Why DON’T you like Eberron?

[Ozreth]

I like the setting and have had the books forever but only run one short game with it. I’m re-visiting the setting and finding that I like some of it a lot more than I remember, and certain things I really dislike. Overall it’s a very clever and thorough setting.

The setting seems to be having a resurgence. I can find plenty of people talking about what they love about Eberron, but how many of you dislike it and why?

Being a 3.5 setting originally and since that’s what my group plays I’m posting here.

[pabelfly]

I prefer to make my own setting rather than have someone else's setting. If I use someone else's setting, I need to do all sorts of research and prep to make sure I'm not dropping the wrong lore and to make sure I don't get the characters wrong.

I also dislike the action point mechanic of Eberron, although I cannot articulate why I do.

[chaincomplex]

I never found Eberron's cosmology compelling. One thing about it I never liked. But it's not hard to fix by importing Planescape's.

Eberron's world doesn't have the depth of writing of, IDK, something like Tekumel, nor the breadth of material that Forgotten Realms does. This means the facade of fantasy drops away very quickly if the DM isn't actively inventing while DMing.

But you won't find me hating Eberron, I generally have positive views of the setting.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

I like the surface, 'day-to-day' worldbuilding of Khorvaire - the Five Nations and their societies, Dragonmarked Houses and their role in the economy, Artificers, that sort of thing. Basically most of the stuff you think of when you think of Eberron. It has a fair few glaring holes or daft bits, but no more than pretty much any other published setting and less than many.

I'm really not fond of the cosmology, and strongly dislike a lot of the 'deep lore' - things connected to Argonessen, Sarlona, etc. In particular, the fact that these places are full of super-duper high level ubermonsters and characters makes a mockery of Eberron's claims to be more grounded and low-level than other settings, and makes Khorvaire - the supposed focus of the setting - feel like a pathetic backwater that the actually important places and groups are just leaving alone by fiat.

Io'lokar is the perfect example of this, with its humanoid inhabitants somehow all being ridiculously high level - to the point that it gives the example of a 'lowly clerk' being 15th level. (For reference, this is higher than every statted character in Five Nations save a Silver Flame-empowered Jaela Daran, including hardened war heroes, ancient vampires, and robosupervillains. The only real justification is given for this is 'dragons gave them some teaching and magic items...1200 years ago'.)

It also includes this line, which hurts my soul:

A tavernkeeper willing to barter a month’s lodging for a magic weapon makes no distinction between a +1 dagger and a +5 holy vorpal short sword of wounding.

The idea of equivocating between something that can be made by a low-level artificer in a couple of days, and something which would require an epic level character to dedicate years of their life towards (not to mention near 4 million gp and enough xp for a 14th level character - or a 'lowly clerk', I suppose) would be a stretch even when applied to something like a Fey or Slaan; the idea of a supposedly sane humanoid thinking like this is just laughable.

[Metastachydium]

Artificers

That. That right there. Artificers are stupid, and their face is stupid and their stupid Warforged are stupid.

I'm really not fond of the cosmology

To be honest, I kinda disagree there. I like the odd, self-contained setup with the moons and the bleak&creepy afterlife moon in particular has some very fine classical pedigree.

The idea of equivocating between something that can be made by a low-level artificer in a couple of days, and something which would require an epic level character to dedicate years of their life towards (not to mention near 4 million gp and enough xp for a 14th level character - or a 'lowly clerk', I suppose) would be a stretch even when applied to something like a Fey or Slaan; the idea of a supposedly sane humanoid thinking like this is just laughable.

I don't quite remember the context and I'm NOT going to dig out DoE for just that (it's, um, not that good a book), but if our inkeeper can only Detect Magic, but not Identify its exact nature, I could see 'em just shrugging. And it's not like the guest is shortchanging them.

[Prime32]

Io'lokar has got to be the single dumbest, gamiest piece of Eberron lore. Don't forget that the city is divided into tiers which only let in people above a certain level.*
Or the thrown-in "There's this guy, maybe he's like the real Kaius III or something", when there's already an established hook for that which is way more interesting (the masked prisoner in Dreadhold).

It's a shame, because Dragon of Eberron does introduce some fun mechanics and other interesting things.

* Not just for metagame reasons - it's established that HD exists in-universe as "the strength of the soul" and is somewhat measurable - but because declaring "only lv16 people can be innkeepers on this street, lv15 need not apply" is such a random and arbitrary thing to do .

