The Campaign Builder's Guild

Quote from: Other peoplesomething about 4e ungoodness

Athas.org?[/url], in particular http://athas.org/products/ds3#description

Being one of the official fan-sites allowed to develop conversions for dead settings or however that deal went back in the day, it's both non-wizards and non-4e :P

I can't speak for the quality though, but it looks fairly decent browsing through the last release. (I personally stear clear of fan-sites, but I understand others here have a different opinion ^_^).

Not spending a lot of time browsing DnD lately, what were the "minor tweaks" to Eberron?

Quote from: athas.orgAthas.org?[/url], in particular http://athas.org/products/ds3#description

Being one of the official fan-sites allowed to develop conversions for dead settings or however that deal went back in the day, it's both non-wizards and non-4e :P

I can't speak for the quality though, but it looks fairly decent browsing through the last release. (I personally stear clear of fan-sites, but I understand others here have a different opinion ^_^).

Not spending a lot of time browsing DnD lately, what were the "minor tweaks" to Eberron?[/quote]
Things like, oh, letting any race have any dragonmark and undermining the entire basis of the Dragonmarked Houses and thus the basis of almost the entire setting--yeah, they say it's only for the PCs "because the PCs are special!" but the dragonmarked feats are so good that you're practically guaranteed to have an entire of party with mismatched dragonmarks and if you're playing in Eberron at all it's stupid not to take them.  Yet they still have Aberrant dragonmarks, when prior fluff held that a dragonmark on the wrong race (from a mixed-race pairing, for instance) ended up as an aberrant mark....

Things like randomly making up "feyspires" or some such that are entire eladrin cities literally plopped down in the middle of nowhere in the Mournland and Xen'drik and all that...when the whole point of those places is that they're too dangerous to live there, and plopped down right smack in the middle of Khorvaire...when their existence requires a few massive retcons.  Plus, the eladrin ability to step into the Feywild to teleport (which they still have) makes no sense if they've actually been kicked out of Thelanis as they claim.

Those are the two big ones; there are some less prominent ones, like changing the artificer's schtick because ritual casting makes its older one (which was fairly strongly tied into the setting's assumptions with the artificer vs. magewright thing) obsolete, or changing the mechanics of lycanthropy so huge chunks of the Silver Flame fluff make no sense any more.

Dunno, sounds like relatively minor tweaks to me. Some necessary, some just to fix things maybe some people complained about.

The change to lycanthropy was a change to 4e. It's not the same as a tweak to Eberron.

But I can't see how any of these things mess up the setting. That idea presupposes that there is some kind of Platonic ideal of Eberronness out there that we should strive for, and if so, it was achieved in the first printing, so any retcon deviates from it.

Now if the problem is that you had an existing campaign going, but you wanted to switch that campaign from 3.5 to 4e, and could accept those changes, but not setting changes, I suppose that's a different issue.

I refuse to buy any more D&D products. Wake me up for 4.5

Quote from: PhoenixDunno, sounds like relatively minor tweaks to me. Some necessary, some just to fix things maybe some people complained about.

The change to lycanthropy was a change to 4e. It's not the same as a tweak to Eberron.[/quote]But I can't see how any of these things mess up the setting. That idea presupposes that there is some kind of Platonic ideal of Eberronness out there that we should strive for, and if so, it was achieved in the first printing, so any retcon deviates from it.

Now if the problem is that you had an existing campaign going, but you wanted to switch that campaign from 3.5 to 4e, and could accept those changes, but not setting changes, I suppose that's a different issue.[/quote]
I'm not running an Eberron campaign at the moment, no.  And, yes, I'd say that any retcon deviating from the 3e version by this degree is getting too far from the ideal.  If the minor tweaks were actually minor, that would be one thing--you know, changing the name of one of the Sovereign Host, moving Darguun slightly southwest of where it is now, things like that.  The Dragonmarked houses, the ideology of the Silver Flame, manifest zones, the nature of magic item creation...all of those are central to the theme of 3e Eberron, and all of those are changed in the 4e version; the exact name of one god or the location of one nation, not so much.

