present, who was as smart as the original Sleestaks.  He explained that he had been one of the lucky few of his kind born every generation who had the mental faculties of their ancestors.  Unfortunately, many of those were killed by their degenerative brethren.  There was a hope expressed that one day the Sleestaks would recover from their disaster.  (I think it was environmental poisoning.)

BiggusGeekus@Work: Actually, the land of the Lost was set in a closed universe.  In one episode, the Marshalls actually travelled for several days only to return to their destination. In D&D terms, they were stuck on a demiplane.  I think ENoch's difficulty with the Marshalls was due to the fact that he was perhaps emotionally colder than the Marshalls.  There were also the cultural differences between 20th century Californians and an ancient representative of a lizard-like race who knew that one day his civilization would fall and his people would become degenerate savages.  I doubt that this knowledge would make him a happy camper.


----------



## KeithBaker (Jul 30, 2003)

Hey, all -

If I don't post more often, it's because I have to constantly bite my tongue to preserve the Veil Of Secrecy(tm). It's very interesting to see everyone's speculations across the various threads, some of which are more on the ball than others. All I'll say is that the use of magic in Eberron is something that has been carefully thought through, and hopefully you will like what we've done with it. And it's not just Iron Kingdoms from WotC... it's "Iron Kingdoms, now with 500% more dinosaurs!" (that's a joke, son.) 

Oh, and just to go on the record -- since it was pointed out that I didn't directly *deny* it in my previous statement -- I am in no way related to Richard Baker. I simply took the family name when he adopted me.    (Note to conspiracy nuts: also a joke)  

-Keith


----------



## William Ronald (Jul 30, 2003)

Keith,

Perhaps you can let a few more hints slip closer to the actual release.  Or perhaps WotC can lift the Veil of Secrecy just a tiny bit.  From reading the GamingReport.com story, I think that most people are uncertain about Eberron and its true nature.

Perhaps it might be possible by stating what it is not.  For example, it is probably  NOT a Land of the Lost ripoff and will not come with any music from either the 1970s series or the more recent one.  (See my previous post.) 

Also, can you comment on what it is like to work with a company like WotC on a product like Eberron?  A lot of people might be interested into what insights  you can provide on what happens from the development of an idea to the finished product stage.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 30, 2003)

KeithBaker said:
			
		

> *it's "Iron Kingdoms, now with 500% more dinosaurs!"
> 
> I simply took the family name when he adopted me.
> *




AH HA!!! Its crap! Proof is right there!! Burn WotC! Burn them alllll!!!!


(sorry, I had to )


----------



## Teflon Billy (Jul 30, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> Steamduel
> Proposal
> A post-apocalyptic world of darkness.  A world of fear, where only the strong survive.  But most of all, a world of railways, and the engineers who ride them.
> ...




DAMN!...I'M SOLD


----------



## Monte At Home (Jul 30, 2003)

Wow. That's a lot of discussion over a few pictures and phrases. 

Personally, I liked what I saw. I was surprised by it, because it had seemed clear to me that the judges at WotC accepted what the contest designers (who were not all the same people) had made it clear that they did not want. 

Nevertheless, I thought it seemed cool. There was clearly a lot going on, and was very different from what WotC (and TSR) have done before. It gave me the impression that there was a lot more going on behind the scenes NOT revealed yet. I'm intrigued, and would like to see more. 

It'll probably be too different to be the new Forgotten Realms, but it certainly could be the new Dark Sun--and that's no mean feat.


----------



## woodelf (Jul 30, 2003)

Arken said:
			
		

> *I find it very hard to imagine tht after all that fuss it would be poor, and in fairness the writer must be good. (one would hope) *




There are those of us that think that Forgotten Realms is somewhere between "eh" and "this sucks", and are thoroughly underwhelmed by Greenwood's writing (his were just about the only articles in Dragon that i routinely skipped, or started to read and then gave up on, when i read Dragon).

Not saying i'm right (about FR), just pointing out that, to me, the concept of the new WotC D&D setting being bleah, or the writer being uninspiring, is no big stretch.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 30, 2003)

mythusmage said:
			
		

> *As to casting for pay. That's for the apprentices. *




Why would that be?  I'm thinking of worlds like Lawrence Watt-Evans' Ethshar, where consulting mages of all sorts build their business on casting spells for other people.  It's certainly not all relegated to apprentices there.  Or a seer, who uses their divination ability for pay.  Maybe a magical construction company: "Need a castle and it absolutely, positively has to be up overnight?"  Or a messenger service, or...well, you get the idea, and a lot of those spells are going to be far beyond apprentice level.  So I would think that a mage could make a very comfortable living for himself without dropping the XP on casting, and in fact (if he had the right spells and clientele) could make more money than a crafter, which would lead to the crafter being less willing to fork over the XP for crafting (thus slowing his development) if he could get the money another way, which was (IIRC) the original point from way back when. 

