Do you use the Eberron content in Dungeon (or plan/want to use it in the future)? Sound off with a "yes," "no," or "other" and feel free to explain your choice.
My vote: yes.
Eberron is exciting, it's interesting. Not because it's new, but because it's genuinely well-designed and innovative. It's exotic, and yet distinctly and unmistakably D&D. It has it's flaws, like any setting, but on the whole it's very good.
Greyhawk is bland. It's dull. It tastes like chicken. This works as an advantage in one sense, in that a Greyhawk adventure can be seasoned and cooked and modified to fit into whatever world you like. But to convert a bland Greyhawk module into a distinctly Eberron one can often take a lot of work, with some complete re-writing necessary (I'm sure anyone trying to convert Shackled City knows this). Sometimes it's almost as easy to start from scratch. This is why Eberron adventures are needed.
For my part "no" I do not use Ebberon content, though just about any Dungeon adventure can be adapted to my campaign. I admit that the setting sounds interesting, but I feel the same way about Star Wars, Iron Kingdoms, and Munchkin and I don't play, nor do I have any desire, to play any of them.
The notion that Greyhawk is "bland" is the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Perhaps you feel that Tolkien or Jack Vance are bland as well and prefer the likes of R.A. Salvatore. You sound like a newbie to the game to me or someone that got burnt out and needed something to make him excited about D&D again for whatever reason. Whatever the case, opinions are free and everybody has one.
Not yet - a few of us here in Indy are trying to put together a Monday or Teusday night Ebberon game (in which I'll be a Artificer - kewl!), but we haven't started it yet.
Also, in my current campaign as a DM, there are lots of allusions to the Guilded Age, where there were fantastical wonders, high magical technology, and a very complicated political system. I never fleshed much out except for what I was specifically planning on using. The Ebberon "feel" is perfect fit for it, and I've gotten so many interesting ideas from the core book.
I like Ebberon alot. As for the magazine, I'd say the "Adapting the Adventure" sections do a pretty good job for most generic adventures, but I still want to see some with Eberron's specific "feel." An adventure every 2-3 months is not so bad, IMHO.
Also, "Adapting the Advenure" sections work both ways. Who's to say that an Eberron adventure can't be used in Greyhawk or any other settings?
No I can't say that I do. The adventures themselves are fine as they are easily adaptable (I play FR so I have to adapt greyhawk stuff as well, no biggie). The exception to this is the adventures that seem to focus on the Warforged. They are pretty uniquely Eberron and I find it difficult to adapt them. Now if I were playing a sci-fi game...
Sean Mahoney
|
No I can't say that I do. The adventures themselves are fine as they are easily adaptable (I play FR so I have to adapt greyhawk stuff as well, no biggie). The exception to this is the adventures that seem to focus on the Warforged. They are pretty uniquely Eberron and I find it difficult to adapt them. Now if I were playing a sci-fi game...
Sean Mahoney
I ditto that! I dont use them generally myself. I hope somebody is.....
Cheers,Stegger
The notion that Greyhawk is "bland" is the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Perhaps you feel that Tolkien or Jack Vance are bland as well and prefer the likes of R.A. Salvatore. You sound like a newbie to the game to me or someone that got burnt out and needed something to make him excited about D&D again for whatever reason. Whatever the case, opinions are free and everybody has one.
I've been playing D&D for seven years (and ran a Greyhawk campaign for 11 months), so I'm neither a newbie nor burnt out. I don't think Greyhawk is a bad setting, I just think Eberron is better in almost every aspect (the cosmology and deities don't quite do it for me). I suppose it's a matter of taste. Just for the record, I love Tolkien, haven't gotten around to reading Vance yet (but want to), and won't touch Salvatore with a 10-foot pole.
I actually like Eberron a fair bit myself. My husband likes the world a lot, and I've been holding off on reading too much of it because he's been making noises about running an Eberron campaign.
My vote: yes.
I've been playing D&D for seven years (and ran a Greyhawk campaign for 11 months), so I'm neither a newbie nor burnt out. I don't think Greyhawk is a bad setting, I just think Eberron is better in almost every aspect (the cosmology and deities don't quite do it for me). I suppose it's a matter of taste. Just for the record, I love Tolkien, haven't gotten around to reading Vance yet (but want to), and won't touch Salvatore with a 10-foot pole.
