Keith Baker's page

I had always judged that a deity had too many other concerns to worry about your cleric's every action.

With that in mind (and veering even more wildly off-topic with every post) I will say that one of my favorite Order of the Stick strips has to be the one where Thor has to interupt his battle with Surtur to answer Durkon's call for spells.

In case I've been misunderstood, I want to make it clear that _as an alternative from the baseline_, I think this is all well and good. D&D is at its best when it provides lots of options, and Eberron is certainly among the best of the "non-vanilla" flavors...

I just wanted to reiterate that I think we're on the same page here. I feel that there should always be a "Vanilla" D&D, something well suited to replicating classic high fantasy, from Tolkein to the Trojan War. I'm the first to say that Eberron is not that setting. One of my negative reactions was to the word "innovation". To me, this implies that as one of the setting designers, I feel that the previous system is flawed, and that Eberron does it better... which isn't the case. Taking the gods, I love having the gods taking an active role in a story. I still have my copy of Gods, Demi-Gods, and Heroes. I don't consider Eberron's distant gods an improvement over the active gods of other worlds... but I like it as an opportunity to explore a D&D setting in which the gods are truly unknowable, and exploring the issues of faith, corruption, and misdirected zealotry that can arise from this.

So I do consider Eberron an exotic flavor as opposed to vanilla D&D, and I feel that there always should be a solid vanilla, whether that's Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms. In fact, one of my primary concerns with the future of Eberron is the fear that certain aspects of it will be "dumbed down" to make it more vanilla.

On the issue of death, frankly, I just cheat. I'm a bad DM. If I want to play a wargame completely ruled by the numbers, I'll play minis. In tabletop, my greatest concern is the story, and again, if Legolas gets dropped by some %$#@ of an orc who just happens to get a critical hit, not much of a story. This doesn't mean I won't let players fall, because if there's no sense of risk or failure, there's no drama... and if the entire party is defeated, game over. But I am more likely to bend the rolls so they end up right at -9 instead of -11 (still requiring first aid or an action point to stabilize, but at least giving them that chance). As I said, in my eyes there are many ways to penalize PCs for failure without death; consider the cost of a resurrection in time and gold and look for other losses that could be equally significant. Oh, you did survive the thrust, barely - but only because the blow caught on your amulet of shielding and destroyed it instead of piercing your heart! Or perhaps Spanky the NPC jumped in front of you at the last minute... and now you'll have to finish the adventure without his help. There is a loss, but it's not as severe as death (especially in a world where resurrection is uncommon, as I have it in my campaign).

Again, it's a different play style, and what I do does frankly break the rules. It's something that by-the-book players will likely hate, because damn it, by the rules that Amulet of Shielding can't possibly be threatened in this situation. And I *will* kill PCs... I just want it to feel that it is a dramatic moment that's worth a death in a book or a movie, not just some meaningless "Oh, he died? Damn it - now we have to go back to the temple!" thing. Needless to say, I DON'T run this way if I'm running an RPGA event, and it was quite an interesting experience when I was running the D&D open at a con and suddenly found myself killing off PCs right and left!

I'm an equal opportunity D&D nerd. We're all in this together; let's all be D&D nerds together.

Amen!

(Though the D&D nerd in me feels obliged to point out that by making a conciliatory statement in my threatened boardspace, you're provoking an argument of opportunity...)

On the other hand, there are some bits of eberron I really find fascinating, and would really love to see more of - the Inspired/Kalashtar dynamic is spectacularly cool, for instance.

Well, I can neither confirm or deny the existence of any sourcebook WotC hasn't announced, but Amazon seems to think there's a book coming out that you'll want to see..

As far as the Eberron planes issues --

Hey Keith and Erik -- I see potential for 13 articles in Dragon Magazine. How about it? (That is unless there is already a HC in the works.)

I'd love to do something like this, but that's obviously a level of commitment to a specific aspect of a specific setting that may not be appropriate for Dragon... and it's possible WotC does already have plans (as a freelancer, I don't know everything that's in the works).

Of course, the big problem with a 13-article run of anything to do with Eberron is that you KNOW that last article will disappear in some sort of freak accident.

Stupid dragons. Stupid prophecy.

Since so much of the Great Wheel is hard-wired into the rules of the game and has been a tradition for D&D going back to the very beginning, I think it's natural that a lot of players (myself included) would prefer that Eberron be treated more or less the same as every other Material Plane world in the history of D&D...

I just wrote "Fiendish Codex 1: Hordes of the Abyss," and you might be surprised by how many people have commented that they "can't" use it with their Eberron campaign ...

