Dragon 338: Returning to Athas, part1

[Aegeri]

What about Wilden on Athas?

I imagine like other elements they aren't interested in including specific support for they will just not mention them at all.

 

[Kingreaper]

There is one thing that bugs me, though, and I know I will regret asking.

What about Wilden on Athas?

I can't see them existing any more.

If they had to be included (which is doubtful, because... yeah, they're not THAT popular) I'd expect nature's last ditch attempt to wipe out those that are defiling it. And probably wouldn't be at all discriminate in who they kill "The only good humanoid is fertiliser" sort of approach.

 

[vagabundo]

I can't see them existing any more.

If they had to be included (which is doubtful, because... yeah, they're not THAT popular) I'd expect nature's last ditch attempt to wipe out those that are defiling it. And probably wouldn't be at all discriminate in who they kill "The only good humanoid is fertiliser" sort of approach.

Maybe they roam the forest ridge squishing halflings and other interlopers....

 

[Wik]

Ok everyone, even though there seems to be agreement on both sides that this is a minor issue, we're on page 7 now. I think everything has been said on this particular topic.

I agree. I've said my part, people have disagreed, fair enough. Some folk are now going after me on my usage of quotation marks. It's great when people start picking apart your posts and ignorning your actual points, eh?

(Not that everyone has, but at this point, there's no real value in responding. I've said my two cents, and I'll defend them if need be, but it's just going to turn into an argument instead of a debate if I keep pushing my opinion, at this point).

There is one thing that bugs me, though, and I know I will regret asking.

What about Wilden on Athas?

I imagine they're having tea time with the gnomes, orcs, and wemics.

If you wanted to incorporate wilden into Athas (I wouldn't, even though I LOVE wilden in normal 4e), I imagine the natural approach would be to say "sand". I disagree. I think the cooler way would be to tie them into defiling magic - ie, have wilden actually draw upon the life energy off the earth.... they hate defilers, but only because defilers are such a major source of harm to wilden, who (sort of) defile themselves.

 

[Wik]

I wanted to reply to this because it is a very well put out argument. I disagree with parts of it, but I do appreciate the way it was put forward.

"But we think it’s important for someone who’s new to the D&D game with 4th Edition to find many/most of the things they regard as being in the core of the D&D game in the Dark Sun setting"

Right up front, he is saying that not everything needs to be included. Read the entire quote - only one sentence mentions the guy who likes to always play Eladrin. Several more are devoted to the real heart of the matter - that taking familiar races and throwing them into different roles has always been part of the Dark Sun experience, and that is exactly what they are working with here.

Not to be picky, here, but I've always seen the Dark Sun experience as being one where there was a considerable DECLINE in the number of races. Dark Sun, as compared to pretty much every other published campaign setting (except for maybe Birthright, and definitely Jakandor) had a smaller number of races. Which, from my perspective, is awesome.

And I read the whole blog post before making my argument. I disagree with how Rich Baker describes the Feywild, because I think it takes away from Athas. But, whatever, I'll ignore it. I am a bit nervous that the monster book is going to make every cool/weird monster "from the feywild", which would bug me.

And here's the thing, regarding your specific comparison. The absence of Eladrin was never a core part of Dark Sun - just a byproduct of them not existing as a specific race at the time! But the absence of gods is a fundamental to the setting.

Thus, Eladrin can be added in to preserve familiarity without undermining the setting, while the same isn't true for divine characters. Could they have found a way to make it work if they wanted to? Probably. But they felt the element was too central to the setting to do so, and I am fine with that.

That's a really good way to put it. I can understand that point of view. I don't necessarily agree with it for personal campaigns (there will be no eladrin in my games), but I can understand that belief. I still don't understand the logic of why you can include eladrin for that reason, and then exclude divine magic (why not simply refluff divine, then?), but I can understand where you're coming from.

I don't have an issue with you questioning the designer's decisions here, or stating that you prefer an Athas without a Feywild. You certainly aren't coming off simply as a hater, but... you also aren't particularly coming off as arguing in good faith.

I'm trying. I really am. I know I was a bit abrupt with Moridin - hence my apology. And I've been trying to acknowledge view points. But then, it goes both ways. And there's only so often people can tell you that you're wrong, y'know.... before you start looking at them like they're wrong.

There have already been a lot of good responses in this thread explaining why many people are perfectly happy with an Athasian Feywild, and excited to see it in action. Shrugging those opinions aside while fixating on a single quote of the designer (and ignoring all the other reasons the designer is giving), declaring the opposition's viewpoints for them (saying that wanting to use the Feywild means a DM isn't willing to think outside the box), or making complaints based on information that isn't remotely available to us as of yet (how Eladrin's Fey Step will work) hasn't helped your point much, either.

