5E Assuming Dark Sun is on the horizon, what are your worries?

The Glen

Adventurer
I wonder how they're going to handle the fact that 5th edition is death light and dark sun is most definitely not death light.
 

Coroc

Adventurer
I wonder how they're going to handle the fact that 5th edition is death light and dark sun is most definitely not death light.
You got a point there, I can remember official 2e recommendation was to create a roster of characters instead of just one, so you have replacement ready, because your main character dies and methods for resurrection are dim at best.
This was also the reason you had to start out at level 3 (single class) since they thought the setting is to deadly for everything weaker. It was explained in game that DS has a higher gravity so everything that lives there is tougher.
 

LuisCarlos17f

Adventurer
Other option would be coming back as revenants, a druid with a reincarnation spell, or the soul is "rescued" in a gem (like a cortical stack in "altered carbone") and this is used with an animal what "digievolution" to an anthropomorphic shape. (OH, MUMMY, NOW I AM A DROMITE!).
 
I don't think Dark Sun is on the horizon but assuming it is I have a few worries.

0) None of the people who came up with DS or handled it well still work at WotC or are likely to be hired as consultants. This makes it much more likely that careless changes will be made.

1) Defiling and Preserving, whilst more conceptually relevant than ever may be seen as too political or too complicated by WotC. As such they may well simply be removed and vague, nebulous, non-personal stuff put in their place.

2) WotC hasn't locked down Psionics, at all, and we'd be less than a year from release. So a fundamental part of DS identity might well be a mess. It'd much worse than doing Eberron without Artificers, even.

3) Most subraces and many subclasses simply don't work for DS. DS would need to add subraces for many races, add several races, two of which are challenging to do well (Half-Giants and Thri-Kreen), and add subclasses, some required, for most or all classes (not Rogue or Ranger I guess). This would be huge work and likely to create issues and I worry they'd just take a bad road and change the setting to match the rules to reduce required effort.

4) 5E does not have great rules for survival. To be fair, neither did 2E. But that's a whole chunk of rules to create and get right.

5) 5E doesn't really have design space for the alternate armours, weapons, and armour and weapon materials that give DS part of its character. Perhaps this could still be made, but that's a whole other chunk of rules to get right.

6) Big fundamental issue, 5E is about pretty much everything being compatible and only individual DMs saying no. DS, however, says no to vast chunks of stuff. No to loads of monsters, including D&D classics. No to loads of subclasses and subraces. No to some spells. No to entire concepts (gods, for example). It would be incompatible with virtually all WotC released adventure paths and some entire books. This again might lead WotC to just change DS, making it something else entirely, as it would be so much easier and potentially more profitable than not doing so.

There an awful lot of other issues too. But I think any DS in the next year would likely be a completely different setting, stripped of uniqueness and that 1990s edge, and replaced with marketability. It might even be a good setting! But it would be an entirely different one.

All that said I don't think it will be DS. Spelljammer is strangely well known and conceptually popular with many people who have never played it, including people relatively new to D&D. It also has none of these flaws, is very marketable (and we know Spacefinder sells well), and is the ultimate in cross-marketing in some ways, arguably more than Planescape. So. I think if we see an old setting back it will be that. I note the BG3 trailer features an Illithid Spelljammer ship in it too. And the FR has had Spelljammer ships in it since Spelljammer was a thing (Classic FR borging!).

If we suddenly see a Psion class appear and maybe a survival rules UA and stuff then DS may be on the way, but not before.
 
Last edited:

LuisCarlos17f

Adventurer
My concern is about after the end of the tyranny of the sorcerer-kings WotC will publish new expansions about adventures in new regions, with titles as "burning crusaders", "wraiths of the lich kings", "post-cataclysm". "Mists of Sandaria", "warlords of Dregorth", "Legionaries", "Battle for Azuth" or "Shadow lairs", with monsters more powerful than previous.
 

Arnwolf666

Adventurer
No, and of the classes monks and barbarians ruin the settings environmental challenges with their class abilities. As does any spell which allows for easy magic weapon access, create food or water, or allows for easy travel.

Darksun and Paladin? Won't work there are no Gnomes on Athas and no rapiers either :p
you mean there were no Persian or Babylonian monasteries. And barbarians in dark sun are just fitting. Although setting appropriate archetypes should be mandatory. The totem theme doesn’t quite fit with dark sun. And berserkers were Norse. But barbarians are very fitting for that brutal society of tribes that lived outside the city walls.
 