No, it really doesn't surprise me at all; I think it's a very valid complaint. It's certainly one of the most challenging issues when dealing with things like Adventure Path conversions. And hey, between having my first edition books still up on my bookshelf and the "Planescape Fan" sign floating over my head, it's not as if I don't know the Great Wheel like the back of my hand myself.

It's a frustrating situation. On the one hand, I completely agree with you: It would be much easier for people to adapt existing material to the new setting if it was just one more world in the material plane. On the other hand, I like having the opportunity to explore an entirely new cosmology, providing room for the cycles of planar reincarnation of Dal Quor, for the shifting alliances of Shavarath, for arrogant and distant Syrania and subtle Thelanis. The greatest problem that I see is that so little material exists ON the planes of Eberron; as a player or DM, you basically only have a paragraph on each one. *I* have a vision of each plane, why I think it's interesting, how I would adapt existing material to fit to it, where I would put archfiends and others. You, on the other hand, are stuck with "Mabar is the realm of night. It's... um... very dark." And that's just not a lot of material to work with. Once more material becomes available on the Planes (which I assume one day it will), I think things will become easier... but I do agree, at the moment, this is a very difficult point of conversion, and makes it very hard for Eberron players to make use of existing planar material.

Of course, while *I* like the planes of Eberron (small surprise), following the whole "use what works in your game" theory, it's not like I'm going to rant and curse if I hear about people who actually replace the Thirteen with the Great Wheel in their Eberron campaigns. Again, I think that the Thirteen have a great deal to offer in the future, and as with all things in Eberron I appreciate the chance to explore new ideas. But the Great Wheel is tried and true, and compared to many things, it's a fairly easy substitution to make.

What finally made me buy it was the Lords of Dust article earlier this year (or was it late last year?) in Dragon.

I'm glad you liked it. And even more than that, I'm grateful to Paizo for printing it. I really appreciate the fact that despite whatever personal preferences people have, Erik and the others have been willing to give Eberron material a chance, and to give me (and others) an opportunity to expand the world beyond what is otherwise possible with the limited sourcebook release schedule.

I still think Wizards wouldn't hurt Eberron or FR sales by putting out just one GH hardcover to throw to the ravenous GH crowd.

I'd buy it. One of my favorite D&D experiences was running Living Greyhawk in Australia, and of course, I'm an old-timer too... I picked up my white box back in 1979, and I grabbed everything I could from that point forward. I'm as excited about the Demonomicon of Iggwilv as anyone.

But that's the point. I love Greyhawk. I'm glad to see Paizo continuing to support it, and if a new sourcebook came out, I'd buy it. But I also love Planescape, and I'm glad TSR took a chance and offered something new and different. And that's how I feel about Eberron. It is different, because that's the point of producing something new. Whether it's religion, magic level, the fact that orcs may be the good guys as often as they're the bad guys... it's a different experience. It's not for everyone, but just as I loved Planescape, it may be just the experience someone else is looking for. I would like to see more done with the settings of the past. @#%$, I'd like to see more Planescape. But I don't want to see that at the expense of continuing to explore new ideas and new possibilities.

I don't expect everyone to like Eberron, because it is a twist from classic fantasy. I don't know if it will still be around in ten years. But I don't expect anyone to be forced to play it, either. Earlier on this thread, someone said "Let's fight with our dollars! Don't buy Eberron stuff!" Uh... isn't that just basic logic? If you hate the setting, why would you ever buy Eberron stuff? I don't think WotC is coming around twisting people's arms. If enough people like it, it will continue to exist for those people. If it doesn't catch on, it will die, and that's OK - because if no one likes it, it SHOULD pass on to make way for another new idea. I don't expect it to ever be the sole setting for D&D. And no matter how successful it is, I hope that the powers that be will always be open to exploring new ideas, so some gamer in the future can enjoy something as new and exciting to them as Planescape was to me.

QUOTE="Jonathan Drain"]I don't really "get" this pulp/noir thing. I googled it; looks like it's old adventure fiction and black-and-white crime detective movies. Those came and went before I was even born, how am I even meant to work out how to combine the two? Give me old-fashioned wizards and elves any day.

As one more aside (how many posts can I make on the thread?) I'll point out that when *I* call Eberron "Pulp/Noir", I mean it in the sense of "Pulp and/or noir". It's a spectrum, not a forced merging. I originally described Eberron as "Lord of the Rings meets Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Maltese Falcon." By that, I didn't mean to cram them all together; I meant that the world should encompass all three. Xen'drik, the Order of the Emerald Claw, Khyber, Dhakaani ruins, Action Points... all of these things lean towards "pulp". Groups like the Aurum, the Chamber, the power balance between the failing monarchies and the rising houses, uncertain divinity, the malaise and anger following the Mourning - these things lean towards noir. Adventures may incorporate both aspects, but it's not a requirement; it's a matter of drawing out the elements that best fit the tone you're looking for.