I guess that WAS a bit acidic, even for me. My apoligies. I've proudly run Greyhawk campaigns over the past 20 years and have yet to find a setting (and I have looked into the others) that does it for me like GH. Some see open vistas. Others see a wall. To each his own, is all.
Eberron content to me is very much like the Wil Save article...
But at least Wil is amusing at times.
Eberron content to me is very much like the Wil Save article...
But at least Wil is amusing at times.
Please, please, please don't start a Wil save discussion on this thread too. . .
For my part I don't play Eberron and really have no intention of doing so. I bought the book to make conversions easier and to satisfy my curiosity about the new world.
The argument that a fantasy world can be boring strikes me as a similar to the argument people make for breaking up bands—when lead writers want to split off to do something new, I often wonder how they’ll break away from their own minds. If you can imagine it, it can be done in any world. So the world itself isn’t the weak part of that link.
Wow, where are all the Eberron supporters. I haven't used any of the Eberron stuff, but unlike other posters (not this thread mind you this is just great), like to see variety. Dungeon Magazine is so close to being perfect I can't even complain about eberron.
I use everything! While I'm an FR girl at heart, I love Eberron and also Greyhawk and pretty much everything else. Anything I can't use out of the box (or the pages, as it were) I can adapt - or it inspires me in some way. I like Dungeon as is, please don't change it!
Well, I suppose I could handle a little more Eberron. ;-)
-Amber S.
Yes - I use the Eberron stuff.
Nope, don't really use the Eberron content. It's simply an annoyance to me.
(Though I will consider adapting it if desperate...)
Nope. I find the setting terribly bland. About the only thing I'll salvage from a Eberron adventure is a monster or a magic item.
I can honestly say that it is the only setting I dislike. They could write something in any of the defunct settings, and I'd gobble it up immediately.
I am currently running a re-worked version Steel Shadows in Greyhawk in the city of Cryllor, using murdered dwarves instead of warforged in order to riff off of the racial tensions within that city (and substituting Suel noble houses for the "Dragon-Marked").
It's a little bit of work, especially with some of the more Eberron specific elements (the above mentioned war-forged for instance ;-) but not as difficult as I had feared.
So...I guess my two cents would have to be that Eberron content has its place, and while said material has a little more difficulty attached to it in regards to being imported into my Greyhawk campaign than a generic adventure would, it's certainly not an insurmountable challenge. It's not quite as cut-and-paste as I would prefer, but since we Greyhawk/FR/generic world fans get more than out fair share of adventures and material, I'm certainly prepared to live with it.
Heck, there have been many occasions where I've found FR adventures to be more of a hassle to convert (usually involving gods or plot points/adventure hooks that are saturated with the intricate history of Faerun).
Cheers,
Colin
I would like to be able to run an adventure where my players don't kill everyone that they meet. They even killed an NPC trying to pay them for slaying her attackers. Eventually they find the dungeon and waltz through it like every challenge is cheese dip.
Get new players and this time, don't recruit from the kindergarten...
I would like to be able to run an adventure where my players don't kill everyone that they meet. They even killed an NPC trying to pay them for slaying her attackers. Eventually they find the dungeon and waltz through it like every challenge is cheese dip.Get new players and this time, don't recruit from the kindergarten...
Uh... get the right thread, Delglath.
I haven't used it. It's kind of a catch 22 for me.
If it's heavily centered around Eberron elements like magic trains and airships or Warforged or what have you, it'll be real tough to convert to something that makes sense in standard D&D, so much so that it really makes no sense to not start working from another adventure entirely.
If it is really easy to convert, it's probably not using the setting to full potential (that is, in an interesting way), so why make it an Eberron adventure at all?
My verdict is that I like Eberron alright, but I like Mystara and Dark Sun and Birthright and lots of other worlds, too, and I'm still willing to acknowledge that two Dark Sun adventures in Dungeon in one year would be pushing it and more than that would be right out.
Uh... get the right thread, Delglath.I would like to be able to run an adventure where my players don't kill everyone that they meet. They even killed an NPC trying to pay them for slaying her attackers. Eventually they find the dungeon and waltz through it like every challenge is cheese dip.Get new players and this time, don't recruit from the kindergarten...