Quote from: Pair o' Dice Lost<various amusing silliness>

QuoteThe change to lycanthropy was a change to 4e. It's not the same as a tweak to Eberron.

Fair enough.

QuoteI'm not running an Eberron campaign at the moment, no. And, yes, I'd say that any retcon deviating from the 3e version by this degree is getting too far from the ideal. If the minor tweaks were actually minor, that would be one thing--you know, changing the name of one of the Sovereign Host, moving Darguun slightly southwest of where it is now, things like that. The Dragonmarked houses, the ideology of the Silver Flame, manifest zones, the nature of magic item creation...all of those are central to the theme of 3e Eberron, and all of those are changed in the 4e version; the exact name of one god or the location of one nation, not so much.

But if the 3e version was ideal for you, you've no reason to complain. It means you don't need to buy the book at all and you can save your $35 (or whatever it costs). You've already got your ideal fluff.

You can't mean you'd wanted them to make a new book just to change a few feats to match 4e rules? I'd be a lot more pissed if I bought a new book and only one chapter had changed.

But then again, I don't see anything you've mentioned so far as a big change to the setting. To be honest, even if they had entirely removed the dragonmarked stuff I don't know that I'd call it major (although perhaps not minor). It doesn't change the feel much for me.

If they said no more warforged, lightning rails, or other technocraziness, that would be pretty major, to me. Though I don't know that I would say it would ruin things, since I don't believe in the idea of a Platonic ideal for a setting.

But then, I didn't love Eberron to begin with--I liked it way more than FR, but I didn't love it. If you were a huge fan, then I can see not wanting something you love messed up. But that brings me back to, if it wasn't broke for you, you've got nothing to complain about.

Quote from: PhoenixI'm sorry, I don't accept your analogy.

Nor do I find argument by analogy particularly convincing in most cases; better for amusement than constructive reasoning.

But then again, I don't see anything you've mentioned so far as a big change to the setting. To be honest, even if they had entirely removed the dragonmarked stuff I don't know that I'd call it major (although perhaps not minor). It doesn't change the feel much for me.

If they said no more warforged, lightning rails, or other technocraziness, that would be pretty major, to me. Though I don't know that I would say it would ruin things, since I don't believe in the idea of a Platonic ideal for a setting.

But then, I didn't love Eberron to begin with--I liked it way more than FR, but I didn't love it. If you were a huge fan, then I can see not wanting something you love messed up. But that brings me back to, if it wasn't broke for you, you've got nothing to complain about.[/quote]
I guess this is where our tastes diverge.  For you, removing warforged is a big change and changing dragonmarks is minor; for me, warforged (and shifters and deathless and...) being able to get the wrong dragonmarks is just as big a change as removing warforged.

As to not having anything to complain about...well, kind of.  I know you don't like analogies, but humor me for a moment--did you like the original Star Wars movies?  Assuming that's a yes (who doesn't?), did you like the prequel movies?  Some people liked them just fine; hardcore Star Wars fans (such as myself) disliked them for their contradiction of previously-established canon and stilted plots.  Yes, I can watch only episodes IV-VI and act as though the prequels never happened (which I don't, but just for the sake of argument), but anyone introduced to the "new" Star Wars who hears I'm a Star Wars fan is going to start talking about Gungans and midichlorians and General Grievous and all that.  Changing many of the iconic aspects of Eberron has a similar effect--someone starting on 4e Eberron is going to think of the setting in a different way from someone who played 3e Eberron and switched to 4e Eberron, and both are going to think of the setting in a different way from someone who only played 3e Eberron.

It might just be that the only aspect of the 4e transition I really hate is the discarding of all of the older edition canon, and as FR is nuked, and Planescape is relegated to a sidebar in MotP, and Greyhawk is summarily ignored, I simply find the Eberron changes slightly more drastic than I would if they were alone because it's part of a general "shoehorn settings into the 4e mold" trend, and seeing new players thinking of 4e as the Way D&D Is while not knowing anything about the shared lore and quirks that make me like D&D just rubs me the wrong way.  Who knows; I guess when I get interested in a hobby I just take it too seriously.  I'll stop derailing a DS discussion with Eberron and let others contribute.