Now it's just "surface elves vs....evil surface elves".

Actually, it's just "Surface elves." The drow of Eberron aren't inherently evil, and there's no more hostility between the drow and the Aereni than there is between the drow and any other surface race. On top of which, in Eberron, "drow" alone doesn't tell you much; there's a big difference between the Umbragen (who are the Underdark dwellers), the Children of Vulkoor (the jungle savages), the Sulatar (elemental binders), and whatever cultures you may choose to add yourself. Secrets of Xen'drik will go into the history and nature of these cultures in more detail... not that I'm expecting you to check it out. ;)

The point to me is that at least to my knowledge, no one is going to force you to play Eberron. I don't believe Eberron is going to replace Forgotten Realms. Which means traditional high fantasy will always be there. Eberron is intentionally different, because if you want evil-drow-in-the-Underdark, you've already got two excellent settings that provide them. Do you need a third? You may not want or like Eberron, but it does offer an alternative for someone who wants a change.

And just to answer my own question before someone else does, yes, you can counter resurrection with things like soul bind and for that matter the Keeper's fang quality, which I wanted in Eberron for just that reason. Again, it's all about the flavor you want. If you're playing a high-action game in which PCs die on a regular basis, resurrection is absolutely vital. I prefer to focus more on intrigue than battle, and to have death be a major event... and I will often bend the rolls to avoid what I consider a "trivial" death. I generally say "If I was writing this as a story, would a character die here?" If not, there's always other ways to handicap the PCs for their failure.

This also ties to the fact that I prefer mid-level action. My favorite time is when characters are between 6-10th level... powerful, but not earthshaking. I often slow down experience gain during this period to draw it out. So yes, I'm the first to admit it... there are things about Eberron that are ideally suited to what *I* like about playing D&D, but which I realize are not part of the "baseline D&D experience". That's why I'd be surprised if Eberron was ever considered "core D&D". I'm proud of what's been done with the setting, and I hope it will stick around; but I don't expect it to supplant all other settings, especially those with a strong grounding in traditional high fantasy.

I will add one other note on the NPC issue. What I advocate in Chapter Nine and take very seriously in my campaign is having both major and minor NPCs that advance in level as the PCs do. At 12th level, the Lord of Blades just isn't that scary. But the goal there is to let you face him when you're only, say, 8th level, and have a chance to beat him. then when you're 12th level, he comes back at 16... and so on. If you foil Erandis d'Vol's plan but she gets away with the Book of the Qabalrin, I want her to come back with an extra level next time - so the story evolves, and the PCs feel that they aren't the only ones tearing up through the power levels. I want characters like Bellaq... er, Halas Martain... who are always just tough enough to pose a challenge without being overwhelming. But again, that plays better with my style of campaign; if PCs are going to make absolutely certain that no NPC escapes alive, this sort of advancement is difficult. And regardless, it's certainly more work for the DM. So as the PCs become the mightiest heroes of the age, I want new villains to arise to match them. And of course, there are other epic-level villains waiting in the woodwork, from Lords of Dust and their Overlords to the mightiest of the Daelkyr and the Kalaraq Inspired.

Anyhow, bla bla bla goes the game designer. (Strangely, this sound was left off of the Playskool toy...)

Quadruple meh. This is one of my least favorite "innovations" related to this campaign setting.

Needless to say, I'm sorry to hear that, as I'm certainly among the many who respect your editorials and opinions on D&D, and admire what you've done with Paizo. To me, the key point is that Eberron isn't the baseline D&D experience. Forgotten Realms is still going strong with no signs (that I know of) of slowing down, and the active role of deities in the world is a critical part of Forgotten Realms. In my mind, it's not a question of better or worse; it's providing a different experience if you want to have it. I personally love the "Trojan War" style of play that you can explore with Forgotten Realms, and if I'm running an FR game, I'm going to focus on that. But I also enjoy having Eberron as a world where divinity is a mystery, where we have fewer religions but a lot of room for internal conflict within the faiths... in large part because there is no deity to act as final arbiter of these things.

The same really holds true of the limited-NPC approach. It's not better; it's different. Having high-level NPCs lets you have figures like Mordenkainen or Elminster that PCs can aspire to match. It's one reason that I don't expect Eberron to replace FR or Greyhawk. But I don't want it to replace them. Because each setting has its own strengths, and each offers me a very different experience as DM or player. In Eberron, you don't expect to find a 12th-level wizard in every city. In FR, you do. No right, no wrong... but a choice and a chance to explore a different tone. If Eberron kept the Great Wheel, had either the same gods or just similar ones with new names, and so on... why bother having it at all? I realize so people may respond to this with "Exactly! Why DID they bother creating it at all?" but to me the differences are the point. It's not the baseline D&D experience. But I hope it's an interesting one.