Sure, you could take the XP out of the crafting, but I'm more discussing the implications of the D&D magic system than trying to change it for a particular result.

J


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 30, 2003)

KeithBaker said:
			
		

> *Oh, and just to go on the record -- since it was pointed out that I didn't directly *deny* it in my previous statement -- I am in no way related to Richard Baker. I simply took the family name when he adopted me.    (Note to conspiracy nuts: also a joke)  *



Yes, yes, but how closely related are you to Kevin Bacon, we'd all like to know?


----------



## mythusmage (Jul 30, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Why would that be?  I'm thinking of worlds like Lawrence Watt-Evans' Ethshar, where consulting mages of all sorts build their business on casting spells for other people.
> 
> J *




_Small_ magics, son. Small magics.

You know, zero and first level spells. The sort of thing an apprentice masters before going on to the hard stuff. Of course the master is going to be casting the dangerous dweomers.

Of course master and apprentices wouldn't be the only viable business plan. I can see consulting wizards, industrial wizards, even advisor to the king wizards (the old vizier, from whence wizard came). After all, not all detectives are consulting detectives.

In my considered opinion, D&D has become a poor table top imitation of a bad video game. Reward inflation, gamist thought, stuff like that there. When it could be so much more if those elements from story, theater, and real life also found therein were promoted alongside the game elements..

Wizards concentrated on rewarding people for playing the game, when they should've gone out to reward people for taking part in the overall experience. Of which game play is but a part.

I could say tons more on the subject, but this really aint the place for it.

To make this short, anything that gets people to think of an RPG as a place where people live and have adventures, social encounters, and stuff like that there is good in my eyes.

A +8 sword is a poor substitute for a rousing session.


----------



## woodelf (Jul 30, 2003)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> * Doesn't the article quite clearly say this is not steampunk?  Magical Industry is not steampunk.  Lots of typical and frankly fairly pathetic knee-jerk reactions on this thread; latching onto words that don't even seem to describe the setting, and denouncing the setting because of it.   *




Well, first, "steampunk" is a near-meaningless term.  Or, more precisely, it has a plethora of meanings, depending on who you talk to.  Second, if someone were to say "this is nothing like traditional D&D fantasy. it has dragons and powerful magic, and features dwarves and elves and orcs prominently", would you accept the first part of their statement as being true?  Someone can say "this isn't steampunk", but if what they describe is what you consider steampunk, then it is, their claims to the contrary notwithstanding.


----------



## woodelf (Jul 30, 2003)

Gargoyle said:
			
		

> *My opinion is that WOTC shouldn't have unveiled the setting until they had more information that they could release.  This is a very large campaign world in its infancy.  Why have a Q&A seminar when you can't answer most of the questions?
> *




So you can gauge customer response?  Maybe, more than being a chance for the fans to find out abou the setting, this was a chance for WotC to find out what the fans liked/disliked.  After all, it should still be fairly early in the development cycle--easy to change emphasis at this point (such as how much they talk about the dinosaurs, or how much page count they spend on magitech feats).


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 30, 2003)

woodelf said:
			
		

> *Well, first, "steampunk" is a near-meaningless term.  Or, more precisely, it has a plethora of meanings, depending on who you talk to.  Second, if someone were to say "this is nothing like traditional D&D fantasy. it has dragons and powerful magic, and features dwarves and elves and orcs prominently", would you accept the first part of their statement as being true?  Someone can say "this isn't steampunk", but if what they describe is what you consider steampunk, then it is, their claims to the contrary notwithstanding. *



Steampunk is only near meaningless if you talk to people who don't understand the genre and lump anything "steamy" into it.  It's got a clear set of genre conventions, it's just that not many folks who use the term are necessarily familiar with them.  But that's beside the point.  Nothing about the setting as described so far fits _anyone's_ definition of steampunk.

As to your second question, clearly a setting could be "nothing like traditional D&D fantasy" and yet feature "dragons and powerful magic, and feature dwarves and elves and orcs prominantly."  Dark Sun was essentially that setting already.

