[OSSR]Races of Eberron

[Foxwarrior]

tussock:
> You can replace most stuff in D&D by just being a human full caster and handwaving the fluff.
Did anyone play as a wizard, but said to other players it's a homebrewed monk class?

Sorcerer (pretending to be special monk), once, I think. I never did get to see his character sheet, but he sure did have a lot of "ki blasts".

[Reynard]

> If you can change sex at will, having a gender identity as a man or a woman makes even less sense than usual.
What does this have to do with anything?

We are arguing semantics here. As in "is Gender Identity a subset of Gender or not". I.e. could it be used as an example of difference between Gender and Sex.

[ishy]

Second of all, it's not entirely clear what David Noonan's player was using to justify entry into Warshaper, but presumably it was the Weretouched Master Alternate Form ability, which functions "like polymorph." Which is his own fucking fault for allowing, and possibly more evidence that WotC writers employ houserules that render their playtest games almost entirely unlike what the books give us.

Well, what do you do when a race is greatly over-performing in your playtest? You slap it down. So the playtest version Noonan was running for is probably a lot stronger than the printed version.

[Username17]

The issue with gender and sex and personal identity and social presentation and all that is that none of these terms are used remotely correctly in Races of Eberron. There are of course a lot of different theories and opinions about how one should talk about these issues and what they mean for people in general or individuals and their feelings. But the writeup in Races of Eberron os simply gibberish. It's not even wrong.

The book talks about whether you have a functional womb or not as a function of "gender" and that's so far off the mark that you can't readily evaluate the rest of the pronouncements from a scientific orpolitical standpoint.

There's certainly an interesting discussion to be had about what gender means to a race that can change their biological sex and lives and interbreeds with races that can't do that. But Races of Eberron does not have that discussion. The authors don't have a firm enough grasp of what words mean to even begin having that discussion.

You might as well be trying to have a discussion of LGBT issues with Hodor (the character, not the actor).

[Orion]

I'm away from my books at the moment, so I fired up a PDF. Let's look at the Warforged chapter. Pro: the fiction piece about "Watcher" the dock worker is pretty sweet.

There is a huge missed opportunity here, and that's the treaty of Thronehold. Apparently, at the end of the Last War, the Warforged were suddenly declared people, and in fact *free* people, after having been chattels until then. The weird part is that many warforged are depicted as being unable to process it. This clearly didn't happen because of widespread pressure from warforged, so why did it happen at all? It's attributed to one Warforged, Bulwark, and his influence in Breland, but how did everyone else feel about it? How did Cannith fuck up bad enough they couldn't put the kibosh on it?Also, there are two sidebars devoted to "controversy" about whether warforged have souls. They can be resurrected, so I'm pretty sure the answer is an unambiguous "yes."

"Warforged and other Races" section seems to have been written by someone unfamiliar with the rest of the chapter. For instance, it says that a gnome's insatiable curiosity mirrors a warforged's search for knowledge, but this chapter has said over and over that the warforged are incurious gits who don't care about knowledge. I also love how you must choose a gender for your warforged at character creation and "this decision cannot be changed later." Wow bad. Wow + fuck off.

[TheFlatline]

I'm kind of surprised that creating artificial life that even has a soul hasn't pissed the ever-living fuck out of the Gods. Usually that's their bailiwick.

[Ancient History]

Well, there's a whole sidebar on whether or not Warforged have souls. Which you would think could be answered by any competent necromancer, but apparently is still an issue of debate.

[Maxus]

I'm kind of surprised that creating artificial life that even has a soul hasn't pissed the ever-living fuck out of the Gods. Usually that's their bailiwick.

The Eberron deities are a lot more passive, more like forces than personalities.

[TheFlatline]

Well, there's a whole sidebar on whether or not Warforged have souls. Which you would think could be answered by any competent necromancer, but apparently is still an issue of debate.

I thought you had to have a soul to be resurrected (I guess technically raise dead), which as pointed out, warforged can be.

Also I remember somewhere reading that the departed who is resurrected must want to come back to life for it to work. Which implies some kind of afterlife, which really implies either a soul or something like a soul.

[Prak]

AH, you're assuming that WotC's D&D people are familiar with even the concept of a competent character. I'm starting to think WotC D&D games all took place in Infomercial Land.

I'm pretty sure I wrote a better impression of what a warforged character might be like as a short story about a magical robot crushing on the dwarf fighter.

[Ancient History]

Well, there's a whole sidebar on whether or not Warforged have souls. Which you would think could be answered by any competent necromancer, but apparently is still an issue of debate.

