Then why even make 4e Dark Sun if it's just going to be the 4e GENERIC FANTASY SETTING...ONLY WITH SAND!
Seriously, why make Dark Sun if it's NOT GOING TO BE DARK SUN?
Also, thank you for proving my earlier point for me.
Darksun Teasers
- Thread starter Phaezen
- Start date
Then why even make 4e Dark Sun if it's just going to be the 4e GENERIC FANTASY SETTING...ONLY WITH SAND!
Seriously, why make Dark Sun if it's NOT GOING TO BE DARK SUN?
Also, thank you for proving my earlier point for me.
It's regarding his commentary of offhand inserting the Elemental Chaos and Primordials into the setting.
Since the 4e Dark Sun was announced, people have been holding their breath, waiting to see if they're going to take an FR approach (Change everything!) or an Eberron approach (Change almost nothing!)
When the first blog post mentions some changes that could have very hefty alterations to the setting, people start >:|ing
Not exactly sure how Primordials contradict anything....Seriously, I'm reading it and all Baker mentions that if gods don't exist on Athas, did a primordial do it and if so, is it still there or was it because of Rajaat's original spell?
You guys are REALLY jumping to conclusions here...
GMforPowergamers
Legend
...um those two concepts fit perfect...why is that a problem??? I also hope to see genesi...becuse in a world with little to no outer planes but still tied to the elemental ones...what is the problem???
I personaly am hoping this is the middle ground setting in that regard...
so Had he said elemental planes/pera planes and elemental lords it would be diffrent?
4e turnes the elmental lords into primordals...that is the same...it turned 4 planes with 16 bleed over planes into 1 plne of pure chaos...is that reall the probleem?
catsclaw227
First Post
OK, then help me understand.
I was not ever a DS expert, but was there anything written that would rule out there being Primordials buried deep within Athas or hidden from what was known about Athas?
Why would having primordials connected to Athas be a bad thing?
Obryn
Hero
I'd say that there's about a 90% chance that the Dray are going to be dragonborn, but as a huge Dark Sun fan myself, I can't for a moment bring myself to care.
I am also 100% positive that a new 4e setting will never, ever say, "You may not use Tieflings in this setting." It won't happen. What you will almost certainly see happen is something like they did for off-race Dragonmarks in Eberron. Something like, "There are no known Gnomes in Athas. They are believed to be extinct from Rajaat's Cleansing Wars. If one of your players runs a gnome, they may very well be the only one, and it could do way freaky things to the setting, possibly even igniting new Cleansing Wars or at the least earning the enmity of some Sorcerer-Kings."
The Primordials are a pretty decent fit for Athas, from everything I've read. I'm going to wait and see, rather than get my panties in a bunch over speculation. Primordials could suck in the setting, or they could be a new and interesting way of re-envisioning it. I'll withhold my judgement until, you know, I can actually see the setting.
See above as for the races. However, IMO what was important for Athas wasn't what races were present - it's how the races were presented. All of them were existing races with a Dark Sun, post-apocalyptic, twist. If they do the same to other races, it's a job well done in my book.
There's no reason the list of races has to be set in stone. "No Gnomes" was hardly a major defining feature of Dark Sun, cleansing wars or no cleansing wars. OTOH, cannibalistic jungle-dwelling halflings, dune-running elves, and bald dwarves were.
Heck; TSR expanded the list pretty greatly during the revised setting, too. Where were the hints of Pterrans or Aarakocra in the original box set? WotC would not be the first one to add new races to the setting, so what's the issue? Is it that only TSR had the right to do so, and they're not TSR?
Yeah, and it also has no githyanki or anything to do with the Astral Plane! Ohwait...
No easy healing? The druids in my 2e games would disagree with you!
Also, I completely fail to see how any of the above is incompatible with Primordials. In fact, it kinda fits right in, thematically.
-O
Obryn
Hero
I don't see all too many people in this thread complaining - mostly it's you telling me why I, as a fan of Dark Sun and a fan of 4e, should be outraged. And apparently gleefully fomenting a conflict that's all been hashed out in a few threads in August - which Purple Guy apparently missed.
-O
Mouseferatu
Hero
Okay, folks, here's the thing...
As I said before, people are creating a dichotomy where none exists. People are saying that the options are either A) 100% identical to what came before, or B) it's not Dark Sun except in name.
But this isn't accurate. Frankly, there's a huge amount of middle ground.
As someone said, elves and dwarves were changed from 2E core to 2E Dark Sun. And that's true, and I would definitely want a 4E DS to keep those changes. But why, then, assume that there wouldn't be similar flavor tweaks to dragonborn and tieflings? That particular argument is a non-starter.
As to the question of "Why?"
As Nifft said, this is 4E Dark Sun. It has to appeal to two markets: Dark Sun fans, and 4E fans. There's overlap between those groups--more, I think, than Cirno suggests--but to be a successful product, the setting has to go beyond that overlap in its appeal, regardless of whether it's large or small. It has to bring 4E players to Dark Sun, and it has to bring Dark Sun fans to 4E.