I did. It's these buggy boards that messed up my post. I swear, this is the buggiest site I've ever been to, and I used to actually go to WotC's site occassionally!
I absolutely use everything, but I've started running a campaign in Eberron. I haven't seen anything that isn't reasonably easy to adapt, except for "Steel Shadows" (which is adaptable, but certainly would take a bit of adjustment).
My verdict is that I like Eberron alright, but I like Mystara and Dark Sun and Birthright and lots of other worlds, too, and I'm still willing to acknowledge that two Dark Sun adventures in Dungeon in one year would be pushing it and more than that would be right out.
However, Dark Sun isn't a supported setting and Eberron is.
If it is really easy to convert, it's probably not using the setting to full potential (that is, in an interesting way), so why make it an Eberron adventure at all?
I could say the same thing about Greyhawk (or Forgotten Realms).
It's so that those followers of a campaign setting can have an adventure set in that world and not have to make adaptations to their setting.
I personally think that less than 4 Eberron specific adventures a year would be too low, given Eberron is the "new kid on the block." However, I also support that a majority of those adventures should be readily adaptable to other campaigns. Why shouldn't an adventure that takes place on an airship not be adaptable to a sea adventure?
No. But I hope to do it one day. Forgotten Realms is my favorite setting, but the Eberron material in Dungeon has so far been excellent, and I would very much like to use it when its time for a change of pace.
IMO Paizo should stay away from setting specific adventures, unless they feature the defining qualtities of the setting in question. Eberron adventures should have pulp plots and war forged, FR adventures should feature evil organizations, gods on the rampage, drow, elves and greedy merchants, and so on.
I believe that the only way Paizo has a shot at making everybody happy is by keeping the number of setting specific adventures to a minimun, while ensuring that the setting specific adventures that make it to print really count.
Yes.
Eberron is distinct, new, interesting, and fun. It's nice to have content in the magazine that directly taps into the setting's special qualities. Sure, it's possible to convert and adjust generic adventures into Eberron-usable ones, but every so often it's also nice to be able to just pull content out and mix it into a campaign without having to go through the conversion process. Plus, using the Backdrop article to occasionally flesh out an area of Eberron is VERY appreciated. The recent Backdrop on the Ring of Storms in Xen'drick is a good example.
Please keep up the good work!
|
I use Eberron content quite a bit. I actually wish there was more. Mainly because seeing as the campaign is still young there is still not a lot of content out there directly from WOTC it makes me happy to see that paizo is putting content for this campaign in there two mags. Actually my favorite article so far has been in Dragon and was about the new drow race. a close second would be the article in 122 of dungeon about the ring of storms which I will prolly use here soon. And if you are a fan of eberron and are running a game or playing in one; I highly suggest picking up the "Races of Eberron" book I got it two days ago and totally love this book. It delves deeper into the new races of eberron in a way the core book couldn't. It also gives some great info on the common races on eberron and how they differ of the normal D&D races. And don't forget all the great prestige class and some really awesome new feats and tactical feats.All around a great book.
In Short: MORE EBERRON!!!!!!
I do not use nor plan to use any Ebbron content or adventures in my game.
That said, i think that wizards is putting too much effort in to it and ignoring thier other campaign worlds. I have been playing for 20+years and have used grayhawk as a source for my own worlds and as it was intended to be used. Nothing compares to the classic world of Grayhawk.
I am also a member of the RPGA and think it really sucks that Living grayhawk is getting ignored in favor of Mark of Heroes (ebbron).
my 2 coppers worth.
"I could say the same thing about Greyhawk (or Forgotten Realms)."
Actually, I dispute this. Greyhawk is D&D. It represents the default baseline for a D&D setting. FR is very close in tone to this, as well. Eberron is a very novel setting with little in common with typical D&D, which is its greatest strength, but ultimately I feel that Dungeon should cater to the majority and offer adventures created with standard D&D in mind.
Although a few of the posts have been a bit ambiguous, here is how I see the current tally:
Yes: 12 votes
Nope: 8 votes
Don't really care: 1 vote (hooray for apathy!)
The results can also be broken down the following way:
I play the Eberron content (I "heart" Eberron): 10 votes
I adapt or can adapt the Eberron content (Eberron's okay): 5 votes
Eberron? Blech!: 5 votes
Don't really care: 1 vote
If you haven't posted yet, please cast your vote!
