Chris P's page

We played through it for a few levels but then got bored of it. It might of just been our GM but it just seemed like a lot of combat and that the next door could be an encounter several levels too high for us. I'm sure with the right GM is could be better.

It's going to be a tough go of it with only three of you. The adventure paths are hard for a party of four. I would think that you might want to take Leadership at 6th level to swell your ranks a bit, with maybe a healing cohort and some fighter followers. Conjurations are nice but th full round casting time can be a pain. Extend Spell will be nice for your conjurations since combats are likely to take a while for your small party. Augment summoning is nice too, but requires Spell Focus (Conjuration). Reserve feats from The Complete Mage help you to have something to do every round so you don't burn through all your spells quickly. Really it's going to depend some on what direction the rest of the group goes and how you standardly operate.

Was looking for ways in which to make my rogue / cleric gestalt more effective, while doing so got to thinking about the stone shape spell. Standard action to use and instantaneous effect, so my thinking is whats to stop you from readying the spell against an oncoming creature and using the spell to form an instant 10 ft long stone spike angled to set against its attack, or readying it against a volley of arrows you know is coming into the form of a tower shield or small wall etc, another might be to sneak up to a creature and drop it into a 10ft pit. If these kinds of things can be done there are many others.

Before i spring this on my DM looking to see if there is any reasons against such uses.

I don't see anything particularly wrong with using it that way but I don't think it was ever intended to be used as a reactionary spell. For a rogue/cleric I would think you would use it to bypass traps and door mostly. Form a bridge over an existing pit, make your own door to bypass a tough lock, disable a trap without having to make a roll. Those sort of things but that's just my opinion.

I lost a character to trying to cast a higher level spell off a scroll. Tried to cast Stone to Flesh in order to save a family that had been turned to stone. I was able to cast 2nd or 3rd level spells at the time. A tough roll but not impossible. Well I rolled a natural 1 for the caster check and another natural 1 for the Wis check. GM ruled that I fried my brain. I had to roll up another character and the group needed to find someone else to cast the spell.

Does anyone see any reason that a creature with an animal intelligence cannot use the aid other action. Pack animals such as wolves help each other in combat, it seems like this would be useful in a world with creatures that are so hard to hit.

I would say yes assuming the animal knows the appropriate tricks. An animal that does not have the Attack or Defend tricks would not be able to aid other in combat.

Ok thanks. I am going to let him apply metamagic feats spontaneously like a sorcere does. It seems unneccessary to make them "fetch" the spell with the metamagic feat applied to it already.

I just started a new game and one player chose Orc Spirit Shaman as his character. While I really like the idea of swapping out there known spells each day, the number of known spells per day looks like it should be bumped up by one per spell level. Is that too powerful? Is it used as game balance to counter the fact that they change every day? Any other comments on the pros and cons of the class?

Thanks in advance.

My first question is. If its facing you with its main eye and you attack it with a slashing or piercing weapon, would or shouldn't you have a chance to blind that eye, or stop that eye from functioning for so many rounds? I could see blunt weapons working as well but in a different way.

Ok this question is alittle more slily but i can't help but wonder. How do Beholders reproduce? Do they even reproduce? Does one of its eye tenticals just pop off and form a baby Beholder and that grows into an adult? What would it look like. Would the baby's had just the main eye and slowly as it grows up the other eye stalks pop out of i ts body? I just cant help but wonder about this for some reason.

Unless there is mechanics for taking out the main eye in the MM I description for beholders (which I don't think there is) then I would say noyou can't. 3.5 does not have a called shot mechanic that I can recall, so taking out the eye no matter how big or small is not possible. I understand this seems it should be an option, and the DM could house rule it as such, I think the fluff around a monster's AC includes some level of bobbing and weaving so your hit could hit just about any part of it's body.

Yeah there is a detailed (almost too detailed :) ) description in Lords of Madness. It also describes the some what survival of the fittest approach to parenting where they eat the younge that are the most flawed if I remember correctly.

Background.

What would be the cost?
spell lvl x caster lvl x 25 + (total x 5/3)x3)
ie 2x5x25 = 250 + ((250x1.6)x3){1200} making it approx 1500gp seems a bit cheap would have thought more of the reagion of 4000.

