D&D 5E Mearls on other settings

[Zardnaar]

Warlocks were always appropriate to Dark Sun, and the other things don't even exist in 4e Dark Sun.

Not really I would argue that the only arcane spellcaster on Athas would be the wizard.

Why I said Athas was a low magic world (its probably more medium) is because you can't use it openly as it can be a death sentence either by the Sorcerer Kings or mob rule. You have to resort to the black market for things like components, spell books and forget about buying magical items. Learning magic is harder and it can get you killed.

Athas also did not have sub races either so adding things like Eladrin defeats that concept as well. They did add the Halflings of Thamasku later on that were different tan the DS Halflings but they were not really available as a player race and came towards the end where DS and TSR were falling apart.

Warlocks do not fit because arcane energy on Athas comes from plants not pacts and its a silly idea to make an Athas pact with a tree as that is more Spirits of the Land and things like Druids and Rangers are not fans of arcane magic. Sorcerers are also out for similar reasons and the Sorcerer Kings are a title (wizards and psions).

 

[Remathilis]

Maybe, but it's also far less appropriate than saying "they would ordinary be excluded because Athas lacks a connection to the feywild, but here's a modified version that fits with the themes and character of the setting." If you're talking about allowing a single player to make a single Eladrin PC, you can make a virtually infinite number of excuses for how that character arrived on Athas without originating there because of all the magic in all the worlds of D&D (as I said earlier, it's just as easy as saying a character from any other Palladium game was drawn through a portal into RIFTS Earth).

That's a cop out. If I'm playing an Athas campaign, I want Athasian PCs. I don't want "Bob, who came from Oerth" hanging out. I want to use Eladrin NPCs, tell stories tied to the Eladrin, and have multiple Eladrin PCs. I don't want "planeswalker eladrin ends up a Athas". There are far better ways to integrate a new race than have every one of them be off-worlders.

Sorry, but I have to call BS. There is no "hardline no" as it relates to the races of individual characters, for reasons I already mentioned. An orc PC fits into Krynn just as well as an Eladrin PC does to Athas. However, having a section that explains "this is why they were excluded, here is a modified version that fits with the setting, and here are ideas for bringing in PCs of that race from other settings" is inclusive, thorough, and educates people new to a setting about the intended character and feel of the setting while giving DMs tools to ignore that intent if they so choose.

You're fighting on both sides of the argument now?

What makes Dragonlance unique?
There are no orcs. But heres how to import a bunch of orcs from Faerun.

As soon as the 2e PDFs start including mechanical update appendices for every edition that comes after, I'll agree with you on that.

Sure. A 5e update, and then the 2e PDFs to show the world "as it was". Win-win.

"Arthaus Ravenloft?" I've never head of a product called that. A quick Google search appears to indicate that you're talking about the 3e Ravenloft books. If so, I liked those books. I liked what they did with the dark lords and land masses changing (I didn't have a problem with Soth losing his domain or with that Necropolis domain nestled within Darkon), and I liked what they did with the Weathermay twins taking on Van Richten's mantle in his absence. Notably, all of those things are in keeping with the tone and character of Ravenloft.

I was. However, isn't ironic to comment how you like the 3e changes to Ravenloft when it introduced Calibans (Ravenloft half-orcs) and found places for paladins, druids, bards, barbarians, monks, and sorcerers in the setting? Not just "ported over and stuck" but home-grown versions? By your Dark Sun example, The Ravenloft PHB should only have had Fighters, Rangers, Rogues, Wizards, Clerics, and then a section on "how to import other classes from other settings".

It shows what I've been on about, you CAN expand the setting's options while keeping true to its spirit.

That's making things a bit personal don't you think? I have no problem with changes, I just want them to be in keeping with the feeling, the tone, and the character originally intended for the settings. You can play it as jumpscare slasher "horror," but Ravenloft should always be designed primarily with a gothic horror feel in mind because that is the identity of the setting.