A few points I want to make to defend myself. First, I've been looking at one particular paragraph in a three paragraph post. I have a history degree - this is what we do, when given a small source to work with. From what I've read of that post, I don't like it.

The fey step thing wasn't really my main argument, but I dislike teleportation in Dark Sun. It seems to go against the source material, in my mind. But whatever.

When did I say that DMs that use the feywild won't think outside the box? I believe I said that the feywild can be the "easy button". And I'm afraid that much of the cool stuff in Dark Sun (a village built over a pool of lava, for example) is going to get shunted over to the feywild. Which I din't like.

As for complaints about info... a lot of people have been putting argumetns towards KM and I that are just as assuming. And I don't see a reason why we cna't assume that the Eladrin fey step in Athas will work like it would in any other setting, since a feywild exists and we haven't been told otherwise.

Anyways. Good response, and I hope I've made my opinion here clear. But I agree with mkill - let's just let the subject lie, before this gets heated and the thread gets locked.

 

[Obryn]

Not to be picky, here, but I've always seen the Dark Sun experience as being one where there was a considerable DECLINE in the number of races. Dark Sun, as compared to pretty much every other published campaign setting (except for maybe Birthright, and definitely Jakandor) had a smaller number of races. Which, from my perspective, is awesome.

Hmmm... When I look at Dark Sun, I see the opposite. While there was a general decline in the NPC races (take that, wemics!), the only PC race forbidden, of all those in 2e core, were the gnomes. (And in 2e, they got shafted anyways.) Half-Orcs weren't a part of 2e core.

Humans, Half-Elves, Halflings, Elves, and Dwarves were all still hanging out. And to that mix were added a potpourri of new races - Muls, Half-Giants, and Thri-Kreen in the original set; then aarakocra and pterrans later on.

I think you had more options for PC races in Dark Sun than you did in most other 2e settings, honestly.

-O

 

[Wik]

Hmmm... When I look at Dark Sun, I see the opposite. While there was a general decline in the NPC races (take that, wemics!), the only PC race forbidden, of all those in 2e core, were the gnomes. (And in 2e, they got shafted anyways.) Half-Orcs weren't a part of 2e core.

Humans, Half-Elves, Halflings, Elves, and Dwarves were all still hanging out. And to that mix were added a potpourri of new races - Muls, Half-Giants, and Thri-Kreen in the original set; then aarakocra and pterrans later on.

I think you had more options for PC races in Dark Sun than you did in most other 2e settings, honestly.

-O

In terms of PC options, you are absolutely correct. Fully agree (unless you start counting in the book of humanoids and Dragon magazine, in which case there's a huge glut of races in the kitchen sink).

However, in terms of total humanoid races, Dark Sun is pretty barren by D&D standards. No orcs. No goblins. No lycanthropes. No kobolds. No gnomes. No centaurs, wemics, or other fey creatures. No ogres, or bugbears, or gnolls, or....

In short, I always found Dark Sun to be a bit more "believable" in terms of humanoid races... although there were still about two dozen of them or so (more if you count some of the silly races in the MC compendiums - but still, not nearly as much as in, say, the Realms, Greyhawk, or even Dragonlance).

 

[Aldarc]

In terms of PC options, you are absolutely correct. Fully agree (unless you start counting in the book of humanoids and Dragon magazine, in which case there's a huge glut of races in the kitchen sink).

However, in terms of total humanoid races, Dark Sun is pretty barren by D&D standards. No orcs. No goblins. No lycanthropes. No kobolds. No gnomes. No centaurs, wemics, or other fey creatures. No ogres, or bugbears, or gnolls, or....

In short, I always found Dark Sun to be a bit more "believable" in terms of humanoid races... although there were still about two dozen of them or so (more if you count some of the silly races in the MC compendiums - but still, not nearly as much as in, say, the Realms, Greyhawk, or even Dragonlance).

But is it not an artificial level of "believability" when orcs, goblins, kobolds, gnomes, etc. did in fact exist at some point in Athas history? The only difference is the historical campaign of genocide by Rajaat's Champions that rid Athas of pre-existing races. So what then makes the relative absence of humanoid races in Athas believable?

 

[Wik]

But it is not an artificial level of "believability" when orcs, goblins, kobolds, gnomes, etc. did in fact exist at some point in Athas history? The only difference is the historical campaign of genocide by Rajaat's Champions that rid Athas of pre-existing races. So what then makes the relative absence of humanoid races in Athas believable?

Yeah, fair enough. Except, I avoid any revised Dark Sun stuff, so in my version of athas - there never were orcs, gnolls, gnomes, or anything like that.

The setting, as presented, just works better in my mind with fewer humanoid races. I think most settings do. It helps solidify things in my head.

 

[TarionzCousin]

There is one thing that bugs me, though, and I know I will regret asking.

What about Wild On on Athas?

No chance. The show was cancelled years ago.