D&D 5E How would you wish WOTC to do Dark Sun

[Raduin711]

Maybe just ignore the terrible metaplot and pretend it never happened?

One reason I suggested contriving a way of bringing back the Sorcerer Kings is because... this kind of means that 5e Dark Sun doesn't have anything new in it. No surprises, new toys, new plots. We've seen it all before, aside from new mechanics to play it with 5th edition.

We can do that, though. Just pretend the metaplot never happened and keep Athas frozen in time. It would make a lot of fans happy and I would certainly buy it.

Maybe I'm just getting old and tired of having my nostalgia sold to me over and over again.

 

[Remathilis]

The folks saying that they'd rather not have DS published at all because WotC won't do it the "right way" (which is completely subjective) are being spoil-sports. Why shouldn't a 5E book be published? If you don't like it, don't use it, but it would be a great way to introduce an awesome setting for a new generation of players.

I largely believe an Eberron-sized book can do DS justice. Here's a couple things I'd like to see;

• Alternative magic rules. Lots of folks point out that magic is extremely limited, and it is, however Defiling and Preserving are both available. Having rules that establish some additional cost by using magic would be great.
• Clear establishment that some classes/races are not the default for DS. I really don't need a lore justification for why genasi or tieflings are playable like DS 4E tried; it felt hamfisted and it's not necessary. Keep the retro feel of old DS where they are limited, but feel free to provide alternative rules (in those handy green boxes) for how some classes/races that are default not available may be used in odd circumstances.
• Making Dray and Half-Giants different than Dragonborn and Goliath. This is again a criticism of 4E; they took two races that were distinct to DS and made them the more familiar standard version. I like the gangly warped look of the Dray, and the brutish wide bulk of the half-giant, and think they should be distinct. They can be entirely new races, or subraces of the Dragonborn/Goliath, but should feel different.

Those are my thoughts. Largely, avoid the 4E path as I feel it tried to make DS a little too much like the rest of D&D; it should go back to the roots of DS instead, but provide options so that DMs can plug-in the other class/race options if they feel they need it.

This is why my preference is a separate PHB; unless you're going the 4e route, you are cutting or rewriting 50% or more of the PHB.

When 2e released Dark Sun, the PHB had 6 races and 9 classes. The classes were simpler and had related features, which is why removing paladin for munchk I mean gladiator was easy, as was removing the bards half-caster ability.

5e is a different beast. There are 9 races and 12 classes now, with each class being more mechanically complex and harder to rip apart and resew cleanly. Depending on how much of a purist you are, we could be talking of a lot of class bans and rewrites, on top of new subclasses to replace those that aren't allowed (and to give classes more than one subclass option per class). Lather rinse and repeat for races, backgrounds, equipment, magic, psionics, etc. You could fill a whole book just in changes to the PCs and never discuss anything else!

That leaves two options: a "true" DS experience needs it's own compatible core rules books to be a clean break from all the stuff that isn't allowed or a 4e style setting guide that tries to refluff and reuse as much of the stuff in the PHB as possible. Because any supplement that says "ignore most of the core rules and everything that came after" ain't gonna cut it.

 

[Zardnaar]

This is why my preference is a separate PHB; unless you're going the 4e route, you are cutting or rewriting 50% or more of the PHB.

When 2e released Dark Sun, the PHB had 6 races and 9 classes. The classes were simpler and had related features, which is why removing paladin for munchk I mean gladiator was easy, as was removing the bards half-caster ability.

5e is a different beast. There are 9 races and 12 classes now, with each class being more mechanically complex and harder to rip apart and resew cleanly. Depending on how much of a purist you are, we could be talking of a lot of class bans and rewrites, on top of new subclasses to replace those that aren't allowed (and to give classes more than one subclass option per class). Lather rinse and repeat for races, backgrounds, equipment, magic, psionics, etc. You could fill a whole book just in changes to the PCs and never discuss anything else!

That leaves two options: a "true" DS experience needs it's own compatible core rules books to be a clean break from all the stuff that isn't allowed or a 4e style setting guide that tries to refluff and reuse as much of the stuff in the PHB as possible. Because any supplement that says "ignore most of the core rules and everything that came after" ain't gonna cut it.

You could have a few core classes with sidebars on expaning it.

Probably elemental domains, sorcerer king pact/domain.

2E
Fighter=Battlemaster
Gladiator= Champion with Performer background.
Thief=thief.
Bard =Rogue Assassin
Wizards. Defiler and Preserver.
Clerics. 2-3 domains (fire=light)
Ranger= hunter
Druid=land druid,

Etc.

Races added maybe genasi.

Then you go through and add in archetypes that make sense.

Eldritch Knight. Yes
Arcane Trickster: Yes

Then side are for whatever's left as there's someone who wants it.

