D&D 5E Mearls on other settings

[Zardnaar]

That is the problem; people can't let go.

There is a phenomenon I've witnessed I call "First Love Syndrome" which basically says nothing will ever be as good as the first time you came in contact with it. Whatever it was that drew it to you, you accept it 100% (warts and all) and any attempt to change or improve on it is sacrilege. Name a fandom, you'll find examples. Its why people prefer the original theatrical releases of Star Wars to the Special Editions. Its the rationale for "You never forget your first Doctor" in Doctor Who. Its why people You get Kirk vs. Picard debates, and why reboots and spin-offs almost never please hardcore fans of the originals. Its why people argue endlessly over why the edition of D&D you grew up on is the best version of D&D. And it the origin of the phrase "raped my childhood".

So when people discuss a setting, they look at through the lens of First Love; everything since then has diluted, changed, or "ruined" the setting. Adding anything changes how it was when you fell in love with it, and makes it no longer perfect. Of course, its not a universal syndrome; plenty of people enjoy watching a fandom grow and change. But as with any human endeavor, you'll find fundamentalists unwilling and unable to see their perfect vision ruined.

EDIT: I knew TVTropes would have another name for it: Nostalgia Filter. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NostalgiaFilter

Then why do remakes often end up worse than the originals with a few exceptions. Movies, TV shows, music etc.

HD remakes of old games often rate well they just redo the graphics.

Look how things backfired on 4E Realms. Star Wars prequels would be another example, Madonna's American Pie etc.

If you try something different do a good job of it (Deep Space Nine vs Voyager).

Turns out sone later authors were not even familar with what they were writing about or they were given free reign to do what they wanted (4E Realms).

 

[Obryn]

Then why do remakes often end up worse than the originals with a few exceptions. Movies, TV shows, music etc.

HD remakes of old games often rate well they just redo the graphics.

Look how things backfired on 4E Realms. Star Wars prequels would be another example, Madonna's American Pie etc.

If you try something different do a good job of it (Deep Space Nine vs Voyager).

Turns out sone later authors were not even familar with what they were writing about or they were given free reign to do what they wanted (4E Realms).

You do understand that you're acting as an example to [MENTION=7635]Remathilis[/MENTION] 's point, not arguing against it, right?

A well-done remake will cast the original in a different light, and give a different perspective on it. Like seeing one stage play, but performed by different theater companies.

 

[cbwjm]

I'd probably rather that setting updates hew closely to the original. The dark sun campaign was cut off from the out planes so I'd rather not see tieflings or aasimar in the setting. Genasi would fit in fairly well, I think 4e even did some DS specific versions. I don't think they should try to force gnomes or orcs/half-orcs due to the history of the setting, these races were wiped out in the cleansing.

Clerics should still be possible since the setting had them, they just drew on power from the elements (would love to see some new elemental domains). Even a templar could be represented by the cleric class (though I really loved the theme in 4e which allowed any class to be a templar).

Warlocks can fit as seen in 4e as gaining power from a sorcerer king.

Paladins don't really fit the theme of darksun , but I could see the ancients order as working with druids to protect their sacred land.

Probably a lot could be fit in if you really stop to think about it, but I don't think that the history of the setting should be completely invalidated.

 

[Mouseferatu]

That is the problem; people can't let go.

There is a phenomenon I've witnessed...

This is absolutely a real thing, and must be taken into account.

But it is not an excuse to dismiss all objection to change, when sometimes that change really does conflict with the established theme/mood/aesthetic.

As with most things, it's a balancing act, and everyone has their different lines. I feel like some people are too resistant to changing Dark Sun (offers a friendly wave to [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] ), to keeping it exactly as it was in 2E. On the other hand, I feel like what you want is too much change for the sake of conformity, and that your definition of what makes a "D&D setting" vs. "a new D&D-like game" is way too restrictive.

No reboot of a setting like Dark Sun will likely satisfy either of you. The trick is figuring out where in the middle they can put it to satisfy the most people.

 

[Zardnaar]

This is absolutely a real thing, and must be taken into account.

