D&D 5E Mearls on other settings

[Hussar]

None of those settings are that different to the PHB, Darksun is.

Having Paladin and Fighter archetypes for example covering Knights of Solamnia makes a reasonable amount of sense.

I'm not entirely convinced of the differences though. You mention the difficulty of healing in DS. Thing is, that's not a DS thing, that's a 2e thing. EVERY campaign was limited to clerical/druidic healing which was limited to 1st, 4th and 5th level spells. There is no difference in healing between DS and any other setting.

And, as far as defiler/preserver went, mechanically, they were pretty much bog standard casters with a couple of tweaks. They had identical spell lists, used the same xp tables, gained spells at the same rate, the works. Mechanically, there is no difference between a DS wizard and a Greyhawk or standard PHB wizard.

There were no monks in DS. Thing is, there were no monks in ANY 2e era setting because 2e didn't have monks. There's no distinction here between Darksun and Al Qadim and Planescape. None of them had monks. DS is identical in this sense to all other settings that came out in the 2e era.

I really think you're conflating the system for the setting. I mean, Kara Tur is more mechanically distinct from baseline D&D than Darksun is, and I see no one saying that you cannot have a 5e Oriental Adventures. Heck, we already have half a dozen OA subclasses to work with. Add a monster manual of some sort and you're pretty much good to go.

 

[MechaPilot]

Its why people You get Kirk vs. Picard debates. . .

You also get Kirk vs. Picard debates for legitimate reasons. I love both ToS and TNG, but Picard is a better diplomat and Kirk is a better fighter. Picard makes better use of his rank (delegating responsibility more frequently), and Kirk leads from the front (getting his hands dirty alongside Spock & McCoy, even when it makes more sense for his crew to handle things). That's just a very real style difference between the two captains, and in no small part it comes from the three main members of the original crew essentially being written as embodiments of the Id, Ego, & Superego. You still see that with Picard, Riker & Data in TNG, but it's much more subtle there than in TOS.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm not entirely convinced of the differences though. You mention the difficulty of healing in DS. Thing is, that's not a DS thing, that's a 2e thing. EVERY campaign was limited to clerical/druidic healing which was limited to 1st, 4th and 5th level spells. There is no difference in healing between DS and any other setting.

And, as far as defiler/preserver went, mechanically, they were pretty much bog standard casters with a couple of tweaks. They had identical spell lists, used the same xp tables, gained spells at the same rate, the works. Mechanically, there is no difference between a DS wizard and a Greyhawk or standard PHB wizard.

There were no monks in DS. Thing is, there were no monks in ANY 2e era setting because 2e didn't have monks. There's no distinction here between Darksun and Al Qadim and Planescape. None of them had monks. DS is identical in this sense to all other settings that came out in the 2e era.

I really think you're conflating the system for the setting. I mean, Kara Tur is more mechanically distinct from baseline D&D than Darksun is, and I see no one saying that you cannot have a 5e Oriental Adventures. Heck, we already have half a dozen OA subclasses to work with. Add a monster manual of some sort and you're pretty much good to go.

Greyhawk added Monks back in and the did rewrite the Bard stripping spells off them and making arcane magic exclusive to wizards.

And the Warlock and Sorcerers in the PHB as wtitten do moy really fit the setting. Warlock arguably contradicts the setting.

 

[Hussar]

Greyhawk added Monks back in and the did rewrite the Bard stripping spells off them and making arcane magic exclusive to wizards.

And the Warlock and Sorcerers in the PHB as wtitten do moy really fit the setting. Warlock arguably contradicts the setting.

Note, I did mention 2e era settings excluded monks. Greyhawk added monks as soon as monks were added to the game. But, even going from 1e forward, monks were always part of the game and setting. That's not true for any setting that started in 2e. IOW, you're claiming that no monks (as an example) is a defining trait of Dark Sun. Thing is, it's not. It's a defining trait of EVERY 2e setting. Because there were no monks in 2e.

Barbarians are the same. Are you seriously going to try to claim that barbarians don't fit in Dark Sun? Really?

Earlier you mentioned anthropomorphic animal races should be excluded. But, this is a setting with bug people. Anthropomorphic bugs. Considering the strong Egyptian flavor of the setting, I am having a problem thinking that cat people and jackal people wouldn't fit. Never minding that Dark Sun is the setting that gave us Aarokocra as a playable race. Hrm, bird people and bug people are groovy, but cat people are out?

I'd much rather they go the other way. Give us everything that they think could fit into Dark Sun and then let DM's sort out their own campaigns. Don't want war forged in DS? Ok, fair enough, ban Warforged. Make the setting your own. But, it's not groovy to insist that your vision of the setting is the only one that should hit the shelves.

That's certainly bad for WotC.

 

[Remathilis]

You also get Kirk vs. Picard debates for legitimate reasons.

There are legitimate debates over ALL the arguments I described, and you can get into some of the finer details of comparing Doctors or Enterprise captains, but there is equally, if not greater, chance these debates are rooted in "when I became a fan, X was the best" sense of nostalgia. Its human nature.

 

[Remathilis]

Greyhawk added Monks back in and the did rewrite the Bard stripping spells off them and making arcane magic exclusive to wizards.

What?

Bards in every edition of Greyhawk have been spellcasters; druidic in 1e and arcane in every edition since. Monks were also there for 1e, came back in 2e (Scarlet Brotherhood), and 3e on.