Keep the races very small. 2E races and 2_3 5E races. To many added nothing stand out. For each PHB race cut out in a new one.

Mul,Kreen and Half Giants are the Athasian races. Revamped Genasi perhaps similar to the aasinar and Tieflings love.

Sidebar for any other race is a mutant. You can play one but you're the only one.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is why my preference is a separate PHB; unless you're going the 4e route, you are cutting or rewriting 50% or more of the PHB.

When 2e released Dark Sun, the PHB had 6 races and 9 classes. The classes were simpler and had related features, which is why removing paladin for munchk I mean gladiator was easy, as was removing the bards half-caster ability.

5e is a different beast. There are 9 races and 12 classes now, with each class being more mechanically complex and harder to rip apart and resew cleanly. Depending on how much of a purist you are, we could be talking of a lot of class bans and rewrites, on top of new subclasses to replace those that aren't allowed (and to give classes more than one subclass option per class). Lather rinse and repeat for races, backgrounds, equipment, magic, psionics, etc. You could fill a whole book just in changes to the PCs and never discuss anything else!

That leaves two options: a "true" DS experience needs it's own compatible core rules books to be a clean break from all the stuff that isn't allowed or a 4e style setting guide that tries to refluff and reuse as much of the stuff in the PHB as possible. Because any supplement that says "ignore most of the core rules and everything that came after" ain't gonna cut it.

I'm starting to think a short document on the DMs Guild updating the rules to 5e is the best solution. All the setting material is available in pdf anyway. Just release a "Wayfarer's Guide to Athas" online and be done with it.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I have said some times the plans of the D&D lines aren't only to publish TTRPGs but also multimedia titles: comics, novels, toys, videogames, and media productions. WotC knows if it's wants to add new PC races and mosters, harder to explain how to add previous lines, for example dragonborn in Mystara, totemist shaman in Dark Sun or martial adepts in Dragonlance. What if a player says "I want play a dromite psionic ardent in Dark Sun? If WotC wishes to tell an epic story about time travels to explain the reboot of a old franchise, then they will use it for a reboot of all D&D worlds, and this may be risky because the fandom could be angry with a "jumping the shark" worse the spellplague in FR 4th.

You should accept the fact Hasbro worries about making money with D&D with multimedia lines (toys, videogames, movies) than with the TTRPGs.

And the main hook for new fans is the art, but this needs a lot of work, because Braxat and Brom style were special.

 

[Haldrik]

A "true" DS experience needs it's own compatible core rules books to be a clean break from all the stuff that isn't allowed. Because any supplement that says "ignore most of the core rules and everything that came after" ain't gonna cut it.

And this is why the CORE RULES must be setting neutral.

What is true here for a comprehensive Dark Sun setting experience, is also true for any homebrew setting experience that disresembles the Forgotten Realms setting.

Flavorless core rules allows the setting creator to cut-and-paste the relevant mechanics. Then the setting creator can add the relevant setting flavor.

If the core rules already has contradictory flavor baked into it from a different setting, then the core rules are useless.

 

[Remathilis]

And this is why the CORE RULES must be setting neutral.

What is true here for a comprehensive Dark Sun setting experience, is also true for any homebrew experience that disresembles the Forgotten Realms setting.

Flavorless core rules allows the setting creator to cut-and-paste the relevant mechanics. Then the setting creator can add the relevant setting flavor.

If the core rules already had contradictory flavor from a different setting, then the core rules are useless.

You couldn't GET the core rules flavorless enough to make FR and DS work.

It's not just Gods and subraces, things you would have to cut or change from the PHB to make it work for DS.

Barbarian: animal totem
Bard: Athas bards don't cast magic and are assassins.
Cleric: all domains but life and elemental ones
Fighter: Eldritch Knight
Monk
Ranger: all bonuses to survival and gathering supplies
Rogue: arcane trickster
Sorcerer
Warlock: all patrons
Wizard: all school specialization
All subraces of dwarves, elves and halflings.
Gnomes, drow, and half-orcs
Dragonborn and tieflings
Most of the weapons and armor section
Spells that allow survival bypass
The outlander and pirate background
Named spells (Bigby, Melf)

That should take care of Dark Sun. Should we move on to Birthright, Ravenloft and Dragonlance?

 

[ZeshinX]

The tricky thing about Dark Sun is that it is, by original design, harsh, brutal and unforgiving. Its original incarnation, for all intents and purposes, required starting at 3rd level and having at least one other character ready to play, as death was as common as sand on Athas. Dunno what 4e did to it, since I skipped it, but that's what Dark Sun was originally.