It's my understanding that adventure queries based in a pre-existing supported setting have a higher mark to meet in order to get greenlighted. I don't mind an occasional adventure based in any of the settings - so long as the majority are generic. Since that is the setup already used in Dungeon, I'm quite happy. As a writer who aspires to make it into the magazine, it also makes me happy, since it means I don't have to spend a fortune on every source book for every setting in order to stand a chance of getting an adventure into the magazine.
- Ashavan
I do not currently use any of the Eberron material in Dungeon.
I don't begrudge anyone their Eberron material, and I may end up converting it at some point.
As long as Dungeon keeps giving me the great Greyhawk material they've been dishing out over the last few years I'll be very happy. I think the balance has been fair.
"Which is exactly what we do, so I guess we're on the right track."
This is true, as a majority of Dungeon's content is definitely not Eberron adventures. Still four Eberron outings a year is still too large a minority, IMHO. What has the setting done to warrant that level of support? Is there really that much demand across the board with the average reader, or just from a small vocal group, of Eberron fans? Is that small group significant enough to dictate over 1/12th of a year's adventure content (assuming three adventures per issue)?
What has the setting done to warrant that level of support? Is there really that much demand across the board with the average reader, or just from a small vocal group, of Eberron fans? Is that small group significant enough to dictate over 1/12th of a year's adventure content (assuming three adventures per issue)?
Yamo -
The setting is new, and there is little released content for it - that in and of itself is enough reason to provide more support for it right now. Once the setting is more established, I could see scaling back the support a little bit. Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms got years of support. I'm hardly going to begrudge Eberron getting some of that support as well.
- Ashavan
"I could say the same thing about Greyhawk (or Forgotten Realms)."
Actually, I dispute this. Greyhawk is D&D. It represents the default baseline for a D&D setting. FR is very close in tone to this, as well. Eberron is a very novel setting with little in common with typical D&D, which is its greatest strength, but ultimately I feel that Dungeon should cater to the majority and offer adventures created with standard D&D in mind.
There is no reason why Greyhawk has to remain the baseline. I'd prefer a thicker baseline myself, and there is no reason why Eberron cannot add something to it.
Look - an Eberron adventure is basically D&D - in a sense. TO me, it's like setting the timeline of feudal sword and sorcery forward 500 years, to a more "civilized period." Eberron is a time of large populations and "large population problems." Cities are interconnected by magic, rather than technology. There's a daily paper with wide circulation, airships, vastly powerful merchant houses, and all kinds of interesting things.
IMHO, you can always tell whether or not a setting is good by the number of adventure ideas you can get from it. With Ebberon, there are as many, if not more, hooks, conflicts, political upheavals, magical happenings, fantastical locations, and so on than your "traditional baseline" can offer.
This is why Eberron should continue to be supported, let's open up the baseline to a wider view. The setting isn't just isn't a "novel take," its a world as vast and as interesting as FR or Greyhawk. It's good, man. It really is, but if you don't like it, don't use the material.
As far as the material goes, we have:
12 magazines a year/ w/ (at least) 3 adventures per issue = 36 adventures (at least). If 4 of those are Eberron, that means:
4 Eberron adventures
32 traditional adventures
Over 50% of this posting, so far, have said "Yes!" to Eberron, and the number above show a 12.5% use of the magazine. That's gotta be considered a reasonable level of support.
Another, somewhat related point: The 4-part Greyhawk poster map didn't start out as detailed as was in history and topography 30 years ago. That map represents a plethora of additions and history by years of gameplaying and publications by tons of people.
WE, the players of D&D, represent the first year of Eberron's game play, and find ourselves in position to have a hand at fleshing out this vast world of adventuring possibilites. I want to be part of it.
(Okay Chris, off the soapbox - step down, and slink away quietly . . .)
"Over 50% of this posting, so far, have said 'Yes!' to Eberron, and the number above show a 12.5% use of the magazine. That's gotta be considered a reasonable level of support."
If you sent out a form to every Dungeon subscriber asking "Do you want to see more than one full issue of Eberron adventures in the coming year?", I'm pretty darn sure you're not going to get many "yes" responses at all. From the hardcore Eberron fanboys, maybe, but the other 95+%?