But I still fail to see how that's relevant, as there's nothing even remotely like any definition of steampunk that's been revealed as yet.  This brouhaha about the "train" seems completely misplaced and willfully ignorant, based on comments we've got from people who _were actually at the presentation_ and know _what was actually said_ as opposed to people who looked at a little picture and immediately jumped to insupportable conclusions.


----------



## KeithBaker (Jul 30, 2003)

William Ronald said:
			
		

> *Perhaps it might be possible by stating what it is not.  For example, it is probably  NOT a Land of the Lost ripoff and will not come with any music from either the 1970s series or the more recent one.  (See my previous post.) *




It's not Land of the Lost or Dinotopia. It's not Iron Kingdoms or Shadowrun. It's not... hmmm... BESM or Nobilis. Though you probably could have guessed the last two.  



> * Also, can you comment on what it is like to work with a company like WotC on a product like Eberron?  A lot of people might be interested into what insights  you can provide on what happens from the development of an idea to the finished product stage. *




When I was selected as one of the final three, they brought me out to Seattle and told me what they liked and didn't like about the setting -- as I've said before, there were some things about it that even *I* knew were too bizarre (I should note that this was something they did for all three of the finalists). The 125 page document was designed as a story bible as opposed to a rule book, and discussed races, cultures, countries, history, and the theory of the world.

Once it made the final cut I began talking directly with Bill Slavicsek, James Wyatt, and Christopher Perkins. There was a lot of discussion about how to adapt certain features of the world to D&D mechanics. A few things were toned down or removed; among other things, the world was just too darned big. I certainly believe that two heads are better than one (of course, I'm an ettin) and a lot of excellent ideas came out of these group discussions. Having paid the big bucks, WotC now owns the idea. But so far it's been a team effort and there hasn't been any sort of iron fist at work. We're all really excited about it, and if we occasionally disagree it's usually because we need to choose between two interesting ideas. 

The important thing all along has been to find ways to work together. When WotC has felt the need to change something I like, I've always been able to help come up with something that I believe is as good or better than the original, instead of just sulking about it and ending up with something I hate. I may not have full control at this point, but I've never been shut out of a conversation or decision process. Anyhow, hopefully this addresses the question...

-Keith


----------



## woodelf (Jul 30, 2003)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> *I think the setting may suffer from being too different, too 'out there' to attract a strong fan base.
> 
> Which I believe will work against it, not for it.  The setting seems to its trying to be too different.  Unless is absolutely brilliant, the FR, Scarred Lands, Midnight, Greyhawk, etc  players are going to stay with their settings or will venture into other settings with familar themes and feels to them.
> 
> ...




Why are fans wanting more familiar ground looking at a new setting?  If you're satisfied with FR, Greyhawk, and/or Kalamar; or Midnight, Scarred Lands, Dragonlance, and/or Iron Kingdoms, why are you looking at now settings?  I think going for something different is a very smart move.  D&D is in desperate need of some more variety in settings--Midnight is about as "out there" as it gets right now, except for Dragonstar.  Just how many variations on the basic theme do we need?



			
				Michael Tree said:
			
		

> *
> Exactly.   With this sort of setting, the execution is what is important.  Anyone could throw together magical tech and dinosaurs and create a mediocre derivative setting, but from the praise we've heard from the judges, this setting is much more than that.
> 
> What I like about the setting is that it isn't yet another pseudo-medieval fantasy heroic-quest world.  There isn't an existing D&D setting that does swashbuckling well, nor is there one with interesting extensions of magic. *




I'm with you on the different-ness of the setting being good.  However, in response to your and others' comments that "it must be good, why else would they have chosen it?", let me just say: Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, SpellJammer, Ravenloft, Council of Wyrms, Netheril, Dark Sun, Planescape, Birthright.  For probably any person, there's at least one in there that falls into the personal "what were they *thinking*?" category.  I don't know exactly who the judges are, but if they're the same people who think that FR is a really cool setting, or thought the Book of Vile Darkness was awesome, i don't have much hope.