I dunno if 5e's overall approach to the game of D&D really supports that truly brutal and unrelenting approach to a campaign world. It can be, definitely, but I don't get the impression WotC is interested in exploring that with 5e (it feels, at best, like a curiosity to them, but not one of significance).

If it doesn't focus on the fact that Athas is a brutal, harsh and unforgiving world, and support that with mechanics...then what would even be the point? It wouldn't be Athas then.

 

[Eltab]

The tricky thing about Dark Sun is that it is, by original design, harsh, brutal and unforgiving. Its original incarnation, for all intents and purposes, required starting at 3rd level and having at least one other character ready to play, as death was as common as sand on Athas. Dunno what 4e did to it, since I skipped it, but that's what Dark Sun was originally.

I dunno if 5e's overall approach to the game of D&D really supports that truly brutal and unrelenting approach to a campaign world. It can be, definitely, but I don't get the impression WotC is interested in exploring that with 5e (it feels, at best, like a curiosity to them, but not one of significance).

If it doesn't focus on the fact that Athas is a brutal, harsh and unforgiving world, and support that with mechanics...then what would even be the point? It wouldn't be Athas then.

4e sanded some of the rough surfaces and polished some of the sharp edges from Original Athas. It included all the PHB races (dragonborn sorta had a credible plot niche available, despite the complaints otherwise) and other innovations like Primal power.

 

[Haldrik]

You couldn't GET the core rules flavorless enough to make FR and DS work.

The core can easily be setting neutral enough.

It's not just Gods and subraces, things you would have to cut or change from the PHB to make it work for DS.

Core rules do well to avoid any cosmological assumptions.

Especially, religions need to be more diverse and customizable in D&D, more like Eberron - so reallife religious minorities can feel more welcome.

And religious diversity makes it more convenient to world-build homebrew settings that have special assumptions.

Barbarian: animal totem
Bard: Athas bards don't cast magic and are assassins.
Cleric: all domains but life and elemental ones
Fighter: Eldritch Knight
Monk
Ranger: all bonuses to survival and gathering supplies
Rogue: arcane trickster
Sorcerer
Warlock: all patrons
Wizard: all school specialization

With regard to classes, setting-neutral classes and archetypes make it easy to cut-and-paste the concepts that are relevant and to leave out the ones that are less relevant.

Especially the basic classes - Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard - need setting-neutral mechanics, to plug-and-play into a diversity of homebrew settings.



With regard to Dark Sun specifically:

Athas Bard = 5e Assassin
Setting neutral assassin description, perfect.

Totem Barbarian is fine. Dark Sun has Druids who animistically venerate the plants, animals, and elements that are significant to a specific landscape feature. So a totem of an animal at that location feels appropriate in Dark Sun.

A Cleric description devoid of baked-in cosmological setting assumptions makes it very easy to reflavor official domains, and even very easy to customize new domains. The Cleric mechanics are conveniently customizable, but it is the baked-in flavor that ruins the Cleric.

Fighter is fine in Dark Sun. Wizard is fine in Dark Sun. Eldritch Knight is fine in Dark Sun. Indeed, I prefer the Eldritch Knight for the Templar. If Templar were Cleric, it makes less sense that the Templar would receive spells from the dragon-sorcerer that the dragon-sorcerer Wizard doesnt know. But the Eldritch Knight as Templar can normally learn Wizard spells from a dragon-sorcerer Wizard.

Monk as a psionic class can work well. The Shadow Monk feels awesome as a psionic mystic who engages with the Dark Sun plane of the Black.

Ranger needs a fix anyway. I have no opinion about it Dark Sun. Maybe a Scout Rogue works better. In any case, as long as setting-neutral mechanics are siloed as separate options without entangling baked-in flavor, then it is easy and useful to plug-and-play some classes and races, while leaving other classes and races out.

Sorcerer is actually one of the classes I would leave out of Dark Sun, in order to pressure the dilemma between preserving plantlife versus defiling it. On the other hand, the psionic Psychic Soul Sorcerer might be a thing, and can work well in Dark Sun.

For Warlock, I would either leave the class out, or else specifically flavor it as "Athas Elf magic", allowing fey and hexblade focusing on preservation. Still undecided, but in any case the availability of setting-neutral class mechanics helps me.



Spell names dont need to gratuitously add character names for core rules.



In sum, setting-neutral class descriptions for the core rules makes it easier to plug and play into Dark Sun flavor, ... and also into any homebrew setting flavors.

Setting neutral core rules helps ME! world build.

All subraces of dwarves, elves and halflings.
Gnomes, drow, and half-orcs
Dragonborn and tieflings

Races/species need to be far more customizable anyway. The customizability helps a player feel more comfortable about reallife concerns about ethnicity. The same customizability makes it easy for the DM to tweak it to make it more resonant for a different setting.