I thought you had to have a soul to be resurrected (I guess technically raise dead), which as pointed out, warforged can be.

Also I remember somewhere reading that the departed who is resurrected must want to come back to life for it to work. Which implies some kind of afterlife, which really implies either a soul or something like a soul.

These points are both brought up, but apparently don't constitute "proof."

[TheFlatline]

Well, there's a whole sidebar on whether or not Warforged have souls. Which you would think could be answered by any competent necromancer, but apparently is still an issue of debate.

I thought you had to have a soul to be resurrected (I guess technically raise dead), which as pointed out, warforged can be.

Also I remember somewhere reading that the departed who is resurrected must want to come back to life for it to work. Which implies some kind of afterlife, which really implies either a soul or something like a soul.

These points are both brought up, but apparently don't constitute "proof."

I don't suppose it'd be too much to hope that this is a meta-commentary on religious fundamentalism objecting to modified beliefs in the face of what would nominally be considered pretty concrete proof right?

I mean... I can hope the derp isn't that stupid...

[RadiantPhoenix]

I'm kind of surprised that creating artificial life that even has a soul hasn't pissed the ever-living fuck out of the Gods. Usually that's their bailiwick.

Some deity: "Y'all have been doing that since forever. Now you're just making artificial life with souls that's different from yourselves."

[Ancient History]

I don't suppose it'd be too much to hope that this is a meta-commentary on religious fundamentalism objecting to modified beliefs in the face of what would nominally be considered pretty concrete proof right?

I mean... I can hope the derp isn't that stupid...

Here is the entire bottombar:

THE QUESTION OF SOULS
The Treaty of Thronehold gave warforged their freedom, but only after great debate. House Cannith and Thrane argued ardently that warforged were not living creatures because they do not possess souls. Their evidence for this was that warforged cannot become undead by any known method, not even ghosts or shadows. They are immune to energy drain, and no one knows of a warforged soul in Dolurrh, the Realm of the Dead. Breland argued that because warforged can be raised and resurrected, they must have souls. Of course, House Cannith and Thrane countered that no warforged brought back from death told tales of any kind of afterlife.

In the end, the Question of Souls, as that portion of the negotiations came to be known, was left unanswered. Warforged were freed because they could exhibit thought and free will. Today many people continue to think of warforged as creatures without souls, and citizens of Thrane often refer to warforged as “the soulless.”

[RadiantPhoenix]

Of course, House Cannith and Thrane countered that no warforged brought back from death told tales of any kind of afterlife.

I thought "not remembering the afterlife" was the default state of affairs, even for humans and elves.

[Ancient History]

[TheFlatline]

Speaking of elves, at what point did they suddenly qualify for Res and raise dead? Because I distinctly remember that elves didn't get raised in AD&D due to explicitly not having souls.

Was it 3rd ed?

[Prak]

I like that the debate over whether constructs were living people or animate objects centered on whether or not they had souls, and no one thought to see what happens if you cast soul jar or bring up outsiders, which exist in the afterlives but cannot be raised and many of which would not be pleased with the idea of being owned. I almost think that was an actual attempt at satire.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

tussock:
> You can replace most stuff in D&D by just being a human full caster and handwaving the fluff.
Did anyone play as a wizard, but said to other players it's a homebrewed monk class?

I played a half-orc Battle Sorcerer (UA) and called myself a barbarian. What's funny was I did more damage in melee than the actual barbarian. Krunk the Barbarian, along with his ally Scramble the Death Dealer (a bat familiar), and his Rogue cohort (actually a wooden log with a mean face carved in it. I would throw it down the hall to check for traps, use it to bash open doors and locks, I'd throw it at people screaming "SNEAK ATTACK!". They mostly put up with my fishmalking because I didn't actually disrupt the game with my weirdness and generally contributed positively.)

[DrPraetor]

For some reason, while reading that post I imagined Arioch's avatar - the undead fairy pony thing - locked on someone's patio trying to get back inside so he can join the D&D game.

Is that a mushroom growing out of his head? Is he infected with that fungus from the Last of Us?

The major *positive* aspect of Eberron is that it at least keeps the Gods from mucking about in play. Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance are always having their pantheons do stuff, and the players are supposed to care but can't change the outcomes in any official material, which is awful.