Mind you, i'm fully aware that my tastes don't match the mainstream customer base.  I think that FR is one of the lamest, least-interesting fantasy settings ever published, for D&D or otherwise; can't stand Planescape; never got into Dark Sun or Ravenloft; think that Dragonlance is incurably silly; and love SpellJammer.  IOW, from everything i've heard, my tastes are almost exactly inverse to actual sales of the various settings. My point is not that i am right and everyone else is wrong. Rather, it's that they're already catering to the mainstream taste, and maybe exactly what they need is a setting a bit more "out there".  I just hope it's also cool, and internally consistent ot a reasonable degree.

Oh, and if i never see another drow for as long as i game, it will be too soon.  I never thought they were interesting or cool, and they've only gotten worse by overstaying their welcome.


----------



## woodelf (Jul 30, 2003)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> *Well, if you look at the pictures, the riding dinosaur is called a "Clawfoot".  And it's got this nice sickle-shaped claw on the foot, and the quote says "Clawsfoots are disturbingly fast, even with riders".
> 
> To me, that says Velociraptor.  So perhaps different names for the dinosaurs.
> *




Damn Jurassic Park!

A pony-sized bipedal, pack-hunting, bird-hipped dino with a giant sickle claw on its hind feet?  Deinonychus, known for decades.

A wolf-sized bipedal, pack-hunting, bird-hipped dino with a giant siclke claw on its hind feet? Velociraptor, first discovered about 15yrs ago (it was a new discovery when Crichton first wrote Jurassic Park).

I got no problem with them wanting to biggify the villains for the movie.  But, given that there is a more-well-known cousin of the velociraptor, virtually identical in general appearance and behavior, and about the size they made the villains, why they couldn't use its name i just don't understand.  In the interests of education, if nothing else.

So, rant aside, the "clawfoot" they're riding looks like it could be a renamed Deinonychus--it's way too big to be a renamed Velociraptor.


----------



## TheAntiSummit (Jul 30, 2003)

Okay I was new to DnD with 3e and I keep hearing some settings that I haven't seen in 3e spoken of with equal reverence and disdain.  If some people could just explain briefly what the gimmick ( the catch, the thing that makes you love it or hate it)is for Dragonlance and Spelljammer, I would really apreciate it.  Or if I should ask in a seperate thread, I can do that to, just say the word.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jul 30, 2003)

KeithBaker said:
			
		

> *The important thing all along has been to find ways to work together. When WotC has felt the need to change something I like, I've always been able to help come up with something that I believe is as good or better than the original, instead of just sulking about it and ending up with something I hate.*




So...is the stuff that was originally in there that _didn't_ get used covered under your NDA? Or can you share that with us? 



			
				woodelf said:
			
		

> *
> I got no problem with them wanting to biggify the villains for the movie. But, given that there is a more-well-known cousin of the velociraptor, virtually identical in general appearance and behavior, and about the size they made the villains, why they couldn't use its name i just don't understand.
> *




Because _velociraptor_ sounds way cooler than _deinonychus_, silly.

J


----------



## Spatula (Jul 30, 2003)

TheAntiSummit said:
			
		

> *Okay I was new to DnD with 3e and I keep hearing some settings that I haven't seen in 3e spoken of with equal reverence and disdain.  If some people could just explain briefly what the gimmick ( the catch, the thing that makes you love it or hate it)is for Dragonlance and Spelljammer, I would really apreciate it.  Or if I should ask in a seperate thread, I can do that to, just say the word. *



Spelljammer: D&D in space.  It's "fantasy space" however; it doesn't share much of anything in common with real-world physics.  Not so much a setting as an expansion to (and a way to connect) all the other campaign worlds.

Dragonlance: A setting based on the host of Dragonlance D&D novels.  Dragonlance on the surface appears to be similar to a vanilla D&D world, but there are a whole bunch of little things that set it apart.


----------



## Psiblade (Jul 30, 2003)

I am interested in the setting because it does seem a little off the beaten to death path of Forgetten Realms, Dragonlance, and Greyhawk like settings. My two current favorite commercial settings are Scarred lands and Ravenloft. I will wait to reserve judgement until I see the setting.



-Psiblade


----------



## Gargoyle (Jul 30, 2003)

woodelf said:
			
		

> *
> 
> So you can gauge customer response?  Maybe, more than being a chance for the fans to find out abou the setting, this was a chance for WotC to find out what the fans liked/disliked.  After all, it should still be fairly early in the development cycle--easy to change emphasis at this point (such as how much they talk about the dinosaurs, or how much page count they spend on magitech feats). *




You could be right, but I think the main reason for it was to create a buzz.  After I protested that they weren't answering our questions, Bill Slaviscek compared the seminar to a movie trailer.  That's why I was huffy in the earlier post.  Audiences at movie trailers don't expect to have questions answerd...they expect to be teased...we were at a seminar with a Q&A section, and hardly any questions were answered.   I'm not mad or anything...but our expectations and the expectations of the community here weren't met by the lack of info.  We still don't know what this world is really about, and that's frustrating.  

