More Dark Sun Goodness

As I posted on Rodney's blog post in the comments, excellent summary of the iconic points of the setting.

Though my playful conspiracist wonders at those missing. Dwarfs (the underwhelming focus ability) and half giants (the overwhelming size) and strength? Were they excluded because they have been altered beyond what was familiar and revealing anything now is too soon?

Hunter In Darkness said:

We burn them, leave them to die in the sun , send the dragon kings out. If wizards are out in the open it is not athas

Click to expand...

I'm not really a DS fan, but I feel it's only fair to note that "spellcaster" does not necessarily translate to "wizard." Perhaps they're mercenary clerics earning a living by selling their elemental powers, or druids or other primal sorts doing the same? After all, the kind of idealism that would preclude or mitigate against mercenary divine or primal spellcasting is a lost thing on Athas.

Eric Anondson said:

Though my playful conspiracist wonders at those missing. Dwarfs (the underwhelming focus ability) and half giants (the overwhelming size) and strength? Were they excluded because they have been altered beyond what was familiar and revealing anything now is too soon?

Click to expand...

No conspiracy theories here; they weren't intentional omissions. I just didn't cross their paths when writing my little summary.

Yeah, that really settles a lot in my mind. I'm really excited about the setting. Wish I knew when it'd be released.

One thing I always loved about DS was the amorality of the setting. In that, a PC could be a templar, and another would be a defiler... I've played games where PCs were slaves owned by other PCs. And yet, the PCs were not really "evil" - they were just following the rules of their society. That templar and defiler, and their slave elven rogue, did all sorts of heroic acts. It was pretty cool.

I'm 99% on board with 4E Darksun.

My last lingering concern is that one of the central conceits isn't exactly as valid anymore. It's only a minor thing, but it's been bothering me for a while.

When the first version of DarkSun came out, mages were the kings of D&D. High level mages clearly outclassed all other beings, and wielded forces few could even comprehend. It made sense, then, to form a world partly around the concept that mages and arcanists could, as central, powerful figures in the world, drain it of most of its life force.

4E, however, has in many ways removed the primacy of Arcane power. High level wizards are no more, or less, powerful than other high level characters or monsters. Without the previous experience under our belts of earlier editions of D&D or Darksun, the choice of Arcanists as the source of these woes might seem random and arbitrary.

Basically, in the old days the answer to the question "Why didn't someone stop those mage guys from doing this?" was obvious - they simply didn't have the raw power to do it. Today, the answer to that question is more difficult to form without resorting to fiat.

I'm not super worried about this, just putting it out there.

amysrevenge said:

4E, however, has in many ways removed the primacy of Arcane power. High level wizards are no more, or less, powerful than other high level characters or monsters. Without the previous experience under our belts of earlier editions of D&D or Darksun, the choice of Arcanists as the source of these woes might seem random and arbitrary.

Basically, in the old days the answer to the question "Why didn't someone stop those mage guys from doing this?" was obvious - they simply didn't have the raw power to do it. Today, the answer to that question is more difficult to form without resorting to fiat.

Click to expand...

You know I have been thinking about this alot too. Now in general I have faith, but It does nag at me.

It rememinds me of just how 'unfair' the scales have been in the past. Back in the 2e days I wanted to have a BBEG be a high level warrior king...around level 8 PCs totaly had him out classed (he was level 25 high level campign) and I had to start makeing up weird magic items to keep him a threat.

This then make me think of a 3.5 game that I played, where 5 warriors killed 5 mystic dragons, became immortal (ageless to be exact) and took control of the world. We were suppose to start at level 8, and work our way up to fight the weakest of them at level 17...The DM almost cryed, he drew them up as 20,22,24,25, and 27th level characters, a Ranger, 2 fighter, a rouge, and a multi classed fighter/ranger/rouge...the 8th level PCs on the other hand were a psion, a cleric, a Druid (me), a warblade/Warlock, and a Duskblade/Swordsage. we played for 2 games, leveled to 9th level, and had each gotten a hombrew artafact (I refused to use mine, I felt so bad it was way OP). Then the 5 of them showed up and we were suppose to run...The cleric pulled a will save or die spell and droped the 27th level multi class character int he first round, then me and another player had to explain that hidden in the PHB is the rule "fighters can't have nice things"...


Now 4e has one saving grace...stat them as monsters not PCs...so maybe the weakest SK is a level 27 elite, and the most powerful ones are level 32 solos...

amysrevenge said:

Basically, in the old days the answer to the question "Why didn't someone stop those mage guys from doing this?" was obvious - they simply didn't have the raw power to do it. Today, the answer to that question is more difficult to form without resorting to fiat.

I'm not super worried about this, just putting it out there.

Click to expand...

It's not difficult when you remember one of the key things about 4E: the rules of the game aren't the rules of the world. PCs are special.
Not everyone gains XP at the same rate, and the sorcerer-kings managed to rise in power much faster than anyone else, so no one could challenge them.