 

[Aldarc]

Greyhawk added Monks back in and the did rewrite the Bard stripping spells off them and making arcane magic exclusive to wizards.

And the Warlock and Sorcerers in the PHB as wtitten do moy really fit the setting. Warlock arguably contradicts the setting.

Regardless of how 2E Dark Sun shoehorned them in via elemental forces, I always thought that clerics contradicted the setting. That is why I thought that 4E's "no divine source classes" rule better reflected the spirit of Dark Sun than the original game. As Hussar says, a lot of original Dark Sun was still shaped and constrained by 2E itself that includes non-divine healing alternatives. But if some of these post-2E PHB races and classes did exist at the making of 2E, it seems clear to me that Dark Sun would have looked remarkably different as they probably would have included them. For example, Dark Sun was published in 1991 before the half-orc really became a PHB standard race in 2000 with the introduction of 3e. It's also possible that it would have even kept closer to how Dark Sun was initially conceived, a world without elves, dwarves, halflings, etc. Because I see Dark Sun as being a setting of its time and system, I am far more interested in seeing a Dark Sun that reflects 5E (or whatever particular system is used for play). I don't think that addition of new races (e.g. half-orcs, tieflings, dragonborn, etc.) and classes (e.g. sorcerers, warlocks, monks) should mean that these additions should be excluded from any new adaptation of Dark Sun. If Dark Sun was meant to be a subversive post-apocalyptic sword & sorcery take on core 2E, then I do think that any update of Dark Sun should serve as an "alternate universe" reflection of the given core system.

 

[Remathilis]

So lets look at each setting for a hot minute. What specifically is needed for each?

Greyhawk: By virtue of its "default" status in 1e and 3e eras (abet limited) it is the poster child for PHB options. By virtue of the 3e alone it made room for every race but dragonborn (tiefling was in the 3e MM as a monster) and warlock, and nothing about either of them should exclude it from Oerth. By the same token, I can't think of anything NEEDED for them, maybe some backgrounds or a subclass or two?

Krynn: Well, halflings are replaced by kender, but as I've said, that's a subrace. The 5e PHB also hints at a relationship between draconians and dragonborn, so I could see them working as well. Half-orcs are out, but I could see the possiblity of tieflings. As for classes; the 3e Dragonlance book has options for all the 3e PHB classes except paladin, and nothing on the warlock (though the SCAG mentions how to fit both classes in DL, so WotC is willing to allow them). Add on some of the DL races like minotaurs and Irda and then a few subclasses for things like wizards of high-sorcery.

Mystara: Despite its rooting in Basic (when options were limited) I don't see anything in that setting that specifically excludes any options from the PHB (drow replaced by shadow elves, perhaps?)

Aebrynis: I literally no nothing about this setting. Anyone want to chime in on why something should be excluded?

Ravenloft: The Arthaus RL PHB found room for every 3e class and every 3e race but half-orc (the latter refluffed as mutants known as calibans). Warlock certainly fits the feel, and since the Mists take all types, I don't specicifally see excluding tieflings or dragonborn (though I don't expect they'd be exactly welcomed either). In fact, 4e's Domains of Dread Dragon Mag articles described a tiefling domain, IIRC... All that's left is the half-Vistani race and a few subclasses or backgrounds to represent knights of the Circle, Avengers, Anchorites, and such.

Eberron: Everything already has room for everything. All you need is the artificer class and warforged, shifters, changlings, and kalashtar (the latter needs the Mystic as well.

Planescape: The definition of "everything". Add Rogue modrons, githzerai, and bariaurs.

Kara-Tur/OA: Well, the 3e OA book removed paladins, clerics, druids, bards, wizards and replaced them with oriental variants. I don't see WotC going that route this time, I more fully expect some of the classes will just receive Asian-inspired subclasses (a shaman/shugenja domain, a sohei, a ninja, a samurai, etc). Pathfinder has done a great job with this sort of "reusing/refluffing/variant" model. As for races; while Kara-Tur doesn't have much contact with elves and dwarves, it IS part of Faerun and thus could have some "gujin" races if it wants, but I'm alright with having the OA races take center stage here.

Athas: If we take every version of DS from 2-4 and average them, we get Barbarian (2), Bard/caster (2), Cleric (2), Druid (3), Fighter (3), Monk (2), Paladin (1), Ranger (3), Rogue (3), Sorcerer (2), Warlock (1), and Wizard (3). So Paladin and Warlock have the least clout, though WotC might save warlock due to the ease of making a Templar Pact vs a whole Templar class. So Paladin might be the only casualty? You will probably want to replace a few subclasses with more Athasian options as well. As for races; you need Athasian subraces for dwarves, elves, and halflings, no gnomes or half-orcs, and then room for half-elves, tieflings, and dray/dragonborn. Add Thri-kreen, Muls, and Aarakroca, and then Mystics for psionics and your done.

 

[Azzy]

I'm looking at it practically; most of these settings aren't getting more than a source book or AP's worth of development.

Apparently, Mearls (on Twitter) suggests they'll be pursuing a Xanathar's Guide format for when they do other settings.

 

[Aldarc]

So lets look at each setting for a hot minute. What specifically is needed for each?

Eberron: Everything already has room for everything. All you need is the artificer class and warforged, shifters, changlings, and kalashtar (the latter needs the Mystic as well.

Also rules for Dragonmarks.