Up through late in AD&D 1st edition, Ithaqua could be a demigod and he was just a 15th level guy - a 10th level party could reasonably be expected to fight him as a final boss. By 20th level you were a match for Arioch even if you weren't particularly well optimized. This was a problem for people for some reason, and Gods in AD&D have been nothing but Shadowrun-ancient-elves plot railroading DM-penis NPC, rules bloat and wank and rot-from-the-top since then.

So I can see why an Eberron sourcebook would want to mince around anything definitive about souls and the afterlife and so forth. Can you cast "raise dead" on a dead tree and have it come back to life? In atheist-plausible D&D this should definitely be a yes.

[Ancient History]

The major problem with D&D religion is that it looks anything like real-world religion. Because whatever else people believe about the powers-that-be, they don't think that God or the spirits will perform a miracle on command, and they don't think that Zeus or Thor is going to climb down out of the sky to smite a few blasphemers. The whole top-down hierarchy of Christianity comes explicitly from the idea that God delegated authority to mortals instead of doing things himself; the whole profession of the priest or shaman is to act as the go-between for gods or spirits and mortals. In a game where mortals can roll up to Valhalla and knock on the door (or vice versa), the religion is not going to look a fucking thing like it does today - or in medieval times - or even in antiquity. The gods need to be distant to make any sort of recognizable religion make any sense. Otherwise you end up with the 200th Heraklid declaring they're the God of Rimjobs or something, and nobody wants to toss a salad to get his blessing.

[Reynard]

Count Arioch the 28th:
> Rogue cohort (actually a wooden log
I just got a very distinct feeling of deja vu. Did you write about it somewhere?

Anyway. I guess spellbook is a bit dissociating for non-caster to lug around. I tried using prayer beads as alternative spellbook. Didn't last long though (players demanded to see my bullshit monk during the very first session). Apparently kicking (crane stance!) some orc with maxed Vampiric Touch was not something one would expect from monk.


Ancient History:
> Because whatever else people believe about the powers-that-be, they don't think that God or the spirits will perform a miracle on command,
Do they? IIRC even average Romans were very matter-of-fact with their dealings with gods. More of a contract ("i give you this sacrifice so you would [insert desired effect]"), than a Christian-style prayer when God is expected to make the final decision (since it is prayer, not a contract).

And if we are talking about lesser spirits, sufficiently high-ranking priests/shamans/miracle-workers were supposed to be able command those without much trouble in any folk tradition. Even in Christian tradition there were demons one could summon to order around.

[name_here]

Pagan religions most definitely did believe that gods would provide miracles when asked, unless they were pissed off for some reason. Likewise, they totally believed Zeus and Thor would smite people who sufficiently pissed them off. They built/renovated giant temples and offered sacrifices for specific favors. People prayed to Thor a lot because he was the dude who decided whether their crops got rain or hail. Modern religions don't believe in interventionist deities all that much, but that has very much not always been the case.

[Prak]

For some reason, while reading that post I imagined Arioch's avatar - the undead fairy pony thing - locked on someone's patio trying to get back inside so he can join the D&D game.

Is that a mushroom growing out of his head? Is he infected with that fungus from the Last of Us?

Hilariously, that is Chrysalis, the changeling queen from MLP. The changelings are black, quasi-insectile ponioids there, but they are pretty much the standard doppelganger trope. Chrysalis actually takes the place of an equestrian princess before her marriage to a soldier explicitly to feed on his love.

I used the plot as a D&D adventure, and I'm pretty sure I wrote that session up somewhere... I think the Chrysalis stand-in was a Spherelock in my game.

Better pic of a typical member of the race-

Better pic of Chrysalis-

[schpeelah]

For some reason, while reading that post I imagined Arioch's avatar - the undead fairy pony thing - locked on someone's patio trying to get back inside so he can join the D&D game.

Is that a mushroom growing out of his head? Is he infected with that fungus from the Last of Us?

Well, kind of apropos the universal need of Dopplegangers. That's the Changeling Queen, the mushroom thing is generally believed to be her crown.




Anyway, the pagans did believe in fairly interventionist deities, but they still lived in the real world and their beliefs still existed in the context of no real miracles taking place and no deities personally showing up to do anything. If Pelor is a dude who can in fact show up, then he should be a Sorcerer-God-King kind of deal, and any kingdom in which he's worshipped is a vassal of Pelor, literally a part Pelor's empire. In order to make the whole thing more like RL religion while stile actually existing somewhere, you'd want them barred completely from personally intervening, almost completely barred from sending any kind of representatives, with their primary means of influencing the world through prophets that get personal visions (and levels, NPC only of course) from thei god and those are restricted in number too.