Yamo -The setting is new, and there is little released content for it - that in and of itself is enough reason to provide more support for it right now. Once the setting is more established, I could see scaling back the support a little bit. Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms got years of support. I'm hardly going to begrudge Eberron getting some of that support as well.
- Ashavan
Being new isn't reason enough to support it. When Oriental Adventures 3E was new, it didn't get four issues a year. Dragonlance has had one since 3E debuted. The very vocal fans of epic and psionic content (myself included) get one adventure a year. It is no harder to adapt a psionic adventure than an Eberron adventure, but many people would give the same responses that Yamo and I are giving to Eberron.
|
|
Being new isn't reason enough to support it. When Oriental Adventures 3E was new, it didn't get four issues a year. Dragonlance has had one since 3E debuted. The very vocal fans of epic and psionic content (myself included) get one adventure a year. It is no harder to adapt a psionic adventure than an Eberron adventure, but many people would give the same responses that Yamo and I are giving to Eberron.
Yamo -The setting is new, and there is little released content for it - that in and of itself is enough reason to provide more support for it right now. Once the setting is more established, I could see scaling back the support a little bit. Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms got years of support. I'm hardly going to begrudge Eberron getting some of that support as well.
- Ashavan
A) Dragonlance is not released by WOTC therefore the support is purely from the company that releases it.
B)I agree with the want for more psionic adventures/content (especially ones involving eberron!). however most epic adventure take a lot longer to prepare for therefore 1 a year is more than enough IMO.C) I have to agree with Koldoon on this Eberron is new and for that reason alone it needs more support than 4 adventures out of 36 a year. Solely because WOTC doesn't have a lot of content out yet. Whereas GH and FR have at least 2 decades of support.
A) Dragonlance is not released by WOTC therefore the support is purely from the company that releases it.
Fair enough. Oriental Adventures is, though.
B)I agree with the want for more psionic adventures/content (especially ones involving eberron!). however most epic adventure take a lot longer to prepare for therefore 1 a year is more than enough IMO.
But many others don't want psionic content. That was my point...the magazine needs to stick to generic adventures to appeal to the majority, and keep everything else limited.
C) I have to agree with Koldoon on this Eberron is new and for that reason alone it needs more support than 4 adventures out of 36 a year. Solely because WOTC doesn't have a lot of content out yet. Whereas GH and FR have at least 2 decades of support.
Yeah, but since 3E was released, Eberron has had as many published (by WOTC, not Dungeon) adventures as the Forgotten Realms.
Do you use the Eberron content in Dungeon (or plan/want to use it in the future)? Sound off with a "yes," "no," or "other" and feel free to explain your choice.
I vote yes. I love Eberron and am always glad to see such content in Dungeon. There is not enough Eberron material out there, so I'm happy for every bit I can get.
Rooster
The main difference between Eberron and Oriental/Psionic adventures is the limits. Oriental and Psionic campaigns, while interesting in their own right, are niche settings. The very specific flavor of those settings/concepts limit their story possiblities.
As far as I'm concerned, it's a great reason for the magazine to support Eberron 12.5% of the time, as opposed to the 1/36 percent of the others (whatever that comes to).
"Oriental and Psionic campaigns, while interesting in their own right, are niche settings."
Ditto Eberron. Now matter how good it is and how much you or I may like it, it will NEVER be mainstream D&D, but a quirky little thing all its own. Pulp-noir fantasy is no closer to mainstream D&D that space fantasy (Spelljammer), extradimensional fantasy (Planescape), Asian fantasy (Oriental Adventures) and so on. It doesn't warrant any more recognition that other niche settings.
Now matter how good it is and how much you or I may like it, it will NEVER be mainstream D&D, but a quirky little thing all its own. Pulp-noir fantasy is no closer to mainstream D&D that space fantasy (Spelljammer), extradimensional fantasy (Planescape), Asian fantasy (Oriental Adventures) and so on. It doesn't warrant any more recognition that other niche settings.