[glass]

Like several of the posters, there is quite a lot to like about Eberron (which is off topic for the thread), but there are a few things I dislike:

• Twelve planes "orbiting" world and having an impact when close/losing influence when far away. Not because it is bad, but because my homebrew setting Pelhorin does the same and did it first*. People are going to assume I nicked it from Eberron when in fact I nicked it from somewhere else entirely!**
• Dodgy mechanical implementation of some cool concepts (exactly which mechanics are dodgy varies by edition).
• Trying to make the cosmology more World-Axis-esque in 4e (including sticking Baator in there) and then AIUI shoe-horning the whole thing into the Great Wheel in 5e.
• That I can never remember without checking how many Bs and Rs there are.

I did not know about the level inflation on other continents TheTeaMustFlow*** mentioned until just now, otherwise it would probably have been on my list also.


* Technically, I started with six, but upped it to twelve to better suit other lore elements. The increase did happen after Eberron existed, but becoming more like Eberron was an unfortunate side-effect rather than the point.
** I think it was inspired by the Orrery cosmology in the 3e Manual of the Planes. But it might even have predated that, in which case I do not remember what exactly inspired it. In any case, the details are pretty different.
*** Great screen name, by the way.

[Palanan]

Like others, I don't dislike it per se, just never really drawn to it.

I've always felt there were probably more interesting entries in the original competition, but for whatever reason Keith Baker's submission was the one they ran with. Nothing against him, and it would be a dream come true for a personal setting to receive the full sourcebook-and-supplements treatment. Just not a setting that really spoke to me.

The one element I liked the most is the warforged, and I wish Pathfinder had done a better job of providing a parallel. The wyrwoods are the closest approximation, but they're rather odd and hardly developed at all.

[Xervous]

Firstly, I hate what Eberron did with dragons. I’m extremely particular about dragons and the whole legions of hesitant to act dragon Illuminati is a pitiful waste of their potential.

Beyond that instant deal breaker I don’t like warforged. I do not want a common, playable construct race in my D&D. I also view the setting’s handling of changelings as extraordinarily lighthearted and optimistic; I would be willing to entertain changelings in a setting if the setting treated them more like dopplers are considered in the Witcher books. Shifters are a delightful contrast in how the setting properly reacts to them.

I’ll echo the point of so many powerful actors lurking on the fringes, and the silliness on some of the other continents. I also dislike the cosmology and the big bads of the setting.


Though I will hold up City of Stormreach as one of the highest quality 3.5 books. The detail, personality and hooks are overly abundant therein.

[Fero]

Like others, I don't actively dislike the setting but feel it is a bit weak compared to other options.

First, I vaguely recall WotC ran a contest among the community to create a new setting and then awarded the prize to one of their own people, even in the face of other, more compelling, settings. That left a bad taste in my mouth. [Note, the statement that WotC gave the award to one of their own was a pervasive, but apparently debunked, rumor]

Second, more substantively, Eberron always felt like a mismatch of disparate settings/genres that did not mesh well with each other or with the DnD rule system

Third, DnD already has many wonderful settings that it never developed for 3.5. Dark Sun, Planescape, and Spelljammer (to name a few) are all much more compelling to me than Eberron.

Finally, Eberron always felt like it was built with marketing, not story/setting first in mind. The whole setting screams early 2000s eXtreme in a way that aged poorly.

Again, these are just general impressions. I am by no means an expert in the setting.

[glass]

First, I vaguely recall WotC ran a contest among the community to create a new setting and then awarded the prize to one of their own people, even in the face of other, more compelling, settings. That left a bad taste in my mouth.

Wait, what?

As far as I heard at the time and since, Kieth Baker did not work for WotC prior to the setting search (he did afterwards, of course). What makes you say otherwise? Got a link?

[Remuko]

I don't. I'm fairly neutral on it. Never played in it. My group always played in homebrew worlds back in the day, loosely based on Greyhawk, since that's what (afaik) the core 3rd and 3.5 rulebooks are about. Forgotten Realms/Faerun though, I do not like. Probably because of being introduced via the Greyhawk stuff. I don't like the "weave" concept as a whole, and I prefer the Greyhawk pantheon. But yeah I know very little about Ebberon and it sounds cool but I've never experienced it.

[Ozreth]

Like others, I don't actively dislike the setting but feel it is a bit weak compared to other options.