Further information
I am actualy a play in this game and as the current DM has banned the item his decision shall be honoured. However as I will be running the Savage Tide Adventure Path as soon as this one finishes I would mor ethan welcome your opinions before I have to ban it from STAP for the sake of continuity/upsetting previous DM etc

Thanks for you imput

Tony

I think I already saw it somewhere. Maybe the Magic Item Comp. Either way cost wise it's way to cheap calculating that way. To me it feel very close to the Brilliant Energy weapon enhancement. That's a +4 bonus equivalent. Just negating natural might be a little more limited but it really depends on how often you fight monsters vs actual armored foes. I would probably keep it as a +4 bonus if allowed.

Just to beat a dead horse, I've never really had a problem with them. In my opinion 3.5 has always somewhat diluted the schools (healing being conjuration) so the spells being conjuration hasn't bothered us at all. I picture the fire/ice/acid/electricity ones being directly summoned from planes that have that material. Force is a little tougher to imagine. No SR doesn't bother me much either. A lot of creatures don't have SR so no big deal. The ones that do, ok so the players have a spell that hurts it. Great, they planned well. The ranged touch attack is nice since many creatures touch ACs are their lowest. But then you have to worry about cover, throwing into melee, miss chance and all the other things that come along with an attack roll. Not many of my casters want to spend two feats to get precise shot and point blank shot.

As far as taking away from evocation, not really IMHO. With the Spell Compendium evocation got quiet a few single target attacks that also have a much better range on them. Evocation is still the master of damage.

Personally, if I felt I had to make all those changes I just wouldn't allow them. There are plenty of evocation spells to fill the role.

I think 3.5 attempted to make level lose in the middle of combat simple so they made a flat lose of attack, skills, saves and spells no matter what class you are playing. Only when you check to see if the level is lost permanently do you go through the trouble of actually lowering the character's level. So in your example you have a 10th level sorcerer that loses two levels. Well at 10th level the sorcerer has 3 5th level spell slots (his highest level). So he would lose two of those slots leaving one slot remaining. He would still be able to cast a 5th level spell even after the temporary lose of two levels.

Were the nature-worshipping orcs in the Eberron setting ever given any further background material beyond the Campaign Setting?

For the life of me I can't recall ever seeing a book for them, which is frustrating since they're practically the only solidly "goodish" orc society in D&D canon as far as campaign setting features go.

If they were explored further, where should I look?

Thanks in advance.

I don't see much with a quick flip through my books. There is a blurb in both the Races of Eberron and The Player's Guide to Eberron. I just finished The Dragon Below novels and one of the characters was an orc. There was some orc culture in those novels. There might be a liitle in the Faiths of Eberron under the Gatekeeper section as well. Overall I didn't see a lot.

Do most DMs just hand the player the character sheet of their cohort when they pick up the leadership feat? That's the way I have seen it done in the past but my player just picked up leadership and I'm considering keeping the sheet. I've told the player in rough terms all the cohorts skills and abilites and still plan on letting the player roll all the dice. The only reason I hesitate on give the player the sheet is I what it to be a little less metagaming/number cruching when asking the cohort to do things. It feel a little more mysterious and organic I guess not knowing the exact number of this person who follows you around. Does that sound worth it or too heavy handed?

The most enjoyable D&D games, plotwise, that I played in were actually published modules. The last 2E game I ran was the Dragonlance Chronicles, from the DL Classics series. The characters were enjoyable and the plot was epic and entertaining.

In 3.5, a recent game I ran to introduce some noobs, was the Eberron path of adventures, The Forgotten Forge, Shadows of the Last War, Whispers of the Vampire's Blade, and Grasp of the Emerald Claw. I heavily modified the campaign to fit into my homebrew world but the pace and characters and such made for a wonderful experience. I followed the game up with Expedition to the Demonweb Pits, which was also amazingly fun and then Greg Vhaughn's classic Istivin: City of Shadows series.

I'm running that series now. It's pretty good for when it was made.

Thanks

Ok I'm still learning the whole Eberron setting and one of my players want to play a Centaur. What region would they most likely come from? I'm not sure I see anyting specifically about them in any of the books. Should I just pick a planes area? Insight from anyone more knowledgeable on the setting?

Next question.

How do I counter-act a wizard in my group who likes to use a Web spell on every BBEG, thus making every climactic encounter target practice for everyone in the group?

Outdoor encounters where there are not two anchor points winthin range also keep the spell from being a viable option.