All that said, I know WOTC reads these boards, and they do consider our feedback.  But I think it will be used to improve their marketing of this campaign world, not the actual design.  I very much doubt that they are going to say "Well, the dinosaur thing didn't go over well, lets cut that section down to 20 pages..."  If they did that, I'd be highly disappointed.  I want a compelling campaign that they believe in, not some Hollywood studio schlock that is made to appeal to the widest audience around.  Now if they use the feedback to improve their marketing...I think that would be wise.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jul 31, 2003)

TheAntiSummit said:
			
		

> *Okay I was new to DnD with 3e and I keep hearing some settings that I haven't seen in 3e spoken of with equal reverence and disdain.  If some people could just explain briefly what the gimmick ( the catch, the thing that makes you love it or hate it)is for Dragonlance and Spelljammer, I would really apreciate it.  Or if I should ask in a seperate thread, I can do that to, just say the word. *




Dragonlance: Hate. Primarily because anything outside of "what the heroes of the books do" is all-but undefined.

Spelljammer: Love: What's not to love about fantasy space space? Especially carried out in the way that it was - crystal spheres, the phlostigon etc.

Hate: "and it tacks onto all the existing worlds like this". Unfortunately this included all sorts of worlds which never mentioned spelljammers, so they had to think up the great spelljammer conspiracy (ie - that spelljammers never talk about spelljamming with groundlings). Giant space hamsters.


----------



## Ralts Bloodthorne (Jul 31, 2003)

I've been watching boards all over the place, and I cannot believe some of the things I've seen when it comes to this campaign world.

Intolerance, bordering on a psychotic frenzy is rampant. Come on, the book isn't even out yet, and some people are acting like Mr. Baker just crapped on thier battlemat during a game.

I've seen insults, what-ifs, and everything else.
Sour grapes here and there. Whole posts of it. It's like a vinegar vineyard in some places.

So it's different.

GOOD!

I'm sick of the pseudo-medieval European crap that keeps getting shoveled out. Maybe it's time someone took the rules and tried to see how far it could go. I'm sick of the "world full of morons and crappy European architechture" that permeates so many campaign worlds.

I'm sick of low magic settings, INCLUDING Forgotten Realms.

People have said WotC won't have the guts to try something innovative, and when they try, a lot of those same people try to stuff everyone in a meat grinder.

Personally, I'll wait for more info before I make the decision.

And frankly, I'll use the train rules.

I'm tired of no technological/mystical science advancement.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 31, 2003)

woodelf said:
			
		

> *A pony-sized bipedal, pack-hunting, bird-hipped dino with a giant sickle claw on its hind feet?  Deinonychus, known for decades.
> 
> A wolf-sized bipedal, pack-hunting, bird-hipped dino with a giant siclke claw on its hind feet? Velociraptor, first discovered about 15yrs ago (it was a new discovery when Crichton first wrote Jurassic Park).*



Coupla nitpicks -- Velociraptor was discovered in the 40s or 50s when the first Mongolian expeditions (mounted by Soviet scientists and Polish scientists) went out that way.  They're also more like collie sized, not pony sized.  Deinonychus was more wolf-sized.  The larger ones, discovered just recently, are Utahraptor and Megaraptor.  Also, all of the above are Maniraptoriformes, which is very clearly nestled in the Saurischian lineage of dinosaurs, i.e., the lizard-hipped.  Although ironically, it's believed that actual birds evolved from relatives very close to the Velociraptor group, and the actual bird-hipped dinosaurs are an evolutionary dead-end.


----------



## Mirth (Jul 31, 2003)

I gave up on reading this thread a few pages ago (too much whining over something that hasn't even been released for my tastes), but I remember someone was looking for the original WotC Setting Search Thread(s) on ENWorld. I had them both bookmarked, so here ya go:

WotC Setting Search Thread #1 (the BIG one) 

Thread #2 

Don't know if these were already posted or not.

To steer this post back on topic, I'm always looking for new and exciting spins on the same old tired cliches, so I'm all set for Keith to impress me.