But it is not an excuse to dismiss all objection to change, when sometimes that change really does conflict with the established theme/mood/aesthetic.

As with most things, it's a balancing act, and everyone has their different lines. I feel like some people are too resistant to changing Dark Sun (offers a friendly wave to @Zardnaar ), to keeping it exactly as it was in 2E. On the other hand, I feel like what you want is too much change for the sake of conformity, and that your definition of what makes a "D&D setting" vs. "a new D&D-like game" is way too restrictive.

No reboot of a setting like Dark Sun will likely satisfy either of you. The trick is figuring out where in the middle they can put it to satisfy the most people.

As I said I am not opposed to all change.

For example I am not a fan of Dragonborn in DS, if you are to include them you can have the mutant in the desert or unknown origins background but in 4E they contradicted the 2E lore and made them "just another race" while in the original they were hidden servants of Dregoth that was unknown to the world at large and Dregoth was believed dead by the Sorcerer Kings. They basically shoe horned them in form the future as City by the Silt Sea was set 9 years after the events of Kalak's death. +ANd they shoehorned in everything else (Pakladins, WWarlocks etc) while removing clerics because they were stupid enough to codify power sources. Mostly it was to sell more books (Darksun + PHB3+ core books etc).

Another example is warlcks. Maybe they do exist somewhere on Athas, unknown to the world at large and maybe they do not need to preserve of defile (depends on if the patron supplies the energy or the knowledge to cast those spells) but you do not need to replace the Templars for example.

The PHB Sorcerers do not fit Athas either, but you could come up with an Athasian bloodline whatever that may be (Abalech-Re has children for example, elemental leakage, mutants, defiling warping things). Once again you can be one, doesn't mean they need to be a well established organisation or whatever on Athas.

Any new arcane class should follow the defiling rules and if they do not they need an organic reason to be there and probably very rare- a PC might be one of the 1st.

Similar argument for other settings. Say if DM set a game in medieval Europe 1490 and a player wants to play an Aztec (in Europe). They exist but should the player be allowed to play one (I would say no).

Anything new inserted should be done logically and in an organic way fitting the setting (any setting not just Dark Sun). If they really do not fit the setting they should be excluded (Aquatic races on Athas being a prime example, Warforged as well).

Some of those settings it is a lot easier to add stuff. Spelljammer for example is very easy, Nerath for example might have its own crystal sphere or it might turn out the Dragonborn have they own moon/planet/ crystal sphere/multispheric star empire.

You get to play the new stuff and it stays faithful to the old (doesn't need to be 100% faithful differences in mechanics etc, new planar cosmology for planescape).

If you set a reboot earlier in the originals lifecycle its also easier to make everyone happy Fans of the original metaplot can still add it/use it, while fans of the old do not have to worry about the world being blown up.

 

[Obryn]

For example I am not a fan of Dragonborn in DS, if you are to include them you can have the mutant in the desert or unknown origins background but in 4E they contradicted the 2E lore and made them "just another race" while in the original they were hidden servants of Dregoth that was unknown to the world at large and Dregoth was believed dead by the Sorcerer Kings. They basically shoe horned them in form the future as City by the Silt Sea was set 9 years after the events of Kalak's death. +ANd they shoehorned in everything else (Pakladins, WWarlocks etc) while removing clerics because they were stupid enough to codify power sources. Mostly it was to sell more books (Darksun + PHB3+ core books etc).

There aren't any paladins in 4e DS.

Elemental Priest was a theme, and worked just great with the Shaman class. A whole Elemental Priest class would have been neat to see, sure, and I think with some work they could have reskinned the Cleric pretty well. But as it stood, "No Divine classes" was a pretty good way to demarcate Dark Sun.

Anything new inserted should be done logically and in an organic way fitting the setting (any setting not just Dark Sun). If they really do not fit the setting they should be excluded (Aquatic races on Athas being a prime example, Warforged as well).

Upthread I posted a write-up that I think is pretty rad for a Dark Sun warforged, if I do say so myself.

 

[Zardnaar]

There aren't any paladins in 4e DS.