Hmm definately an interesting group. I'll comment the best I can but I'm only somewhat familar with most of those classes.

Conjurer - Well if the DRead Necromancer will have a bunch of undead then the summoning just adds more critters to the field which in my experience slows things down a bit. Summoning can get old after a while too, which I found out with the summoner I played not too long ago.

Beguiler/Mindbender - Not too familar with mindbender but really like the beguiler as a class. It's really good at what it does and with a Dread Necromancer in the group you don't have to worry as much about the weakness against mindless undead. I have seen the Improved Fient feat help the Beguiler get it's bonus easier.

Archivist - I really like the concept of this class. In practice it really depends on what your GM lets you find for spells and scribe into your book (at least that's how it ended up being for the guy who played one in our group). The feats that let you use your special ability (can't remember its name) on other types of creatures is very helpful. You'll also provide a good set of knowledges.

Factotum - Really don't know much about this one. If I remember correctly is kind of a jack of all trades type with a little of everything. Depending on what that the other 5th is playing then it could be an interesting support character.

I hope at least some of that helped.

There is a Will Save involved with a DC set at (10+ 1/2 Knight Level + Knight's Cha Mod).

Ok thanks. Appearenetly I need to read through it again.

We just started a new game and one of the players is playing a Knight. In the second game session he challenged his opponent. There is no save involved per the book (i don't have the book in front of me so I could be wrong) and there is nothing that says of opponent has responde to it. Am I missing something? How have other people run it? In this case the opponent's concept definately had him accpt the challenge so it wasn't an issue, just curious for next time.

The tool looks pretty damn nice. I only played with it for a bit but did notice one thing that seems to be a flaw. When I added the skeltal template to say an owlbear, it did not change the hit dice to d12s.

Almost ready to start my Eberron compaign and have been working on props for it. Have all the coins and gems ready as well as a few of the more obscure props. Now I'm looking at scrolls. My current thought is to actually print out each spell on parchment paper with the by the book rules for the spell in small print at the bottom. The top of the page will have the verbal and somatic commands for the spell. If the player actually roleplays the commands when using the scroll I plan to have the spell affected by a metamagic feat or a caster level bump of my choice. Sound like a good idea? Other suggestions?

There is a DM tracker app that is pretty nice but I think it is for 4e. It works ok for 3.5 for tracking who's turn it is and AC and hit points.

Going with the swift hunter option, it fits the character concept. Thanks for everyone's help.

There's this variant from the d20srd:

Druid
The druid might choose to give up her wild shape ability in exchange for becoming a swift and deadly hunter.

Gain
Bonus to Armor Class when unarmored (as monk, including Wisdom bonus to AC), fast movement (as monk), favored enemy (as ranger), swift tracker (as ranger), Track feat (as ranger).

Lose
Armor and shield proficiency, wild shape (all versions).

Do you have a link to this option?

Both sound pretty good. The swift hunter I think may fit her concept better, especially since she won't be using a shield due to weilding a two-handed weapon. We avoided the Shapeshift from PHB II because you loose your animal companion if I remember correctly. I remember the shared rage feat but hadn't put much thought to it for this character. I'll have to ask her what she would like best. The no armor can be rough even once she gets Barkskin. Although there may be someone in the party to give her Mage Armor.

I'm getting ready to start an Eberron game and my wife is going to play a Talenta halfling druid with a dinosaur mount/companion. The thing is she really has no desire to wildshape. Any suggestions for an alternative ability. I considered swapping it for the barbarian rage ability but not sure how balanced that would be. She is most likely gonna be Dragonmarked with the mark of healing and swapping out spontaneous summoning for rejuvenating healing from the PH2. Any ideas?

Does the upgrades to the paladin for Pathfinder make it too powerful for a normal 3.5 game? The standard paladin is lack luster so I wanted to swap the pathfinder version in but don't want it to outshine the other characters. If it is too powerful any suggestions to balance it a bit?

I personally prefer and mix of both. The battle map to give everyone a reference of where everything is and all the props and music to really set the mood. My problem with not using the battle maps is while I think I do a good job describing a scene I have a few readers and artists in my group so no matter how I describe something they picture it different. Re-clarifying something takes as much time and pulls you out of the game just as much as a battle map for me. My feeling that it's not the battle maps fault but the fact that 3.5 became more complex and at least in my group a lot of people only want to learn the basics but want their characters to be able to do the advanced stuff. It's not that the battle map slows things down its that they plays not knowing how to do what they want slows things down and that the battlemap just illustrates it more. I play in a game now where the GM loosly uses the battle map and I get very confused when monsters advantce twice as fast as PC, more around to places that I didn't think we accessable or change their actions midstream because he realizes he can't do that. It's all about keeping the flow going more than anything else.

