D&D 5E Mearls on other settings

[Shasarak]

Anyone else own a near mint copy of Spelljammer boxed set or is it just me?

Near Mint? Mine is too well loved to be called that.

 

[Zardnaar]

Okay, this line of thought bugs the heck out of me.


Specifically "I:m going to ban monks from Darksun because fighting unarmed is a very good answer to having poor materials for making weapons"


Do you happen to be aware of the major motivation for creating martial arts in the real world?

Lack of material for making decent weapons.



Monks would likely have existed in the world of Darksun before everything became cataclysmic and bad and so monasteries where people learn how to fight without weapons just makes so much sense.

It's like saying you are creating a setting where openly wielding a weapon is forbidden, so you're getting rid of monks, spellcasters, and daggers because those all are answers to the problem of having your weapons banned. Yes, of course those are answers, that's why people would use them, because they solve the problem that people have, ie not having a reliable way to defend yourself.



Also, why are we banning things that don't exist like that Chronomancer? It... seems to be an odd choice. Did I miss a UA or something?




Okay... and?

Why is this a problem? Being a Psion who focuses on blasting with their mind gets around the inferior weapons thing as well. Being a Lizardfolk with a 1d6 bite attack helps get around the inferior weapons thing as well.

Why ban a class that makes sense just because they get around this rather minor point.


I mean, how inferior are the weapons anyways? Bows are still made of non-metal materials, arrows are tipped differently, but does that mean a lower damage die? If glass tipped arrows are going to deal the same 1d8 from a longbow than any archer build also gets around the inferior weapons.

I mean, this seems like a really minor detail and it's just a side effect of little to no metal.

The penalty was -1 to -3 to hit and damage depending on what materials were used. An obsidian sword was a lot better than a wooden one. Existing weapons made out of wood (staff, club) were unaffected.

In my conversion I am working on stone is -1, wod and bone -2, and armor is -1 AC +1 dex modifer over the PHB armor. Athasian plate is made out of mekilot hide for example and has 17 AC and a +1 dex modifier. Its not as strong as metal armour, but its lighter. You can find metal armor of course and something like chainmail is going to be worth around 10 000 gp on a normal world, a metal longsword 1500 and things like that are generally unavailable to buy (a metal dagger is 200 gp).

 

[Chaosmancer]

The penalty was -1 to -3 to hit and damage depending on what materials were used. An obsidian sword was a lot better than a wooden one. Existing weapons made out of wood (staff, club) were unaffected.

In my conversion I am working on stone is -1, wod and bone -2, and armor is -1 AC +1 dex modifer over the PHB armor. Athasian plate is made out of mekilot hide for example and has 17 AC and a +1 dex modifier. Its not as strong as metal armour, but its lighter. You can find metal armor of course and something like chainmail is going to be worth around 10 000 gp on a normal world, a metal longsword 1500 and things like that are generally unavailable to buy (a metal dagger is 200 gp).

So depending on how expensive you make a stone weapon, monks are likely getting a +1 over fighters?

A plus one they would also have from using quarterstaffs as their primary weapon because you said wooden weapons are unaffected.


That's enough of a bonus to remove the entire class?

It still seems very minor to me.

 

[Zardnaar]

So depending on how expensive you make a stone weapon, monks are likely getting a +1 over fighters?

A plus one they would also have from using quarterstaffs as their primary weapon because you said wooden weapons are unaffected.


That's enough of a bonus to remove the entire class?

It still seems very minor to me.

Monk dice scale up though and deal magic damage with their fists at level 6 so high level monks will probably deal more damage than fighters.

I am tweaking my conversion notes, just waiting on some final psion rules. I'm on the fence about allowing feats and variant humans into the game (default human has been tweaked to +2/+2/+1/+1). So high level fighters for example will not have access to the -5/+10- feats while a Monk will be dealing 1d10 damage.

I'm also not using subraces and archtypes, each class only has 1 archetype, the Champion is a gladiator, the Battlemaster is the fighter. PHB Bards do not exist (they Rogue: Assassins) so the game is lower powered than everything is in. If monks squeeze in the way of the fists will be the only option. I only have 9 classes/archetypes in my game, 12 if each cleric domain counts as an archetype.