Elemental Priest was a theme, and worked just great with the Shaman class. A whole Elemental Priest class would have been neat to see, sure, and I think with some work they could have reskinned the Cleric pretty well. But as it stood, "No Divine classes" was a pretty good way to demarcate Dark Sun.


Upthread I posted a write-up that I think is pretty rad for a Dark Sun warforged, if I do say so myself.

The problem with warforged is thematic. THey are basically broken even if they are made out of wood, crystal etc. Not needing to eat, breath and immune to the sun.

Since Warforged are not in the PHB I doubt its an issue for a 5E conversion.

 

[Remathilis]

This is absolutely a real thing, and must be taken into account.

But it is not an excuse to dismiss all objection to change, when sometimes that change really does conflict with the established theme/mood/aesthetic.

As with most things, it's a balancing act, and everyone has their different lines. I feel like some people are too resistant to changing Dark Sun (offers a friendly wave to [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] ), to keeping it exactly as it was in 2E. On the other hand, I feel like what you want is too much change for the sake of conformity, and that your definition of what makes a "D&D setting" vs. "a new D&D-like game" is way too restrictive.

No reboot of a setting like Dark Sun will likely satisfy either of you. The trick is figuring out where in the middle they can put it to satisfy the most people.

I'm looking at it practically; most of these settings aren't getting more than a source book or AP's worth of development. There is not a lot of room to replace lost options cut from the PHB. Its far more practical to make warlocks into templars or paladins into knights of Solomnia than it is to spend page-space on new options to replace them. Further, I don't think in 2017 WotC is going to have as much luck selling a setting cutting huge swaths of options out of the PHB, especially when there aren't that many official options to begin with.

Look at the conversion appendixes from Sword Coast Guide and Princes of the Apocalypse. Neither of them outright say "This option is not available in Dragonlance/Greyhawk/Eberron" but instead gives the DM suggestions how to integrate them. I expect any player-facing info for other settings are going to resemble those. I think you'll see far more "X is not common in this setting, but could represent Y" type of descriptions over "X is not available".

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That is the problem; people can't let go.

There is a phenomenon I've witnessed I call "First Love Syndrome" which basically says nothing will ever be as good as the first time you came in contact with it. Whatever it was that drew it to you, you accept it 100% (warts and all) and any attempt to change or improve on it is sacrilege. Name a fandom, you'll find examples. Its why people prefer the original theatrical releases of Star Wars to the Special Editions. Its the rationale for "You never forget your first Doctor" in Doctor Who. Its why people You get Kirk vs. Picard debates, and why reboots and spin-offs almost never please hardcore fans of the originals. Its why people argue endlessly over why the edition of D&D you grew up on is the best version of D&D. And it the origin of the phrase "raped my childhood".

So when people discuss a setting, they look at through the lens of First Love; everything since then has diluted, changed, or "ruined" the setting. Adding anything changes how it was when you fell in love with it, and makes it no longer perfect. Of course, its not a universal syndrome; plenty of people enjoy watching a fandom grow and change. But as with any human endeavor, you'll find fundamentalists unwilling and unable to see their perfect vision ruined.

EDIT: I knew TVTropes would have another name for it: Nostalgia Filter. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NostalgiaFilter

How is this common enough to have a name!?

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm looking at it practically; most of these settings aren't getting more than a source book or AP's worth of development. There is not a lot of room to replace lost options cut from the PHB. Its far more practical to make warlocks into templars or paladins into knights of Solomnia than it is to spend page-space on new options to replace them. Further, I don't think in 2017 WotC is going to have as much luck selling a setting cutting huge swaths of options out of the PHB, especially when there aren't that many official options to begin with.

Look at the conversion appendixes from Sword Coast Guide and Princes of the Apocalypse. Neither of them outright say "This option is not available in Dragonlance/Greyhawk/Eberron" but instead gives the DM suggestions how to integrate them. I expect any player-facing info for other settings are going to resemble those. I think you'll see far more "X is not common in this setting, but could represent Y" type of descriptions over "X is not available".

None of those settings are that different to the PHB, Darksun is.

Having Paladin and Fighter archetypes for example covering Knights of Solamnia makes a reasonable amount of sense.