My cleric5/alienist1 picked up Leadership at level 6 and got a Darnu (from Denizens of Avandu) as a cohort. It's a magical beast that can speak and understand any language and looks like a medium sized dog. It's an ECL 4 so it worked out well for a 6th level character. When I hit level 7 I assume I just add a level of magical beast and do that everytime I level, right? It states that after so many hit dice (I think 7) it becomes size large. Is the a level adjustment for becoming size large and if so do you earn that level first then increase in size or increase in size and spend two levels for it?

What about a Warlock? The unlimited use of Dispel Magic plus all the other tricks could be really dangerous against a spellcaster. I can't remember if their caster level is equal to their class level or half of it which could make a big difference but it might be worth a shot.

I have a Dragon Shaman in the game I play in and she is looking for a feat to take at 6th level. There are a few feats in races of dragons but are there more in other places? I was almost thinking of a feat that would let her coat her weapon in her breath weapon for 1d4 rounds but not sure if that would be too powerful. Any suggestions?

First I have to say I love the idea. I think Shadowcasters are a great class concept wise if not a bit underpowered so combining it with a cleric is a nice idea. Not without going a looking at the books my first impression is it's too powerfull. Sure its a cleric paired with a shadowcaster which from a spell casting point of view is weaker than say the Mystic Thuerge. What concerns are the Channel Shadow powers which overall feel to me like Divine feats mechanics wise and your giving the PrC five of them which seems like a lot. Now the Extra Mystery one is nice but overall once I got some of the other it would be forgotten. Looking at the PrC I thinkof what its role would be and where they would be in a battle or adventuring party. They are non-good so undead minions are an option. Their Rebuke undead continues to progress so another plus for using undead. So basically they would probably be in the back having undead (Dark ones for that matter) fight for them. Things that would probably get to them are hiding/sneak attack foes which is covered at level 7 and ranged attacks which is covered by level 9. On top of that the negative energy that you use to heal your undead troops can heal you covered at level 5 and resisting energy attacks is always nice. Over all it seems like they get a bit too much. I would have to look at it side by side with say the Heirphant(sp?)(druid/wizard PrC) from Races of the Wild to get a good idea of balance.

If I were to tone it down a bit I would remove Negate Critical Hit and Negate attack. Then I would move Resist Negative Energy to levl 9. Not sure if adding the Dark template to undead is powerful or not without looking at it. My guess is on intelligent undead it would make them deadly assassins with it's bonuses to hide.

This is how I *think* my DM handles it (I don't know because he likes to keep his secrets . . . .)

Throughout the game he'll ask everyone for d20 rolls, then he writes them down.

As we progress he might say "You know from your experience in (profession, class, race, etc) that (imparts clue, knowledge, etc.)

This keeps us from knowing that the module has cued him for a knowledge check.

He uses the rolls for spot checks, listen checks, etc.

Of course, if one of us asks for the check, he'll ask for the roll . . .

I've done this for Spot and Listen checks before and it has worked well so players aren't tipped off when I ask for a spot or listen check. I hadn't thought of doing it for Knowledge checks. Hmm might be worth trying.

I wouldn't assume anyone is trying to cheat unless you have prior experience with them actually cheating. People make errors all the time when making characters and sometime they don't get caught for several levels. I would use you option 2 approach and just say that you reviewed the characters, found an few mistakes and fixed them. Make sure that you tell them that if your fixes when not in the spirit of what they were trying to do with their characters that you would be happy to work it out within the rules as laid out by you. As for player 4 it could be a simple misunderstanding. I have seen some DMs give out weapons for free and you use your gold for "other" stuff. maybe they are just used to something like that. Maybe they just forgot to carry a one when adding up the totals and didn't really think about how much stuff they had. Give them the benefit of the doubt because you don't want the game starting out with the players thinking that you think they are cheaters. Now if they are cheaters, I'm sure you'll catch them soon enough. :)

In some monster discriptions it says when ever they win a grapple check they do the damage so is this on there turn when they beat you and on your turn when you try to escape?

examples
Once the creature has hold of an opponent, each successful grapple check it makes during subsequent rounds permanently drains 2d4 points of Constitution. At the same time, the creature regains 10 lost hit points.