And, of course, the lack of true gods is one of the main reasons I created the equivalently-divine-rank-7 Overlords in "Eternal Evil"... so PCs could still have the thrill of going up against a being of godlike power.

"Solving" for this problem by making a world where no one is capable of casting important spells like resurrection seems like a massive overreaction to a largely imagined problem.

There's actually an entirely different issue here... and resurrection is at the heart of it. Others have said that Eberron is a world that's wide-magic as opposed to high-magic, and that's certainly my view of things. Personally, I want resurrection to be rare in my campaign, because I'm usually focusing on mystery and intrigue instead of on dungeon crawls. My problem is that a world in which resurrection is easily available is going to be a very different world than the one we live in. How can you have political assassinations when the King obviously has enough money to be resurrected? Why wouldn't he be brought back the instant he died? And how would this cascade across history, if every wealthy person can essentially have a magical life insurance policy? Meanwhile, I want that noir tone where death does matter, where if your partner dies you can't just toss a bag of gold down on the nearest altar and bring him back... or in a murder mystery, you don't just say "Heck, we've got 5,000 gp, let's just bring the victim back to life." It's a question of play style, and it is in this case me trying to enforce what I like on the world, in a manner that may be inappropriate. I know it's something even people who like Eberron often complain about. It's ideal for the noir scenarios, where death is rare but very significant when it occurs; it's not so good for epic slugfests, where the maximized DB Fireball from the balor wipes out half of the party. And again, this is one more reason why I think Eberron isn't "the baseline D&D experience". The point is, the "few high-level NPCs" is NOT just about making low-level characters feel heroic; it's about the impact the common presence of high-level NPCs (especially high-level spellcasters, wielding spells like teleport, resurrection, and wish) should have on the course of civilization. In FR, you can get a resurrection at any major temple. In Eberron, a temple may not even have a spellcaster; go to House Jorasco for your healing-for-gold. Personally, what I like is the fact that the settings ARE different, and that I get a very different experience when I play Greyhawk, FR, Eberron, or Dragonlance.

But that's just MY take. ;)

So how about it Keith, what part of the Church of Banjo do you see yourself in? Orthodox? Reformed? Or the fear-inducing Cult of Banjulhu?

I only just saw this thread, but I'm Banjulhu all the way. Of course, as this picture shows, I may not survive long enough to join the faithful...

I do like the fact that someone finally did something more with the Rakshasa. In my mind, that was one of the most underused monsters in all of D&D (right up their with the Ogre Mage).

Thanks! Obviously, I agree - the Rakshasa have always been a favorite of mine, both mythologically and as a D&D creature (though personally I'm VERY glad they finally lost the Kolchak-inspired death-by-blessed-crossbow-bolt vulnerbility), and I wanted to see them become a significant force. As for the Ogre Mage, I'm working on that with the nation of Droaam... but haven't had a chance to bring them into the spotlight yet. Anyhow, I'm glad there's something good in the steaming pile of @$%#@. ;)

Though I would like to hear what your take on a Greyhawk hardcover would be.

I'd buy it, certainly. Hey, I still have my autographed copy of Temple of Elemental Evil on the shelf. And while I haven't had the time to play in the local Living Greyhawk campaign, I had an awesome time with the Perrinlanders at Spring Revel '04!

Eberron came out shortly after I started seriously playing. Because it was new, fresh and different I wasn't left out of the "loop".

I've actually heard that from quite a few people... it slipped my mind. When people say "Eberron is for younger players," they're usually complaining about the "magic robots" and lack of firearms. Oh, wait, actually they rarely bring up the lack of firearms... my mistake. ;) But the fact that the setting itself is a younger setting - and thus requires less investment to get "caught up" - is actually a logical reason for it to appeal to new players, whether young or old. And on the other hand, I can just as easily understand the person who has invested thirty years in a setting that has proven itself to be successful wanting to see that setting recieve further support - so that others can share the world they have enjoyed for years.

Again, there's no right or wrong in my mind. That's why I like seeing a little bit of everything myself. I've played in all the settings, and for all that Zuggtmoy has no (defined) place in Eberron, I still enjoyed her Demonomicon entry... and heck, if I felt like it, I COULD just stick her in Eberron. I've never used or encountered Elminster in a tabletop RPG, but I've run into him in the Baldur's Gate and SSI gold box computer games, and I can enjoy his adventures.

For me, much of the fun of roleplaying is exploring other worlds. It's like reading fantasy novels. I read Tolkein. I read George R.R. Martin. I read Steven Brust. Do I think some series are objectively better than others, or that some of their worlds are more to my personal tastes? Sure. But I enjoy them all in different ways, and I enjoy that variety. Same with RPGs. I may play Eberron more often than not, but I've had a great time when I have played Living Greyhawk, and I certainly loved me some Baldur's Gate.