But why should they rise in power faster?
Thankfully, in Dark Sun there exists a mechanism to obtaining great arcane power at high cost: defiling.

Why is it so difficult for the Wizards design team to simply say: "Race X and Y and Class Z are not found in Dark Sun?"

Playing a campaign setting with a completely different spin on things was entirely the point of embracing Dark Sun. So I think people should go into it with the understanding that they have to check a lot of things at the door. If they don't like that, then there's plenty of other settings to play! Eberron is the kitchen sink setting - Dark Sun is not, never was, and definitely should never be.

Playing dragonborn are okay if you actually modify the race to make them Dray. Along similar lines, I would allow goliaths by changing them to Half-Giants.

But devas, gnomes, tieflings, shifters, kalashtar, warforged (obviously), genasi and eladrin just don't belong in Dark Sun, sorry. It really screws with the flavor of the setting. I don't think you lose much by taking these races out, because you gain setting-unique races like the mul and, to some extent, the thri-kreen. You don't really need much beyond that.

Divine and Arcane power classes really have to be looked at closely in Dark Sun to determine if they really work. Paladins don't make any sense. Nor do sorcerors, avengers, warlocks and invokers. I would leave these classes on the cutting room floor. Let's remember here - the Dark Sun setting has NO GODS. And nearly all magic is under the control of extremely powerful sorceror kings.

Shamans and wardens become a little bit wonky but I think they're doable with some tweaking. And wizards should be divided into two specific classes - the defiler and the preserver.

I think there's actually potential for new races and classes in Dark Sun, but you have to consider, really, if they're even needed.

Failed Saving Throw said:

But devas, gnomes, tieflings, shifters, kalashtar, warforged (obviously), genasi and eladrin just don't belong in Dark Sun, sorry. It really screws with the flavor of the setting.

Click to expand...

While I agree that limits can help define a setting, I also caution against overly-limiting the setting. The key is finding the balance and seeing how new races can be put into the setting.

And yes, gnomes must go. I will be very disappointed if they're kept in the setting.

Some of the others, though...give them a chance. Kalashtar are traditionally psions, so some reskinning might help them. Shifters just need some new background flavor and they could work as nomadic tribes of humanoids who have gone wild to survive. Genasi are elemental, so they seem natural to me.

I don't think you lose much by taking these races out, because you gain setting-unique races like the mul and, to some extent, the thri-kreen.

Click to expand...

Thri-kreen are interesting in that they're not specific to Dark Sun, but many people think they are because Dark Sun made them so iconic. It's kind of like the Realms and drow.

Divine and Arcane power classes really have to be looked at closely in Dark Sun to determine if they really work. Paladins don't make any sense. Nor do sorcerors, avengers, warlocks and invokers. I would leave these classes on the cutting room floor. Let's remember here - the Dark Sun setting has NO GODS. And nearly all magic is under the control of extremely powerful sorceror kings.

Click to expand...

Again, I caution against overly-limiting things. Dark Sun has no gods, but divine classes can draw power from a divine philosophy - something stated, yet never fully explored.

I think there's actually potential for new races and classes in Dark Sun, but you have to consider, really, if they're even needed.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I think the designers have an interesting challenge ahead. Yes, they're going back to the original boxed set (yay!), but they're also moving forward in a 4e framework. There will be mixed reactions amongst fans to be sure.

Based on Rodney's comments about Dark Sun being a world without gods, I think you might very well see it as a world without the divine classes. Consider this: not counting divine, the following classes are going to be available by the time this setting releases:

Arcane Classes
Wizard (PHB)
Warlock (PHB)
Swordmage (FR Player's Guide)
Sorcerer (PHB2)
Bard (PHB2)
Artificer (Eberron Player's Guide)

Martial Classes
Fighter (PHB)
Ranger (PHB)
Rogue (PHB)
Warlord (PHB)

Primal Classes
Barbarian (PHB2)
Druid (PHB2)
Shaman (PHB2)
Warden (PHB2)
Seeker (PHB3)

Shadow Classes
Assassin (DDI)

Psionic Classes
Monk (PHB3)
Psion (PHB3)
Unnamed Psionic Defender*
Unnamed Psionic Leader*
Unnamed Psionic Ranged Striker*

*Pure speculation on my part, but I bet I'm right.

Assuming that there aren't any others, that's 20(!) classes, with options for controllers (4), strikers (8!), leaders (4), and defenders (4). Even if you decide Artificers are a bad fit for Athas, that's still plenty of classes. And I think a ranged Primal Striker is a possibility. And, assuming they hold true to the past, there should be a new class introduced in the Dark Sun Player's Guide. Templar, maybe?

Now, can you make divine classes work in Athas? I suppose. But are they, strictly speaking, necessary for variety? Clearly not.