Yamo -
write down the day and time you said that, because there is a chance that you could be wrong. Maybe Eberron is exactly what will appeal to the new, young up and coming gamer who doesn't want to have to buy two decades worth of books and magazines to have an idea of what greyhawk or the forgotten realms is about. I disagree with your assessment that it is a niche in the same way oriental adventures, planescape and spelljammer were. Eberron is a new setting... it will either catch on or it won't. Dungeon is doing exactly what it should be by providing the support that will allow it to catch on. If it doesn't, I have no doubt that the support will drop. But your approach is like sending kids to a college without a solid first year program. The retention rate would suck. Dungeon is helping boost the retention rate of new gamers for whom the Eberron setting resonates. Bravo. They should at least help provide that opportunity.
- Ashavan
Can't Say that I do. Or should I say Have'nt yet?
In my gaming group FR has been the principal setting since I began playing DnD. It's been a great setting to play. And my DM has always been able to pull content from a myriad of sources.
I myself have no intention of putting Eberron content in my game. But I do enjoy reading about it and hope to catch some toasty tidbits to slip into my Campaign.
-Tammarcas-
"Oriental and Psionic campaigns, while interesting in their own right, are niche settings."
Ditto Eberron. Now matter how good it is and how much you or I may like it, it will NEVER be mainstream D&D, but a quirky little thing all its own. Pulp-noir fantasy is no closer to mainstream D&D that space fantasy (Spelljammer), extradimensional fantasy (Planescape), Asian fantasy (Oriental Adventures) and so on. It doesn't warrant any more recognition that other niche settings.
Sorry, I'll disagree about it being a niche setting. It's not that far off from "baseline D&D." Previously supported settings such as Dark Sun (which has had several entire issues devoted to it recently), Al-Qadim, etc. were much further from that than Eberron is. I think Birthright is probably about the same level from baseline as Eberron is. Different enough to be distinctive, but not different enough that anything from D&D would fit into it.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not a huge fan of Eberron, but I've really liked all but one of the adventures that have been published in Dungeon (Queen w/Burning Eyes was a bad generic dungeon crawl). I have to say that I like Eberron adventures better than the historical adventures (there was the russian one and the one set in the middle east) that have occassionally appeared in the past.
Sebastian
Eberron is ok, I didn't find that any of it I have seen was very different than anything I have added to my campaign at some time or another. I don't find that adding any content from any setting to my FRCS is very challenging. You can even just make it another plane of existance within any world. There are always creative ways to add any type of content if your so willing. I support FRCS solely because I like it and want to continue to see more of it. I did find it somewhat force fed that the 30th annual RPGA event for experienced players was only Eberron. I see Eberron in the same light as the WNBA, I got tired of the NBA trying to force feed it to me and I kind of developed a bad taste for it now.
If you sent out a form to every Dungeon subscriber asking "Do you want to see more than one full issue of Eberron adventures in the coming year?", I'm pretty darn sure you're not going to get many "yes" responses at all. From the hardcore Eberron fanboys, maybe, but the other 95+%?
Well, the point of this poll is to help determine whether this is true or not. While it may not be scientifically accurate, I think this poll is proving that the Eberron fans who buy Dungeon form much greater than 5% of the readership. There's no reason why Eberron fans would be more vocal than generic or Greyhawk fans -- we're even hearing from readers who don't mind one way or the other, and they have to be the least vocal of all.
Nope...no Eberron. Even after 23 years of gaming, I can't wrap my campaigns around techo-fantasy. For techno, I play techno systems...Shadowrun, Alternity, Star Wars, Mechwarrior.
Being new isn't reason enough to support it. When Oriental Adventures 3E was new, it didn't get four issues a year. Dragonlance has had one since 3E debuted. The very vocal fans of epic and psionic content (myself included) get one adventure a year. It is no harder to adapt a psionic adventure than an Eberron adventure, but many people would give the same responses that Yamo and I are giving to Eberron.
I agree that being new isn't reason enough to support it. Dungeon is publishing Eberron adventures because *it sells magazines*. Readers *want* Eberron, and there are *many* more Eberron fans than pure psionics fans and OA fans. Putting say, one Eberron adventure in every issue would turn off the generic fans, and Paizo would sell fewer issues. Dropping the Eberron support to one or zero adventires per year would mean Eberron fans wouldn't buy as many magazines, and Paizo would lose out. I'm sure that setting the support at the current level (4/year or whatever it is) maximizes the number of magazines that are sold. Paizo has done their research -- they aren't blindly picking and choosing which settings to support and which to ignore.
Yes - I look for eberron staff and use it and thank you Paizo for this content