First, I vaguely recall WotC ran a contest among the community to create a new setting and then awarded the prize to one of their own people, even in the face of other, more compelling, settings. That left a bad taste in my mouth.

Second, more substantively, Eberron always felt like a mismatch of disparate settings/genres that did not mesh well with each other or with the DnD rule system

Third, DnD already has many wonderful settings that it never developed for 3.5. Dark Sun, Planescape, and Spelljammer (to name a few) are all much more compelling to me than Eberron.

Finally, Eberron always felt like it was built with marketing, not story/setting first in mind. The whole setting screams early 2000s eXtreme in a way that aged poorly.

Again, these are just general impressions. I am by no means an expert in the setting.

I can get behind a lot of your points. For as much as I like about the setting, I feel a lot of the same sentiments. But the bolded part I'm not sure about. I remember seeing accusations fly around at some point about that, but wasn't this heavily debunked?

[Ozreth]

I don't. I'm fairly neutral on it. Never played in it. My group always played in homebrew worlds back in the day, loosely based on Greyhawk, since that's what (afaik) the core 3rd and 3.5 rulebooks are about. Forgotten Realms/Faerun though, I do not like. Probably because of being introduced via the Greyhawk stuff. I don't like the "weave" concept as a whole, and I prefer the Greyhawk pantheon. But yeah I know very little about Ebberon and it sounds cool but I've never experienced it.

I am currently running Age of Worms and so have a renewed interest in Greyhawk, a setting that always eluded me in the past. What is it you like about Greyhawk, especially compared to FR? Its my thread so I'll risk derailing it for a moment Or feel free to PM.

[AMFV]

Wait, what?

As far as I heard at the time and since, Kieth Baker did not work for WotC prior to the setting search (he did afterwards, of course). What makes you say otherwise? Got a link?

What I recall is that around the time of the contest there were a crapload of pervasive rumors with not really a lot of backing spread around by the magic of the early internet.

[Zanos]

Eberonn is fine. If someone tells me that their campaign is set in Eberonn my reaction is "Okay". I'm not particularly hyped about it, but there's nothing offensively wrong with it.

Some issues I have:

There's a huge gameplay vs. story issue with dragonmarks. Despite the fact that dragonmarked individuals are incredibly favored, the abilities associated with them mechanically are pathetic and generally worse than the opportunity cost of taking an actually good feat. The fact that higher tier dragonmarks with more effective powers are effectively gated by HD via their skill requirements is a doubly whammy, as often the effects simply aren't impressive compared to a caster of equivalent level, in a setting that's supposed to account for the presence of spellcasters! The Mark of Passage, for example, one of the better ones, grants access to teleport at the exact same level that a wizard could just cast it. And yet everyone in the setting is completely obsessed with dragonmarks. Hell, one of the most powerful characters in the settings objective is to stop being an immortal lich so she can use her dragonmark that probably gives her create greater undead 1/day as an SLA. One must wonder what use a 16th level wizard has for a necromancy SLA.

In general, I dislike the idea of low-but-broad magic settings. I don't mind PCs or their opponents reliably having access to magic, but magic should be something at least somewhat fantastical that's only wielded by a small number of either gifted or erudite individuals. Walking down the street and seeing magical lights and constructs everywhere should be reserved for settlements that are magocracies.

Dragons are too powerful to form an illuminati-like conspiracy where they control all information and gank anyone that either interferes with or begins to understand the draconic prophecy. Characters have to be far too powerful for the Eberonn setting to interact with this part of it in any meaningful way without dying instantly. There's a good reason that dragons in other settings are generally depicted as being too egotistical to form alliances outside of a small number of individuals; because they take control of the entire setting, and not in a good way.

Speaking of high powered nonsense, while Eberonn claims to be a relatively lower power setting with printed NPCs only going up to the teens with few rare exceptions, you'll quickly find out that those rules do not apply if you leave Khorvaire at all and discover that it's basically the worlds backwater.
a
Agnosticism is fine in real life; in a setting where characters derive magical powers directly from their faith, I'd prefer something a little more concrete than that the power of faith somehow siphons off of one of a few nebulous sources of magical energy that either have no ability or no desire to communicate.

A lot of Eberonn's big unanswered questions are easily solved by the plethora of low level magic users sticking their noggins together and experimenting. "Do warforged have souls"? Apparently nobody has looked, because there's quite a few spells even in core that could determine whether or not they do without question.