Anyhow, I'm glad you're enjoying it, Celiwyn. And Aberzombie, I am sorry it's not for you, but I can certainly understand. It does, after all, have the magical robots and the flying ships. ;)

Mostly I dislike the technomagic, steam-punk feel... Also, it seems that Eberron is a world designed to appeal to younger people (teens to early 20s).

I get that a lot, actually. "Eberron? It's for the kids, with their nintendos and their airships. Feh!" Needless to say, I'm not in my earlier 20s, and it's not what I had in mind when creating the world. A few of my goals included...

• Creating a world where arcane magic played a significant role in society. If wizardry obeys laws, can be repeated under controlled circumstances, wouldn't it be adapted to serve purposes of war, transportation, medicine, and communication? In my one pager, I actually specifically stated that it wasn't steampunk, which is generally the blending of magic and technology, but rather a world in which magic has been applied to civilization.
  
• Pushing against the black-and-white view of alignment. Someone's evil? Reason enough to kill him. All orcs are savage humanoids who deserve to die. I wanted to get explore the idea of evil people serving good causes, corruption in good organizations, and other gray areas. You can do this in ANY setting; I'm not going to say that Greyhawk doesn't have a complex web of conspiracy and intrigue. But it is one of the fundamental principles of Eberron, right on page 250 of the book: an Eberron adventure should challenge preconceptions of alignment.
  
• Having a world where the gods don't walk the earth - where sects can be torn apart by differing beliefs, and the god can't just come down to sort things out. To make sure that faith matters, and that terrible things can be done in the name of faith.
  
• Focusing on the idea that the PCs are the true heroes of the world... that there aren't many benevolent NPCs who can match their abilities. You start out weak, like characters in many heroic sagas; but by the end, you are the greatest heroes of the age. Assuming, of course, that you want to be heroes.
  

Now, with all that said, the last thing I want to come across as doing is saying "Eberron is the best world ever! Nyaah!" Some people like it, some don't. It's different from Forgotten Realms, and but that doesn't (in my mind) make one bad; it means that when you sit down to play one or the other, you can expect a different tone. FR is more traditional high fantasy, which will always have a solid appeal. The gods don't walk the earth in Eberron, but I LOVE the Trojan War potential one can have in other settings; it's just that other settings already have that covered, so why not try something different? I started playing D&D back in the Greyhawk days, and personally, I'm a big Planescape fan.

Anyhow, I certainly don't expect to change your mind about Eberron, and yeah, I'm happy to join in with the jokes. It's not everyone's cup of tea. But I still think the "it's a kid's world" argument is a strange one, when some of the basic principles of the setting are moral complexity, religious ambiguity, the balance of power between industry and monarchy, and the terrible impact of war. People may ignore these components of the setting... but they are there nonetheless.

But hey, at the end of the day, it's a game. Some people like it, some people don't. And especially taking something like the Wizards Three... Eberron's only a few years old, compared to 30 years of Greyhawk. I may not see it as a kid's setting, but as a setting it still IS a kid, while Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and FR have had decades of seasoning. I hope Eberron will have a chance to grow and take its place alongside the others, but there's still the chance it'll wander out into the road and get hit by a truck. 'Cause y'know, kids are like that!

Well, what about... the Great Pine!

Actually, N1NJ4, I'm afraid Oalian is in the story...

... he's the table.

At least its not some damn Eberron schmuck!

Yeah! Stupid %$#@ Eberron schmucks!

Actually, I wouldn't know who to suggest if Ed WANTED to use someone from Eberron; lower level NPC cast and all. You'd probably end up with Hassalac the kobold, and he'd need a kid's seat to reach the table.

If you enjoyed the Lords of Dust article in Dragon #337, I've done a dinky web expansion of my own. If you drop by www.BossytheCow.com, I've posted full stats and background for Thelestes, the succubus assassin allied with the Council of Ashtakala. Happy murderous outsider holidays!

I thought Eberron wasn't supposed to have super high-level NPCs? Am I just misremembering, or was that part of its original design plan?

Others have really hit this on the head. The primary goal was to have few high-level allies and fewer high-level characters just hanging around cities. NPCs typically use NPC classes, and a 12th-level character is a big deal - so finding someone who can cast 7th level spells for you is a big deal. My personal goal has always been to have a world where it is ultimately clear that the PCs are the heroes of the age: for all her power, the Keeper of the Flame can't leave Flamekeep, and if the Tarrasque assaults Sharn, it's in your hands.