Jay


----------



## woodelf (Jul 31, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> *Because velociraptor sounds way cooler than deinonychus, silly.*




Speak for yourself.  I'll take "Deinonychus" any day.  Especially given their respective etymologies.



			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *Coupla nitpicks -- Velociraptor was discovered in the 40s or 50s when the first Mongolian expeditions (mounted by Soviet scientists and Polish scientists) went out that way.  They're also more like collie sized, not pony sized.  Deinonychus was more wolf-sized.  The larger ones, discovered just recently, are Utahraptor and Megaraptor.  Also, all of the above are Maniraptoriformes, which is very clearly nestled in the Saurischian lineage of dinosaurs, i.e., the lizard-hipped.  Although ironically, it's believed that actual birds evolved from relatives very close to the Velociraptor group, and the actual bird-hipped dinosaurs are an evolutionary dead-end. *




Ok, this is me with egg on my face.  I shoulda remembered that the bird-like (in stance) dinosaurs were lizard-hipped.  I didn't bother to grab a book before my last post.  On the discovery dates, i was going on childhood memories: Deinonychus was in every dino book i ever saw, but i'd never heard of Velociraptor before Jurassic Park. Somebody said it was the new, hot thing when Crichton wrote his book (and that's part of why he used them), and it didn't even occur to me to double-check--i'd never heard of them, so of *course* it was because they were a (relatively) new discovery.    Interestingly, a cursory websearch puts the earliest Velociraptor skull at 1924, and the first Deinonychus find in the '60s.  

However, where size is concerned, i stick to my guns.  Checked a couple of books, as well as online, and they all concur: Deinonychus was significantly larger than Velociraptor.  Maybe not quite "pony sized", but i couldn't think of a better comparison.  I suppose "goat-sized" is pretty close, at least for size (probably rather lighter than a goat--what's a goat weigh?).  I also overstated the size of Velociraptor.

From <http://www.mathematical.com/dinovelociraptor.html>:


> Unfortunately, the producers of 'Jurassic Park' felt compelled to make the movie Velociraptor 400% larger than the fossil record would indicate. This perhaps sold 400% more videos. Velociraptor was probably the size of a Great Dane.




From <http://www.nationaldinosaurmuseum.com.au/dinoinfo/dinos/velociraptor.htm>:


> Deinonychus antirrhopus
> Time: late Early Cretaceous, 120 - 113 million years ago
> Place: Western North America
> Diet: Meat
> ...




As long as we're nitpicking: is the opening scene of Jurassic Park in the American SW (as i thought i remembered), where Deinonychus is found, or Mongolia (where Velociraptor is found)?


----------



## KeithBaker (Jul 31, 2003)

drnuncheon said:
			
		

> * So...is the stuff that was originally in there that didn't get used covered under your NDA? Or can you share that with us?
> *




As I read it, WotC owns everything that is in the 125 page bible, and thus it is covered by the NDA. I do hope that I can post the original 1-pager once the setting has finally been released, though. And who knows, perhaps I'll be able to adapt some of the unused ideas for bonus material on my website. We'll see. 

Anyhow, I have deadlines I must deal with, so this will be my last post for a while. I'll post again when more information is released!

-Keith


----------



## blackshirt5 (Jul 31, 2003)

a quick question Keith:

Do you ever get the urge to just kick people in the junk when they rip into what their idea of what your idea is...is?

Did that even make sense?


----------



## Dr. Confoundo (Aug 1, 2003)

KeithBaker said:
			
		

> *
> 
> As I read it, WotC owns everything that is in the 125 page bible, and thus it is covered by the NDA. I do hope that I can post the original 1-pager once the setting has finally been released, though. And who knows, perhaps I'll be able to adapt some of the unused ideas for bonus material on my website. We'll see.
> 
> -Keith *




I have a better idea regarding the 1-pager... include it in the book. Take a page to show the original ideas for your campaign world, and a couple paragraphs to describe your experiences with the contest and working with WotC. I'm sure a lot of people (especially those of us who entered the contest) would love to see that info.

Doc


----------



## woodelf (Aug 1, 2003)

blackshirt5 said:
			
		

> *That setting does look awesome; what's the Savage Worlds system like, perchance?
> *




Rather like D20, but looser.  Not so much fiddly detail.  IME, quicker for chargen, and looks to be quicker-playing (haven't actually played it).