The only way to do that--on a creative level, not just a marketing one--is to include elements that are recognizably 4E in a way that allows them to fit relatively seamlessly into the Dark Sun aesthetic.
Yes, there's a danger of diluting the feel of DS with 4E stuff. There's also a danger of making DS too inaccessible to portions of the 4E market by not including them.
And the solution to that is exactly what I said before: Include much of it, but find a way to do so that's faithful to the moods and themes of the setting. It may not be an easy tightrope to walk, but it's doable.
Does that mean that everything must be included? Of course not. I'm right there with the folks who don't want to see the gods introduced to Athas, and I was gratified at the GenCon seminar to hear them say that divine characters are either unheard of, or at least astonishingly rare (at the DM's option).
But it does mean that if something can be included without diluting the themes and feel of the setting, it's at least worth considering.
So I say again... If dragonborn are reflavored to dray, if they can find a way to bring in tieflings that jives with DS history/cosmology, why not?
And then there's the purely creative aspect. As both a designer and a game, I find it much more interesting to say "How can X be made to work with Y?" than simply to say "X doesn't exist." It doesn't always work--I'll be the first to admit that--but if/when it does, it's a much more intriguing option.
As I said before, people are creating a dichotomy where none exists. People are saying that the options are either A) 100% identical to what came before, or B) it's not Dark Sun except in name.
But this isn't accurate. Frankly, there's a huge amount of middle ground.
As someone said, elves and dwarves were changed from 2E core to 2E Dark Sun. And that's true, and I would definitely want a 4E DS to keep those changes. But why, then, assume that there wouldn't be similar flavor tweaks to dragonborn and tieflings? That particular argument is a non-starter.
As to the question of "Why?"
As Nifft said, this is 4E Dark Sun. It has to appeal to two markets: Dark Sun fans, and 4E fans. There's overlap between those groups--more, I think, than Cirno suggests--but to be a successful product, the setting has to go beyond that overlap in its appeal, regardless of whether it's large or small. It has to bring 4E players to Dark Sun, and it has to bring Dark Sun fans to 4E.
The only way to do that--on a creative level, not just a marketing one--is to include elements that are recognizably 4E in a way that allows them to fit relatively seamlessly into the Dark Sun aesthetic.
Yes, there's a danger of diluting the feel of DS with 4E stuff. There's also a danger of making DS too inaccessible to portions of the 4E market by not including them.
And the solution to that is exactly what I said before: Include much of it, but find a way to do so that's faithful to the moods and themes of the setting. It may not be an easy tightrope to walk, but it's doable.
Does that mean that everything must be included? Of course not. I'm right there with the folks who don't want to see the gods introduced to Athas, and I was gratified at the GenCon seminar to hear them say that divine characters are either unheard of, or at least astonishingly rare (at the DM's option).
But it does mean that if something can be included without diluting the themes and feel of the setting, it's at least worth considering.
So I say again... If dragonborn are reflavored to dray, if they can find a way to bring in tieflings that jives with DS history/cosmology, why not?
And then there's the purely creative aspect. As both a designer and a game, I find it much more interesting to say "How can X be made to work with Y?" than simply to say "X doesn't exist." It doesn't always work--I'll be the first to admit that--but if/when it does, it's a much more intriguing option.
Except it has a direct, tangible benefit: It makes the setting merge smoothly with the core rules, which makes it more accessible to new players (and everyone that enjoys those rules.)
Downside? If it is done while preserving the main themes and elements of the setting, than the only complaint is that it is different from the past, which is no legitimate complaints at all.
Also, I find your claim that 4E Dark Sun fans are "statistically insignificant" to be completely absurd. And clearly just outright wrong, given the enormous fan response from 4E players at the announcement of Dark Sun as the next setting.
Look, if they fit in Dragonborn and the fluff completely doesn't fit in Dark Sun, that would be a legitimate complaint. But the fact is, they have shown they can completely revamp racial identity for Dark Sun with many of the other races (Elves, Halflings, etc). Why do you assume they won't do so as well for Dragonborn - since Eberron already shows they are willing to do so? Eladrin, Dragonborn, Tieflings - all were very smoothly placed in Eberron. Why expect they won't do the same with Dark Sun?
I mean, look at this quote by Purple: "Dark Sun Elves were not Elves, Dark Sun Dray were not Dragonborn, Dark Sun Dwarves were not just Dwarves."
Isn't that an argument in favor of Dragonborn being able to integrate smoothly into the setting? If you can have Dark Sun Elves who are different from Core Elves, why not the same for Dragonborn? What do you lose in making "Dark Sun Dragonborn", especially when they can already fit a pre-existing race in the fluff? You lose nothing, and you gain accessibility and character options.
Man, seriously. Baker posts about coming up with reasons to put some thought into the geography of the setting, and this is cause for condemnation? A prelude to a 'trainwreck'?
Yeah, there will be complaints about 4E Dark Sun. I think this thread has done a great job of proving how eager some are to start complaining without needing any actual issue to complain about.