However, heroes are measured by the vilains they face. So high-level villains are out there. Of course some of the dangerous villains of the age start at lower levels (The Lord of Blades is suggested at 12th)... with the idea that they will increase in power as the PCs do. Doctor Doom is always a match for the Fantastic Four; they don't end up being four levels higher than him a few issues into the comic.

And, of course, Sul Khatesh is imprisoned and her release should be a grave threat to Khorvaire - she's not just hangin' around. It's up to the DM to decide whether he wants to unleash such a threat on the world, and how the party might face such a mighty opponent.

What creation guidelines did you use when you created Sul Khatesh? Did you use epic saves and base attack bonus progressions? If so, did you apply them after the 20 outsider hit die or after 20 class levels?

I used epic saves, BAB, class abilities, etc after her first 20 class levels. Her abilities are largely patterned on divine salient abilities.

Shouldn't Sul Khatesh's Armor Class be 58 (-1 size, +9 Dex, +7 infernal, +20 natural, +13 deflection), touch 38, flat-footed 49?

Yes. Not sure how that got by both me and the editors.

I take it, too, that the example Overlord, Sul Khatesh, essentially had Divine Rank 7?

Essentially. But she can't grant spells, she doesn't have a godly realm, and she doesn't have access to divine salient abilities, despite having powers that mimic them. The overlords are beings with the power to rival gods: but technically they AREN'T gods, just extremely powerful spirits.

Also, if you have the time to answer another question: did you consider some of her special abilities (such as Change Form, Know Secrets, Mystical Force, Terrible Vision) equivalent to Salient Divine Abilities?

Similar to and based upon, sure. Change Form and Mystical Force actually combine the effects of a number of salient abilities. So again, she's not a god - but she has a similar level of power to the manifestation of a god in another setting.

One minor error in the Lords of Dust article in Dragon #337: The DR for the Overlords is listed as 40/magic; this should actually be DR 20/epic.

An Overlord is roughly equivalent to a lesser deity, and the DR was originally 40/+4; DR 20/Epic is the recommended 3.5 conversion.

This is true of all Rajhas, whom I felt did not need to be statted, but here we are.

My feeling is that the overlords are a diverse group of beings. This article gives you one set to use, and is intended for those people who want to actually square off against divine-level threats. But if someone else wants to use the existing archfiends as overlords, or to make an overlord that's an even more nebulous and statless threat - a sentient hurricane that obliterates all matter it comes into contact with - go for it. There's "at least" thirty, and I'm only covering six here... so you can get as weird as you want with the rest.

It's a difficult road to walk, because while some DMs and players don't want definition, others do. So what we're trying to do is provide options. Here's an overlord if you feel the need for stats. If you don't, come up with a new name and say it's a different order than the others, and you're good to go. Same with Secrets of Xen'drik: it provides options for DMs to use, but ideally, it won't close any doors for DMs who want Xen'drik all to themselves. It's a tool box more than a blueprint, and it's up to you to choose what to use.

Eternal Evil - Lords of Dust: Just a bit of an odd one here: Kashtarhak is supposedly the Voice of Chaos, yet he's Lawful Evil? Keith, I've caught you on this one before...

You're being too literal, TK! Kashtarhak is called the Voice of Chaos because of what he does: he shatters empires and brings down kingdoms. He spreads chaos. But he himself has remained dedicated to his overlord for over a hundred thousand years, and his plans are careful and calculating, leaving as little as possible to chance. He may want to bring chaos to mortals, but it's not the force that drives his behavior.

As for Eberron, before hearing that Keith Baker reccomended the Lords of Dust, I thought of using either:

Hextor = The Mockery
Erythnul = The Devourer
Vecna = The Shadow

My suggestion for the Triad is just as you have described, but replacing Erythnul with the Keeper. In many ways the Devourer is a better direct match to Erythnul, but the Keeper-Mockery-Shadow pairing makes a better overall trio to me. Of course, with that said, the Lords of Dust ARE involved - but all will come out in the web expansions.

Can I count Keith Baker as a "yes?" Heh heh heh....

Nah, I just adapt it to my homebrew. Oh, wait, Eberron is my homebrew. Never mind...

What is the hit die for this class.

D8. Just like an aberration itself. Though I'll note that this was an article in Dragon, and you've posted on the Dungeon board... ;)

Unless it was changed in development - which is certainly possible, so wait for word from a Paizo staff member before taking this as gospel - it was supposed to be d8. Aberrations themselves have d8 HD, good Will saves, and a 3/4 BAB, so it actually mirrors that.

