Dark Sun - Player's Guide rendered obsolete

[Ourph]

I think this is a good move. I loved the combo of the FRCG and Monsters of Faerun for the 3e Forgotten Realms (the only 2 books I bought for that line). I thought the Player/Campaign Guide strategy for 4e FR was a really bad choice. As The Little Raven points out, it makes even more sense to have a seperate monster book and a single campaign/player guide for DS.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Some one WotC made a comment to that effect (cannot remember where sorry) that Dark Sun needed very few extra player rules but tons of creatures and DM stuff so they changed the model. Whether this is the true reason or not I don't know. If the next setting has the same format as Dark Sun then we know he was talking bollox! It was done for money reasons

 

[Kez Darksun]

My displeasure isn't so much that there is no Player's Guide, but that there is a reduced page count for the $40 price point compared to the other setting books.

 

[Dice4Hire]

The system for Dark Sun (There is NO evidence it will be the same for next year's setting) really does nto bother me at all. I am glad to have monsters in a separate book, as it makes the book more optional for DMs or otehrs running the setting.

If you don't want to buy it, or do not like the previews, and intend to reskin existing monsters, you just saved yourself some money. With the other model, you have to buy both books if you are a DM. You really have NO choice.

 

[Mark]

They could have put the adventure, which I suppose has DS creatures, in the monster book, away from player eyes. That could have bulked it up to 160 pages and justified a (more durable) hardcover.

 

[Dykstrav]

The format for the Dark Sun books doesn't really bother me as much as the D&D product identity issues. Dark Sun is a cool setting, and a big part of that coolness comes from the fact that it deliberately defies many of the conventions of contemporary fantasy.

Still, I seem to remember some precept of 4E product design that said each setting would get limited products, and that everything for the D&D product line would exist in some form in every setting. If they stay true to Dark Sun's absence of gods, then that would logically knock out the entire divine power source.

I'm still looking forward to seeing Dark Sun though.

 

[Mouseferatu]

They could have put the adventure, which I suppose has DS creatures, in the monster book, away from player eyes. That could have bulked it up to 160 pages and justified a (more durable) hardcover.

But would then raise the price point without cause for people who don't want the adventure. Given how adventures tend to sell, vs. how monster books tend to sell, this would upset a substantial portion of the market.

If they stay true to Dark Sun's absence of gods, then that would logically knock out the entire divine power source.

They've already said that the divine power source is largely or entirely absent from the setting.

 

[Dire Bare]

Whether this new "model" is a one-time variation for Dark Sun or the way settings will be published in the future . . . . I don't care! I enjoyed the 4e FR and Eberron releases, and I'm excited about the upcoming Dark Sun release.

In fact, I (mildly) dislike having one "player" book and one "DM" book as we got for the previous two settings. I say strip out the redundancy and squeeze them together in one book as we saw done for the 3e release for both settings.

The only "wish" I could make for Dark Sun is a higher page-count monster book . . . with more monsters! But I'm sure I'll be pretty happy with the Creature Catalog once I get my hands on it . . . .

 

[Mark]

But would then raise the price point without cause for people who don't want the adventure. Given how adventures tend to sell, vs. how monster books tend to sell, this would upset a substantial portion of the market.

The price on the book the players (and DM) are meant to buy would come down to compensate. Bottom line, no adventures in player books.

 

[Dykstrav]

They've already said that the divine power source is largely or entirely absent from the setting.

Yeah, and it kinda irks me a bit. I can deal with the absence of core material (and even appreciate it), but it still rubs me the wrong way because Forgotten Realms and Eberron were reworked to make them conform to the core D&D design precepts.

Don't get me wrong, it's not a deal-breaker or anything. I'm certainly looking forward to playing a gladiator from Balic or Raam.