I didn't mean to direct it at you, I was directing it at the setting. A setting needs to grow and evolve. It Dark Sun doesn't allow more options that it did in 2e, its not worth converting. There is nothing about gothic horror that precludes monks or elves. There is nothing about sword-and-sandals that precludes warlocks and dragonborn. There is nothing about romantic fantasy that precludes sorcerers and half-orcs. The tone of the world isn't defined by what is cut out of the PHB.

 

[Obryn]

At least in part, that's accurate. Where it's inaccurate is when old races were excluded or altered to fit the character of the settings (i.e. cannibal halflings, etc).

I agree they would have been addressed. They would have either been banned outright, included, or included but modifiied. That's why I say that the best practice is probably to educate newcomers as to why certain things were modified or excluded when the setting was created, and then to provide setting relevant variants of things that would otherwise be excluded, and advice for how to include things originally intentionally excluded if the DM so chooses.

My difference with your post above was not the idea that they'd have to be modified, but with the idea that just because something wasn't in the 2e setting, it's the same as being intentionally excluded.

Frex: There are still no gnomes or half-orcs or paladins (or any divine class) in 4e Dark Sun, because those were excluded in the original box set and it's in keeping with the character of the setting. I don't think it's justifiable to claim a similar "excluded" status for tieflings, goliaths, etc. because 'there are no goliaths' was not a core setting distinction (duh, I know).

So when examining a setting element that didn't even exist in 2e, that prior nonexistence is irrelevant for determining whether or not they fit.

 

[Remathilis]

I feel [MENTION=82779]MechaPilot[/MENTION] spells out the solution.

A 5e update of a classic setting keeps out new races. But the update explains why these conflict with the themes and tropes of the setting. Even so, it suggests modifications that can help them integrate if the gamers (DM and players) want to include one or more of these new races.

At the same time, sometimes current options that did not yet exist when the classic setting was available, might cohere well or even improve it. Then the update can explain why it recommends that the updated setting adopt these innovations.

Why bother then? If the world isn't going to grow to accept new options or find ways to make the PHB options work, you don't need more than a short conversion doc to update the mechanic.

Here is all the 5e Eberron you'll ever need.

 

[Obryn]

Not really I would argue that the only arcane spellcaster on Athas would be the wizard.

Why I said Athas was a low magic world (its probably more medium) is because you can't use it openly as it can be a death sentence either by the Sorcerer Kings or mob rule. You have to resort to the black market for things like components, spell books and forget about buying magical items. Learning magic is harder and it can get you killed.

Athas also did not have sub races either so adding things like Eladrin defeats that concept as well. They did add the Halflings of Thamasku later on that were different tan the DS Halflings but they were not really available as a player race and came towards the end where DS and TSR were falling apart.

Eladrin in the DSCS are clearly not an elven sub-race.

I don't buy an argument that 'anything but the wizard' is out of place except - again - in a 2e (not Dark Sun, AD&D 2e) purism. Athasian casters could still be specialists, after all - having sorcerers and SK-worshipping templar warlocks is hardly out of keeping, thematically.

So when it comes to magic, let's talk about a few ways where the 4e rules worked out as a better implementation than the 2e ones. In the 2e core, "defiling" wasn't a thing that your wizard could choose to do for a burst of power. You were either a defiler, or you were a preserver. In 4e, anyone throwing around arcane abilities can defile for that extra boost - and it will be at a cost. This matches the fiction quite a bit better, IMO.

Likewise, items. Enter, Inherent Bonuses and even rules on item breakage.

 

[Zardnaar]

Goliaths could exist on Athas, I just did not like how they replaced Half Giants.

Some class and Races should only exist if it makes sense in the setting even if those classes and races did not exist in the original material. Tieflings from the Empire of Iuz on Greyhawk seems an obvious tie in there.

Most arcane classes I think should not go on Darksun as the defiling thing is a fairly major part of the setting and other arcnae classes like the PHB Bard were excluded on Darksun. That is because magic was hard.

AD&D had sub races, Darksun did not, at least not as playable races in the boxed sets. I suppose you could go and discover them and put one of them in your character tree but that should be a reward for exploring rather than "here have a Dragonman option".