[2D8HP]

Sentient robots (“Warforged”) just aren’t my thing; that said though, most TSR/WotC D&D settings aren’t either, I’d prefer something closer to Anderson’s Three Harts and Three Lions

[Fero]

I can get behind a lot of your points. For as much as I like about the setting, I feel a lot of the same sentiments. But the bolded part I'm not sure about. I remember seeing accusations fly around at some point about that, but wasn't this heavily debunked?

It was very possibly debunked. Still, even if it was debunked, it is probably fair to say that said rumor laid the foundation for a lot of negative feelings about the setting. I will add a note to my comment to make sure I don't spread disinformation. Honestly, my biggest gripe was that they made Eberron instead of Planescape :p.

[Ramza00]

feels like a grab bag

yes I realize that is its charm , and you kind of need that for a main setting so you can have 30 different games inside of a world

[Pugwampy]

I was ducky imprinted onto forgotton realms . Lots more Novels and computer games. Seems more fleshed out and more book supported . My original group only used Faerun .

I know almost nothing about Eberron .
I would not object to playing or DM ing that world

But i think St Cuthbert is the worst name for a deity ever.

[Tzardok]

But i think St Cuthbert is the worst name for a deity ever.

St Cuthbert is a Greyhawk deity, not an Eberron deity. Also, according to official lore, he originally came from a different world and religion.

***

I agree with some of the criticisms mentioned before, but my biggest peeve isn't even with Eberron itself. It may be unfair of me, and it is obviously a problem of the edition, not the setting, but to me Eberron is the poster child of 3.x's discouraging of setting crossovers. Where 2e had Spelljammer, Planescape and to a lesser extent Ravenloft as crossover settings that connected all other settings, 3.x wanted to limit such contact as much as possible. And Eberron, which was created from the beginning to be incompatible, exemplifies that for me, and I resent it a bit for that.

[Ozreth]

I agree with some of the criticisms mentioned before, but my biggest peeve isn't even with Eberron itself. It may be unfair of me, and it is obviously a problem of the edition, not the setting, but to me Eberron is the poster child of 3.x's discouraging of setting crossovers. Where 2e had Spelljammer, Planescape and to a lesser extent Ravenloft as crossover settings that connected all other settings, 3.x wanted to limit such contact as much as possible. And Eberron, which was created from the beginning to be incompatible, exemplifies that for me, and I resent it a bit for that.

Now this is an interesting take! I almost universally see people praising Eberron for being the one setting that finally wasn't connected to everything else and stood on its own. From what I know, it was the creators desire to have it this way, not Wizards, but in any event, I like it that way.

[AMFV]

I am currently running Age of Worms and so have a renewed interest in Greyhawk, a setting that always eluded me in the past. What is it you like about Greyhawk, especially compared to FR? Its my thread so I'll risk derailing it for a moment Or feel free to PM.

I like that Greyhawk is relatively grounded and has like a consistent well designed political sphere. I like that it's dynamic, you've just had a big war. Which is on of the pluses that Eberron has as well. Like in FR you'd hard pressed to talk about any major changes that impacted the world that weren't walked back. Greyhawk you're coming out of the Flaness Wars and you have a post war kind of fragile peace feeling. A lot of the Gods and religions are very unique and interesting Wee Jas in particular is a really thematically cool deity. It's just a good setting that I think is going to sadly fall away.

[Batcathat]

In general, I dislike the idea of low-but-broad magic settings. I don't mind PCs or their opponents reliably having access to magic, but magic should be something at least somewhat fantastical that's only wielded by a small number of either gifted or erudite individuals. Walking down the street and seeing magical lights and constructs everywhere should be reserved for settlements that are magocracies.

That's kind of funny, since that's the main reason I would like to try Eberron at some point (but haven't so far, so I won't be much help with the question of the thread). I prefer worlds where magic is either widely available and impacting lots of different things or worlds were it's exceedingly rare (like LotR, for example), while a lot of settings (of both D&D and fantasy in general) has it somewhere in between, where it's pretty common but still doesn't seem to actually affect the world much.

[AMFV]

As far as what I dislike about Eberron? I don't really like the MagiTek setting, I don't really enjoy "abundant low magic". I find that a lot of the races that are wearing different hats are doing that just to be different. Dark Sun has a lot of that issue as well. I find that the guild politics is really complicated to explain to new players and they need to know about that to interact meaningfully with the setting. It's basically a lot of homework right off the bat for newer players.

