Follow TV Tropes

Following

Headscratchers / Eberron

Go To

As a Headscratchers subpage, all spoilers are unmarked as per policy. You Have Been Warned.


    open/close all folders 

    Cults of the Dragon Below 

  • Why do the Cults of the Dragon Below worship the Daelkyr and other aberrations? Those creatures aren't the children of Khyber, they're invaders from Xoriat banished to Khyber by the Gatekeepers. Khyber's spawn are Demons, Devils, and the Rakshasa. Wouldn't Cults of the Dragon Below be demon worshippers, not Lovecraftian cultists?
    • While I can't speak for all the editions (I only have a fourth edition book), the cults of the Dragon Below are completely out of their rocker. There is no single unifying element among them other than they worship the beasties which are currently imprisoned in Khyber (as such, it's entirely possible that there are cults worshipping demons - especially in the Demon Wastes). Which is why the common folk call the cults that. However, the Rakshasas and their kin tend to hide in the shadows, operating behind the scenes. They have little use for a group of cultists who run around screaming their patron's name as they burn down villages (though they may, from time to time). If there are demon cults, they, like their masters, tend to be sneaky about it. Which means the cultists worshipping Lovecraftian thingies from Xoriat are more commonly encountered, colouring the public perception of the cults as a whole.
    • This fact holds true in 3e and 5e. While plenty of people in Eberron aren't playing with a full deck, your average Dragon Below Cultist left their cards at home and elected to bring burned sandwiches instead.
    • Keith Baker has also said that "Cult of the Dragon Below" is a mostly academic label and that few groups that would be commonly considered as such actually call themselves that. Daelkyr-worshippers, demon-worshippers, and those that worship Khyber itself as a divinity all get lumped together by outside observers.
    • As far as most people in the world probably know, the Daelkyr and aberrations are of the Dragon Below. Specifically, the Daelkyr in Eberron have been trapped in Khyber for something like 9,000 years, while humans have only been on Khorvaire for about 4,000 years. Nor were most of the other non-goblinoid races anywhere nearby when the Daelkyr wrecked the western continent. From the modern humanoid perspective, it's not really worth making the distinction because they've been a fixture of Khyber from beyond living memory.
    • Poorly Informed Extremists? Maybe we need a trope for that...
    • Worth noting that very few druid sects worship The Dragon Between (i.e. Eberron) as a deity, instead being as fragmented in their theologies as the many cults of The Dragon Below. Your average Gatekeeper or Warden of the Wood has little in common with an Ashbound or the Children of Winter. The Greensingers are also very unusual, being as much focused on fey powers as on mundane nature.
    • Keith Baker also pointed out that since the Progenitors created the planes, this includes Xoriat and the Daelkyr; ALL evil outsiders are the Children of Khyber, even if that label is more commonly applied to native fiends spawned on Eberron.

    Illmarrow appearance 

  • Why is Erandis d'Vol/Lady Illmarrow always depicted as an adult "woman" when she was turned to undeath as a child or teenager? Her body is dead, it doesn't age.
    • Yes, the obvious answer is "artistic license" or, less generously, "fanservice."
    • It could also be that she magically altered her body to appear more mature, both to throw off suspicion to her true identity, and insecurity about being seen as a child.
    • Erandis wasn't all that young when she died; Word of God suggests she was at least a fledgling wizard at the time.
    • She was young when she died, but that might specifically be by elven standards. Most settings have it so any elf under a century old isn't considered an adult, even if they've reached physical maturity. She very well could have been a few decades old at the time, but would still not have been an adult in the eyes of other elves.
    • Word of God is that elves mature physically and mentally at about the same rate as humans, but aren't considered adults until they're over a hundred. This is part of why elven society is so hidebound—they aren't even allowed to make real decisions until their fluid intelligence has all crystalized. So yes, "young prodigy" Erandis could have been eighty years old, a physically adult woman, but dismissed as basically a teenager by her people.

    Leader alignment 

  • How in the world can queen Aurala ir'Wynarn count as neutral good when she is actively trying to restart a war that will claim thousands of lives? Even if she thinks it's for the greater good, she was alive during the Last War, she knows the consequences of war, if she was truly good, she should not be in favor of restarting it. At least Kaius has the excuse of being a Well-Intentioned Extremist and vampire to justify his alignment.
    • She's unwilling to use underhanded tactics like assassination to win, and few of the countries have rulers even close to as benevolent as she is. Her winning would be a genuine step up for most of the continent.
    • "Not using underhanded tactics" seems like a rather lose qualifier for Good alignment. Look guys, I started a war that got hundreds of people killed. But I didn't use assassins, so I'm a good guy. Also Boranel stays a good ruler without wanting to start a massive war, why couldn't Aurala?
    • From her perspective, she doesn't want to restart a war. She's convinced this peace agreement will not last (And it's a VERY tenuous agreement, so she's not necessarily wrong) and thus war is inevitable. So to her, she's not starting a new war, but simply preparing for a war that's temporarily paused, so it's better to begin on the offensive.
    • Keith Baker discusses this in his alignment article:
      Expanding on this: one of the rulers of the Five Nations is a good-aligned monarch who seeks to restart the Last War. Another is an evil leader who seeks peace. Restarting the war will result in the deaths of tens of thousands of people—how can a "good" monarch support that? Again, in Eberron alignment doesn't represent someone's actions on a global scale: it reflects the manner in which they pursue those goals. The good ruler believes that a just war is possible and that a united Khorvaire will prosper under her rule. She won't condone torture, the mistreatment of civilians, and so on. She will treat her prisoners and emissaries fairly. Of course, her ministers and generals may engage in evil behavior in the name of the war; she will be horrified when she hears of it. Meanwhile, the evil king pursuing peace has a noble goal, but will do absolutely anything to achieve it. Torture? Oppressive martial law? Assassination? Anything. He'd kill members of his own family if he had to. So in both cases, the personal alignment tells you how they conduct their personal affairs, but nothing about the big picture.

Top