----------



## Desdichado (Aug 1, 2003)

woodelf said:
			
		

> *Ok, this is me with egg on my face.  I shoulda remembered that the bird-like (in stance) dinosaurs were lizard-hipped.  I didn't bother to grab a book before my last post.  On the discovery dates, i was going on childhood memories: Deinonychus was in every dino book i ever saw, but i'd never heard of Velociraptor before Jurassic Park. Somebody said it was the new, hot thing when Crichton wrote his book (and that's part of why he used them), and it didn't even occur to me to double-check--i'd never heard of them, so of *course* it was because they were a (relatively) new discovery.    Interestingly, a cursory websearch puts the earliest Velociraptor skull at 1924, and the first Deinonychus find in the '60s.  *



Yeah, but we didn't really know anything about it until the Polish and Soviet expeditions, when whole skeletons were found.  Also, the famous "fighting dinosaurs" find -- a 'raptor and a Protoceratops apparently killed by a sandstorm while fighting.
*



			However, where size is concerned, i stick to my guns.  Checked a couple of books, as well as online, and they all concur: Deinonychus was significantly larger than Velociraptor.  Maybe not quite "pony sized", but i couldn't think of a better comparison.  I suppose "goat-sized" is pretty close, at least for size (probably rather lighter than a goat--what's a goat weigh?).  I also overstated the size of Velociraptor.
		
Click to expand...


*Sorry -- if I said otherwise, I mispoke.  Deinonychus is very clearly larger than Velociraptor -- about the size of a wolf or leopard according to Greg Paul in _Predatory Dinosaurs of the World_ (great book, by the way, although the relationships he proposes is an out of date scheme.)
*



			As long as we're nitpicking: is the opening scene of Jurassic Park in the American SW (as i thought i remembered), where Deinonychus is found, or Mongolia (where Velociraptor is found)?
		
Click to expand...


*It's in Utah or Colorado or somewhat such place, although they clearly call it Velociraptor, and it's clearly bigger than either.  The idea of a fully articulated skeleton just lying there like that is pretty amazing though -- those kinds of finds are super rare.


----------



## woodelf (Aug 1, 2003)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> *Sorry -- if I said otherwise, I mispoke.  Deinonychus is very clearly larger than Velociraptor -- about the size of a wolf or leopard according to Greg Paul in Predatory Dinosaurs of the World (great book, by the way, although the relationships he proposes is an out of date scheme.)
> *




Interesting.  The stuff i found online is a bit more ambiguous about sizes, but the book that i have immediately to hand (The Dinosaurs, William Stout, 1981--so a bit out of date) pegs Deinonychus as ~150#.  That's a *big* wolf, and even on the heavy side for a leopard.  Mind you, i'm not sure i trust my book on such specifics.

Really too small to ride, sadly--not that i'd let that stop me.  They were large enough for riding for one of my homebrews, too.  ;-)


----------



## woodelf (Aug 1, 2003)

rounser said:
			
		

> *
> Come on, it was built to reflect the work of Leiber, Moorcock, Howard, Vance, Tolkien etc. It's got swords & sorcery classes, magic, races, monsters, tech levels and setting assumptions.  D&D is like a bunch of standard pulp swords & sorcery fantasy ideas put in a blender and set to "liquify".  Of course D&D is swords & sorcery fantasy.  What else could it possibly be?  It's not generic fantasy, that's for sure - it's way too straightjacketed for that. *




You just gave examples of two genres--both of which are antecedents for D&D.

Swords & Sorcery: sorcery is evil, almost without exception.  Monsters and non-humans are almost always bad guys--at best, they may be allies, but not the heroes themselves.  The hero must use brawn and wit to defeat the above.  The overall level of magic is middling. Even the "good guys" often have questionable morals, and ends often justify the means.

High Fantasy: the good guys have wizards/sorcerers, too, and usually have access to other sorts of weapons.  Magic is not inherently evil. Non-human good-guys are common. The overall level of magic is high. The good guys are good (though they may be flawed), and the bad guys are bad.

So, D&D ends up a sometimes-awkward mix of sword & sorcery and high fantasy, leaning more towards the high fantasy, over all.

[n.b.: those are, of course, horrible simplifications, glossing over all sorts of things.]


----------



## Leopold (Aug 11, 2003)

Warlord Ralts said:
			
		

> *I'm sick of low magic settings, INCLUDING Forgotten Realms.
> *





your sooooo joking right?!?!? Low magic FR?!?!?


----------