 

[Obryn]

Monk dice scale up though and deal magic damage with their fists at level 6 so high level monks will probably deal more damage than fighters.

I am tweaking my conversion notes, just waiting on some final psion rules. I'm on the fence about allowing feats and variant humans into the game (default human has been tweaked to +2/+2/+1/+1). So high level fighters for example will not have access to the -5/+10- feats while a Monk will be dealing 1d10 damage.

I'm also not using subraces and archtypes, each class only has 1 archetype, the Champion is a gladiator, the Battlemaster is the fighter. PHB Bards do not exist (they Rogue: Assassins) so the game is lower powered than everything is in. If monks squeeze in the way of the fists will be the only option. I only have 9 classes/archetypes in my game, 12 if each cleric domain counts as an archetype.

(1) Why are you penalizing bone/stone/etc instead of giving metal advantages?
(2) Dark Sun is not a low-power setting, and I simply don't understand why you are trying to make it one. If you're going that way, Dungeon Crawl Classics is probably a better rule-set.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

The best way to do it IMHO would be with a setting book that also includes an introductory (1-5) adventure for each of the main settings. That way people can get the rules and world expansion they need along with a way to take their group on a test run.

I think the big problem WotC sees is that they can't really stop there. Once a setting has been added they'll need to keep feeding it with content and whilst the setting+adventure books would probably sell well (for the curiosity factor alone) the adventures would probably appeal to only a subset of the audience, and thus volumes go down and more settings just makes the problem worse.

To counter that I think the DMs Guild should be the place to expand that and perhaps the best adventures could be given a WotC gloss and sold for a higher price-point (but still digital/print on demand only to maximize profit).

Selling niche hardback adventures is not going to work IMHO.

It seemed to work pretty well with Ravenloft. I suspect that's a bit of the model we should expect, combined with SKT as part Gazetteer and part adventure. As far as I know both sold well. For the larger settings, a SCAG style supplement to go with it.

Planescape and Spelljammer would both work as potential starting points, with an adventure starting in the Realms and leading to the planes or spheres, and future adventures in other settings starting from there.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

I don't trust WOTC to do older settings like Greyhawk or The Known World or Dragonlance justice. There is too much pressure to squeeze things to fit their business/product/story model.

Move on,WOTC. Do something new and creative that the team can really get behind.

Outsource old stuff to Goodman (or others) like you are doing with B1 and B2.

That's probably a question of the right offer and what ideas they have and want to hang onto.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

I'll believe it when I see it.

At least if they open up DMsGuild to other settings I can hope for Bruce Heard to do The Known World proud.

I think that's pretty much guaranteed. They opened Ravenloft when CoS came out, so as they add additional settings they'll almost certainly open them there too.

 

[Zardnaar]

(1) Why are you penalizing bone/stone/etc instead of giving metal advantages?
(2) Dark Sun is not a low-power setting, and I simply don't understand why you are trying to make it one. If you're going that way, Dungeon Crawl Classics is probably a better rule-set.

Because I thought those changes are stupid. Using crappy weapons is an intereting thing from the original set and this way you can find metal weapons and magical versions of those weapons. Have you read the iroginal material its not just warrior types that get it in some way (arcane users and clerics have Athasian issues).

I suppose in 4E they could not penalise things like powers as the other power sources would not have an equivalent drawback. Darksun was not a good fit for the 4E rules IMHO because of the focus on balance and the way 4E was designed.

Lets say for example a metal sword is as good as a +1 weapon in a normal world what do you do if you want to add a +1 metal weapon?

It also provides a fairly big reason to go explore, "this weapon sucks I want a metal one" and the DM has conveniently put a ancient set of ruins nearby.

 

[Obryn]

Because I thought those changes are stupid. Using crappy weapons is an interetingthing from the original set and this way you can find metal weapons and magical versions of those weapons.

Lets say for example a metal sword is as good as a +1 weapon in a normal world what do you do if you want to add a +1 metal weapon?

Let's turn that around. If a metal sword is as good as a +1, what's important about having +1 metal swords?

Seriously, though, weapons can differ in ways beyond bonuses or penalties. A simple and easy to use weapon breakage rule, for example, is quite genre-appropriate.

Likewise, changing the damage die would be a quick way to differentiate them.