 

[Yaarel]

Why bother then? If the world isn't going to grow to accept new options or find ways to make the PHB options work, you don't need more than a short conversion doc to update the mechanic.

My post said to make an update that includes new options, but these options must be options.

With regard to new options that did not exist earlier, an update can be useful. But tastes will differ with regard to how to incorporate them. So, give a menu of options, and the DM can cherry pick. Dont bake everything into the setting flavor and mechanics. Allow the DM to decide.

Some changes are probably noncontroversial. Eldritch Knight as an arcane-wielding Gish. No problem. Mystic, as a psionic class. Fine.

Some changes are probably controversial. The 5e Bard is a powerful caster now. It could be described as an arcane defiler. Oppositely, it could be described as a psionic mind influencer. Or if the musical instrument is a drum, the Bard makes a decent shaman.

Maybe the Sorcerer makes a better ‘Elemental Cleric’ than the Cleric class does?

Is the Green-Knight Paladin (oath of ancients) suitable as a naturalist champion against the defilers?

Or so on. Many options can be made to work. Give a menu, along with recommendations visavis setting flavor.

But.Let.The.DM.Decide.

Whatever the designer does. Dont force into everything into the default setting, thus forcing it on the players, thus putting the DM in the position of being forced to be the one who has to REMOVE it.

The changes can be excellent and appropriate. But let the DM decide.

 

[Remathilis]

My post said to make an update that includes new options, but these options must be options.

With regard to new options that did not exist earlier, an update can be useful. But tastes will differ with regard to how to incorporate them. So, give a menu of options, and the DM can cherry pick. Dont bake everything into the setting flavor and mechanics. Allow the DM to decide.

Some changes are probably noncontroversial. Eldritch Knight as an arcane-wielding Gish. No problem. Mystic, as a psionic class. Fine.

Some changes are probably controversial. The 5e Bard is a powerful caster now. It could be described as an arcane defiler. Oppositely, it could be described as a psionic mind influencer. Or if the musical instrument is a drum, the Bard makes a decent shaman.

Maybe the Sorcerer makes a better ‘Elemental Cleric’ than the Cleric class does?

Is the Green-Knight Paladin (oath of ancients) suitable as a naturalist champion against the defilers?

Or so on. Many options can be made to work. Give a menu, along with recommendations visavis setting flavor.

But.Let.The.DM.Decide.

Whatever the designer does. Dont force into everything into the default setting, thus forcing it on the players, thus putting the DM in the position of being forced to be the one who has to REMOVE it.

The changes can be excellent and appropriate. But let the DM decide.

This reminds me of a debate from 3e where a poster here demanded a "rule zero" warning pasted in the front of every D&D book so he could point to it while telling his players "no, that isn't allowed in my game." It's the same principle; a DM afraid his players will whine and fight him unless it explicitly says "optional" on it.

We don't need that. A DM can look at something like tieflings or warlocks and say "no, that doesn't fit my vision of Athas." He doesn't need the book saying x is optional because (as many people in this thread have said) D&D can be modified to suit the taste of the group. He can already remove monks and gnomes from the game. He doesn't need the Dark Sun book to give him that permission.

 

[Zardnaar]

This reminds me of a debate from 3e where a poster here demanded a "rule zero" warning pasted in the front of every D&D book so he could point to it while telling his players "no, that isn't allowed in my game." It's the same principle; a DM afraid his players will whine and fight him unless it explicitly says "optional" on it.

We don't need that. A DM can look at something like tieflings or warlocks and say "no, that doesn't fit my vision of Athas." He doesn't need the book saying x is optional because (as many people in this thread have said) D&D can be modified to suit the taste of the group. He can already remove monks and gnomes from the game. He doesn't need the Dark Sun book to give him that permission.

A few classes and races get around what Darksun is supposed to be about though hence why they should be excluded.

 

[Remathilis]

A few classes and races get around what Darksun is supposed to be about though hence why they should be excluded.

What you think should be excluded. There is no agreement on that. I do agree a few exceptions can be made, but banning half the players handbook is a nonstarter.