So am I talking 2d4 Con twice a turn or am I just taking damage on the monsters turn

I believe it is only on there turn. Basically when someone tries to escape the grappler gets a reactive grapple check to not let them go. On the grapplers turn they can make a grapple check to do the indicated damage (vs save making a natural weapon or small weapon attack at a -4).

I've just been thinking about adding the Armored Mage (light) rule to the base Wizard class at around level 6-8. I was just wondering if there is anyone who has tried that or has an opinion about it.

I have not tried it. Personally it doesn't feel right to me when i think about what there role is plus there are plenty of PrCs that would allow it. It would also depend if you are using any of the splat books that would allow the PC by 12th level to be in full plate mail which they could magically enchant themselves if needed.

or because it's fun to play a cute little gal with wings? This exact choice hearkens back to a debate we had around here a few months back and it's interesting to see it crop up again in a more public forum.

I would guess the latter.

What exactly is it that your wife wants out of this character? IIRC, Savage Species has guidelines for determining what abilities add up to a given level adjustment. Maybe you can strip out some of the pixie's abilities that aren't as important to her, or scale down some of the more powerful stuff (or alternatively, build a custom race from scratch based off the pixie parts she likes), to arrive at a lower LA and allow her more hit points.

mainly she is looking for something different and thought the pixie seemed interesting. It may just be a whim but it also could have a lot of potential.

My wife is thinking of playing a pixie from the Savage Species book in my next Eberron Campaign. I know in a few places that some people have played pixies before. What are the pitfalls she should look out for? Is it tough to get through 5 levels with only 6 hps? She is not sure what class to take at 6th level. She was thinking druid to keep with the nature theme but not sure she wants an animal companion or wild shaping ability. I considered having her take sorcerer levels but swap it's spell list for druid spell list and swap the familar for Wild Empathy. Any suggestions?

EDIT: If you're going Warforged Knight, you might change the bonus feat list to bonus Warforged feats.

Another thing to (possibly) consider is to swap out the Knight's Challenge being based on Charisma for one based on Strength or Consitution....I think there is an alternative Warforged Paladin version that does something similar to that. But it's kind of weird to call someone out and have them decide to attack you because you're super strong or super tough. Being super annoying (high cha) makes sense.

Yeah I was thinking of using the different Warforge Armor Material Feats are replacements for mounted combat (as well as swapping out ride for craft) and the have each armor type Knight maybe be from a different house.

Yeah the Paladin's Divine Grace used Con instead of Cha.

Re: the paladin, you could have him use the non-spellcasting paladin rules from Complete Warrior.

Also, Dragon #349 presents the Sword of Celestia option, which replaces the summonable mount with a summonable celestial weapon.

I don't have any experience with the knight from PHII, but at a quick review it doesn't quite look like a nonmagical paladin -- more like the 4E warlord. YMMV

The Complete Champion has a Paladin give up spellcasting for bonus feats I think every four levels.

The player can't decide what image he is actually going for so the Knight being a Paladin without spells is not exactly what I meant. He describes him as having knightly ideals but so far has said much about spirituality so a Knight might be a better fit assuming the class doesn't suck and is no fun to play.

I wanted to get people's opinion of the Knight class. Is it fairly balanced? Is it fun to play? Where does it lack? I have a player who is trying to come up with a character for my upcoming Eberron game and he was leaning towards Warforged Paladin but doesn't want the mount or spells, so I suggested the Knight class. I also thought about doing some Warforged sustitution levels that would remove the mounted combat stuff and add some flavor like maybe adamantine knights and Mithral knights (with the path choosen at the substitution level). Any comments or suggestions are welcome.

I (as GM) would require the use of a feat if the player wished to summon a mount that was not of base type Animal, such as a dragon or dire animal, or had a template, such as Celestial Creature. For example, Dragon Steed is a feat described in the Draconomicon, and the Book of Exalted Deeds described a Celestial Mount feat that adds the Celestial template to the mount (giving the mount the ability to Smite Evil!).

I think you can't go wrong as long as it is a Animal type just made huge. Anything else would probably require a feat to cover it. Power was a huge animal shouldn't be a problem since the player won't get it until 12th or 13th level. Personally unless your player really wants a mount you may want to look at the alternate powers from PHII or Complete Divine that replace the mount with something else.