GVDammerung -

Thanks for the feedback! I'll certainly bear it in mind in the future. I am sorry to hear that Steel Shadows didn't work for you. It is very important to me that the warforged NOT be seen as "metal humans" or, for that matter as robots. The replicants of Blade Runner are one example, but for me, even more so, it comes to the question of what it is like to have your existence shaped by a purpose - along with the following question of what you do when that purpose is no longer called for. A human fighter and a warforged fighter are entirely different, because the warforged sees the entire world through the lens of battle - while the human grew up like everyone else and then chose the path of war.

Unfortunately, both in this and your suggestion that adventures take place spread across Sharn, space is really the biggest obstacle. If you're dealing with a 32-page module, you've got around 24K words to work with; that's enough space to travel from district to district, to present in-depth details on NPCs, and so on. Like I said, in Steel Shadows (and spoilers to follow if you haven't read it) I wanted to go into more detail about House Cannith: their interactions with the warforged community and knowledge of Copper's activities, and develop an ongoing NPC villain who would provide the more noir aspect. Copper was always intended to be more of a pulp villain - a mad scientist, even if he had a noble goal. Cannith was there to provide the noir aspect. The true villain, even though they never face the PCs in battle - who were aware of what was going on and chose to allow it to continue in hopes of personal financial benefit, a power the PCs would be aware of at the end but couldn't touch. But there simply wasn't room for that plot in the space available. The same goes for Fallen Angel and the ravers; dealing with multiple raver tribes would have been more interesting, but to make it interesting you need to devote the space to discussing the tribes, their personalities, structure, etc - something that could really be an entire backdrop without even squeezing in an adventure.

That's not to say these things can't be done; perhaps I need to learn to do more with less. But that's the difficulty one labors under: whatever ideas you may have, at the end of the day you have to be able to squeeze it into the alotted word count.

One thing I will note (and I realize that I'm drawing the thread way off topic, so I'll leave it alone after this) is that while Eberron is described as "pulp noir", that doesn't mean that every adventure is expected to draw on both sources of inspiration, but rather that both are present in the world. Really, it's a matter of what style of play the DM prefers. Just looking to the villains in Eberron, they're even designed to be of more use to these different styles of play. The Order of the Emerald Claw are the pulp villains: when you find them, you know they are bad. Whatever they are up to, you can feel good about stopping it. A group like the Chamber, on the other hand, is mysterious and completely unpredictable. Even if they've done good in the past, you can never truly know what their motives are, and actions you take in their service may cause as much harm as good. But fundamentally, a dungeon crawl in Xen'drik may be entirely pulp-driven; by contrast, an adventure dealing with the conflict between Daask and the Boromar Clan could be pure noir, with little action and a great deal of moral uncertainty.

So far, the adventures that have come out for Eberron have leaned in the pulp direction. I don't consider this to be a failing, because it's always been a part of the setting: "pulp noir" is a spectrum, and it's up to the DM to place an adventure along that spectrum. With that said, it is a shame that the noir aspects of the world have been more or less undeveloped in published work, and hopefully that will change in time. If I do have the opportunity to write another Eberron adventure, I'll see if I can bring that to the fore.

The problem with the Sharn adventure was that it made, IMO, poor use of the city of Sharn where it was allegedly set.

Actually, I think there's been three Sharn adventures. But your point is reasonable. Could you be more specific about how the adventures could have captured the flavor of Sharn for you? On the off-chance that I end up writing more adventures in the future, I'd certainly appreciate the feedback.

Just to let you know what *I* was trying to do, and how I felt that the adventures tied to Eberron:

Steel Shadows wasn't simply supposed to be an adventure that "threw in a warforged." The goal of the adventure was to get people to think about the role of the warforged in a post-war world: to introduce players to the warforged community of Khyber's Gate, and to the tension between its warforged and human inhabitants - the prejudices that are a result of war. I wanted to present a number of different warforged personalities, to show how the paths they might take - the humanist Dandy, LoB followers, laborers who want to be left alone. A further goal was to involve some aspects of mystery as opposed to being a straight dungeon crawl. Originally, I had wanted to do more with the House Cannith connection - sort of a Chinatown element, reflecting the power and potential corruption of the Sharn enclave - but in the end there just wasn't space. Word count is an ogre, and it often limits what you can fit into a story. In retrospect it might have been good to discuss the ir'Tain family in more detail, highlighting the long-term consequences of the manner in which the PCs deal with the foundry; but again, this is an issue of how much fluff one can fit into the allowed amount of space while still providing the core adventure.