[Zanos]

That's kind of funny, since that's the main reason I would like to try Eberron at some point (but haven't so far, so I won't be much help with the question of the thread). I prefer worlds where magic is either widely available and impacting lots of different things or worlds were it's exceedingly rare (like LotR, for example), while a lot of settings (of both D&D and fantasy in general) has it somewhere in between, where it's pretty common but still doesn't seem to actually affect the world much.

As long as by impacting the world you mean that it doesn't enter the everyday lives of commoners, sure. A necromancer might terrorize a town or someone from a village might go off to fight in a war and be incinerated by a battlemages fireball, but generally the common folks experience with arcane magic is one that sows mistrust, not appreciation. Folks know magic is real but don't understand how it works or its limitations, and generally aren't going to be very friendly if they find out you can use it. While people in big cities might have picked up a bit more, it's still going to be fairly uncommon for them to interact directly with arcane spellcasters, since magic items are ludicrously expensive compared to a normal persons income, and it's not like wizards are blowing eachother up on the street. In any case when the commonfolk cross paths with magic it's a story worth telling at the bar, not just a day in the life of a farmer. The farmer doesn't heat his morning tea with magic or ride on the magic train to work or walk home at night from the magic bar on the street lit with magic lights. He might be devoured alive when a psychopathic wizard summons an army of demons to take revenge on the King that slighted him decades ago. So it does affect the setting in that regard.

I kind of count clerics outside this paradigm, at least ones of vaguely beneficial deities. Evil clerics are probably just called wizards by 90% of people because they associate using magic to harm people with "wizard" and using magic to help people with "priest."

Of course, this is all a matter of taste.

[Batcathat]

As long as by impacting the world you mean that it doesn't enter the everyday lives of commoners, sure.

Yeah, pretty much. I guess I mostly just find it boring world-building to include something as monumental as magic and then not have it change society in very meaningful ways most of the time, instead just having it as some pseudo-medieval (or pseudo- some other time period, if you want to mix things up) setting where heroes and villains occasionally use magic. Having magic be super-rare isn't exactly exciting, but at least it sort of justifies why it doesn't affect the world much.

[Fizban]

Short version:
Eberron looks like, and I would even say bills itself as, some sort of magitech and houses and guilds setting thanks to all the stuff it constantly plays up (and people go there expecting it to actually deliver), but fails to actually back any of that up with mechanics. The magitech rules aren't, and what rules are supplied for the houses and guilds actually ensure that no intrigue or conflict between then can affect any change, making them pointless. Instead it's nothing but a pulpy backdrop (albeit with some clever tricks) meant to excuse other types of adventures (train heists and Indiana Jones-ing etc), which relies entirely on narrative-focused DM fiat to hold everything together. There is no substance.

Longest version, see various posts and threads here, here, here, here, here, and finally here, in chronological order. Fair warning some of these are rather heated.

[pabelfly]

Yeah, pretty much. I guess I mostly just find it boring world-building to include something as monumental as magic and then not have it change society in very meaningful ways most of the time, instead just having it as some pseudo-medieval (or pseudo- some other time period, if you want to mix things up) setting where heroes and villains occasionally use magic. Having magic be super-rare isn't exactly exciting, but at least it sort of justifies why it doesn't affect the world much.

A level zero spell cast by a first-level spellcaster is worth 5GP, an untrained hireling makes 1sp per day and a trained hireling makes 3sp per day. An untrained hireling would have to save two months of wages to get a single casting of even a level zero spell like Mending, and a trained hireling would spend over two weeks wages for the same. And this is all from the maths of goods and services in the PHB.

Just by dent of the basic economics of the DnD system, magic will be out of reach for most people except nobility and adventurers.

[AMFV]

A level zero spell cast by a first-level spellcaster is worth 5GP, an untrained hireling makes 1sp per day and a trained hireling makes 3sp per day. An untrained hireling would have to save two months of wages to get a single casting of even a level zero spell like Mending, and a trained hireling would spend over two weeks wages for the same. And this is all from the maths of goods and services in the PHB.

Just by dent of the basic economics of the DnD system, magic will be out of reach for most people except nobility and adventurers.

And even then if we're talking like actual impact there's a question of supply and demand which is never really addressed when people are positing super high magic settings. Sure a person could cast a few spells a day, but only a few. So their impact would need to be massive. Like take fireball, you wouldn't even be able to make a half-ways decent artillery equivalent with it.