I have one of these and love it. No more figure sitting on a d6 on the side to show height. If you have a character that flys on a regular basis its great.

Off the top of my head here is what I would do and I don't have the books in front of me or know how this would work for game balance but here is how I would picture a non-spell casting Bard.

Instead of Bard as the base class take the Swashbuckler from the Complete Warrior. Reduce is Bab to match the bard's and reduce the hit dice down to a d8 (I think they are normally a d10 right). Then add to it the Bardic Music and Bardic Knowledge. Maybe for better balance the hit dice will need to go down to a d6 but I thought the Swashbuckle was a little underpowered to begin with. The skill list will need to be tweaked a bit but overall I think it would have the right feel.

Chris, the thing is, a lot of us managed to get through the first 3/4s of our lives without cell phones being as ubiquitous as they are now. Heck, when we grew up, if you weren't at home or work, you were pretty much incommunicado.

Different generational perspective, I suppose.

Agreed. I also got through almost half my life without a car but I don't take the bus to game every week. I understand that the spirit of this thread is to point out player annoyances, but it seems like some of the stated solutions are directed at taking things away rather than deal with the issue which is player attitude. But I play with mostly friends so I have a luxury of folks that will listen where a lot of people don't. Man I must be tired today to get all work up over this. ;)

Another for me is showing up at game to find out the GM has added another house rule and once again the rules I though I knew are no longer the rules.

Cel phones are a big no-no. Put that s%#@ on vibrate and answer any messages during break.

I think vibrate is a must. Screening the calls by looking at the caller ID is a must. Not allowing people to answer and have to review messages at breaks is a little over doing it IMHO. Maybe it comes from being on call 24/7 for work or having a wife and kids but emergencies happen and the cell phone is how I get informed of them.

Now Lilith I'm not jumping all over you, I'm more intrigued at how much hate on there is for the cell phone. Granted I hardly use mine. It seems that most the issues around cell phones is not the cell phone itself but the level on ingagement the player has in the game. So really you could group all the one together that include player playing with x object. It really comes down to a lack of respect for the GM and other players. Even reading the rule books fall into this to some degree. Reading to make sure what you are doing for your next action is fine, but reading to deicde what you want to do for your next character or next few levels can be done on your time.

So I guess mine is players doing other things during game other than playing the game whether it's their turn or not.

I recollect that the black dragon is a half fiend guarding a temple in Q'Barra. I have been DMing Eberron for 3 1/2 years and have tried to use all the Eberron elements somewhere in the campaign, so here it goes with your elements:.....

I have to admit Greg that until I read more of the books (still working on it) a lot of what you said didn't make sense. Now that I know more that is all great stuff. I think I will definately use some of it. I'm thinking that the black dragon may not have always been evil (I might be twisting history a bit here, not sure) and has the chance to be good again. The reason I say this is I'm thinking that I would like to do something similar to Paizo's AP points during the campaign where depending what the players do they earn either a "good" AP or an "evil" AP which determines how the dragon reacts later on in the adventure. Since the dragons main source of info is the mirror shard that aren't always displaying the current time (sometimes they show the past, other times the future) he can be swayed by how things unfold. Maybe he'll try and get released and doesn't care that doing so will release the demons and cause a second Great War. Maybe he'll sacrifices himself. Maybe he'll find a way that with the players help the release himself and keep the demons trapped becoming an ally. Then the Lords of Dust will come along and try and release the demons themselves. Not a 100% decided as of yet. Still reading and forming a plan. Thanks for your input.

This is somewhat of a follow on to my previous thread of must have books. As I have started to work my way through the books I'm starting to get campaign ideas. The Explorer's Handbook had a Black Dragon (CR:23) that will most likely be the main villian pulling the strings. His main goal is to get free of his prison (I'm at work so I don't have more details than that). Elements of Eberron that I know I want to use are as follows:

The lightning rail - probably a train ride adventure similar to Dungeon issue #143
Airships - one of my favorite things about Eberron
Warforged - maybe a recueing some from a cult who wants to make them slaves again
Archeology - a lot of item finding which will be needed to release the Dragon (probably a Dragon Shard in there somewhere)
Dragon Marks - not sure how to use them yet

Any other suggestions or ideas on things that are very Eberron?