With Fallen Angel, the goal was to explore the ways that a dungeon can exist in a city. I think Fallen is one of the more interesting districts in Sharn, and my main regret with the adventure was that there wasn't more room to explore the Raver cultures. But the purpose of the adventure is to draw players into this district, bringing them into contact with this postapocalyptic environment, and to introduce some of the important NPCs, like Faela. It also provides a hook for the Radiant Idols, something that a DM could follow through with in the future. With Fallen itself, the goal is to drag the PCs through misery that exists under their noses. This isn't some ancient ruin of some long-forgotten civilization - this is right in your town, dealing with people driven mad by one of the worst disasters to hit the city. In my mind, these were issues tied directly to Eberron - a look at the glass tower, an examination of one of the Raver tribes, an introduction to Faela and the Radiant Idols.

As for the Ring of Storms, I'm sorry to hear that you didn't care for it; in retrospect, I do feel that there somehow isn't as much to it as I would like. However, for me, the chance to explore a little more of the history of Xen'drik - the last days of the giants, the roots of the Blood of Vol in the Qabalrin - was an interesting opportunity. Perhaps I didn't accomplish as much with it as I could have, and I certainly accept responsibility for that.

But, I would like to hear how you feel Fallen Angel and Steel Shadows could have been tied more strongly to Sharn or Eberron; hopefully that feedback can lead to better adventures in the future.

Of course, with that said, you've put your finger on the problem. You say "an adventure... that might have been set with minimal disruption in Waterdeep, the City of Greyhawk..." Obviously, it's in Dungeon's interests to present an adventure that CAN be adapted to Waterdeep or Greyhawk, because then there is the potential that all readers can get some use out of it. If the adventure is completely tied to a unique element that just can't be pried away from Eberron, then you have compeltely ruled it out for anyone who doesn't use the setting - whether because they don't like it, or simply because they already have an ongoing campaign in another setting.

But I do have a concern about something else. I'm currently playing a cleric of the silver flame in an Eberron campaign and I notice that the "example cleric" uses a longbow in the EBerron Campaign Setting, but no penalties are given for non-proficiency, and no feat is taken to get that ability. This cleric doesn't have the war domain, so I'm a little confused. Since I've got the leadership feat and I'm going to have over 50 followers beginning next week, I'd like to know how they managed that....

It's a mistake. If you download the Eberron errata, it mentions that the cleric should have taken the martial weapon proficiency feat.

However, given the martial nature of the church, you could certainly choose to split it in to for purposes of domains - give the priests of the ministry access to Healing and Protection, and give the templars Exorcism and War.

Hey Amber!

My one disapointment was that The Celtic Warrior piece was written from a historical perspective instead on drawing on the myths and tales of that period. Heroes such as Cuchulainn perform feats of arms that are every bit as impressive and fantastic as anything you'll see in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and I would have liked to see a broader look at this tradition. As a case in point, the article describes the sling as primarily a defensive weapon - but in The Tain, Cuchulainn's deadly skill with the sling halts an entire army! Though with that said, this would be far too large a subject for a Class Act. The article does a fine job of addressing the historical subject, so I'm not slamming Kieran Turley (especially with a name like Kieran) - I simply would have prefered a different approach.

Oh, and what was up with that Umbragen article? That Baker guy is a hack.

The Dread Knight is not actually an existing PrC; it's a unit from the upcoming computer game Dragonshard. The article suggests how warlock might be combined with other classes to best replicate the abilities of the unit.

I'm looking forward to sending some hapless PC to Dal Quor...

I'm glad to hear it!

And Big Jake, your party sounds like a lot of fun. Has the goblin noble player checked out the Heirs of Dhakaan dragonshard article on the WotC website?

What I'm sort of trying to say is murder mysteries are hard adventures to design.

Agreed! And yes, timing there could obviously be very awkward. I think it does make sense to keep Copper in just one location -- if it turns out that the Foundry works better for your group, by all means switch it. Heck, feel free to add additional scenes that occur in the tunnels, if you want to stretch it out. The Red Hammer provides you with the personalities and descriptions of a few of the denizens of the area, but you don't have to present them all at once if you don't want to!

Needless to say, thanks for all the great work you and the rest of the Paizo staff are doing, James. I'm glad to hear that you enjoyed Steel Shadows!

(And let me just say that I love this little warforged icon!)

I obviously have a bias towards Eberron, but I understand that some folks hate it. And some folks really REALLY hate it. I know Erik has said elsewhere that the new Adventure Path series will include placement and conversion notes for DMs who want to set it in Eberron (or FR), so regardless of whether there are any free-standing Eberron adventures, there will be something for those of you running Eberron to play around with. Conversely, if there are free-standing Eberron adventures, I'm sure they will include conversion notes for pulling them into other worlds.

Actually, Copper WAS the warforged getting beaten up in the first draft -- he was just in the Red Hammer as well. My guess is that the editors felt that it was too much of a coincidence to have him in both places and chose to keep him in the Hammer, and I can see the logic to this. If your players are going to spot him right off, I'd certainly move him to the foundry.

-Keith Baker