Quartz

Explorer
For the sake of argument, let’s assume Dark Sun is on the horizon. What would be some concerns or worries with how this 5e version would be presented?
None. I'm just not interested in Dark Sun. I will likely find ideas in the books stealable, but the Dark Sun setting itself just doesn't grab me.
 
I don't think Dark Sun is on the horizon but assuming it is I have a few worries.

0) None of the people who came up with DS or handled it well still work at WotC or are likely to be hired as consultants. This makes it much more likely that careless changes will be made.

1) Defiling and Preserving, whilst more conceptually relevant than ever may be seen as too political or too complicated by WotC. As such they may well simply be removed and vague, nebulous, non-personal stuff put in their place.

2) WotC hasn't locked down Psionics, at all, and we'd be less than a year from release. So a fundamental part of DS identity might well be a mess. It'd much worse than doing Eberron without Artificers, even.

3) Most subraces and many subclasses simply don't work for DS. DS would need to add subraces for many races, add several races, two of which are challenging to do well (Half-Giants and Thri-Kreen), and add subclasses, some required, for most or all classes (not Rogue or Ranger I guess). This would be huge work and likely to create issues and I worry they'd just take a bad road and change the setting to match the rules to reduce required effort.

4) 5E does not have great rules for survival. To be fair, neither did 2E. But that's a whole chunk of rules to create and get right.

5) 5E doesn't really have design space for the alternate armours, weapons, and armour and weapon materials that give DS part of its character. Perhaps this could still be made, but that's a whole other chunk of rules to get right.

6) Big fundamental issue, 5E is about pretty much everything being compatible and only individual DMs saying no. DS, however, says no to vast chunks of stuff. No to loads of monsters, including D&D classics. No to loads of subclasses and subraces. No to some spells. No to entire concepts (gods, for example). It would be incompatible with virtually all WotC released adventure paths and some entire books. This again might lead WotC to just change DS, making it something else entirely, as it would be so much easier and potentially more profitable than not doing so.

There an awful lot of other issues too. But I think any DS in the next year would likely be a completely different setting, stripped of uniqueness and that 1990s edge, and replaced with marketability. It might even be a good setting! But it would be an entirely different one.

All that said I don't think it will be DS. Spelljammer is strangely well known and conceptually popular with many people who have never played it, including people relatively new to D&D. It also has none of these flaws, is very marketable (and we know Spacefinder sells well), and is the ultimate in cross-marketing in some ways, arguably more than Planescape. So. I think if we see an old setting back it will be that. I note the BG3 trailer features an Illithid Spelljammer ship in it too. And the FR has had Spelljammer ships in it since Spelljammer was a thing (Classic FR borging!).

If we suddenly see a Psion class appear and maybe a survival rules UA and stuff then DS may be on the way, but not before.
Almost every point you make of why I feel Dark Sun can only be handled two ways.

1. A watered-down version that attempts to salvage and reuse as much of the core D&D game as possible, adding a few rule variants and liberal use of refluffing to create a D&D in Loincloths variant.

2. A stand-alone game based on (and compatible with) 5e but has its own PHB with appropriate races, classes, equipment, spells and updated, deadlier exploration, combat and magic rules, plus a campaign book with setting info, appropriate monsters and magic items all included so that you never need to reference the PHB/DMG/MM unless you want to add those elements back.

For some reason, people believe WotC will release a sourcebook that literally says "all your other books, including most of the PHB, is invalid". They're not.
 

Sacrosanct

Legend
None. I'm just not interested in Dark Sun. I will likely find ideas in the books stealable, but the Dark Sun setting itself just doesn't grab me.
for years, it didn't me either. but that's probably because I really don't care for psionics all that much, and the core AD&D game was plenty gritty for me. But one of my issues with 5e is that lack of grit and lethality. So I may give it a shot, at any rate.
 

gyor

Hero
I'm worried this board is going to explode in nerdrage when they find WotC's vision is closer to the 4e reboot than the 2e box set.

I also worry when they find out it will be another D&D setting rather than some D&D hardmode.
I think this is likely to be mostly true, with some exceptions, like I think instead of recycling Goliaths they will just go a Half Giant race. So I think it will be a compromise between 4e Darksun and 2e Darksun.
 
I think this is likely to be mostly true, with some exceptions, like I think instead of recycling Goliaths they will just go a Half Giant race. So I think it will be a compromise between 4e Darksun and 2e Darksun.
I think so too, but statistically I don't expect them to be too different from goliath's or minotaurs.

That said, I expect they will use the 4e method and have a home for most-if-not-all of the PHB classes and many of the races plus the DS exclusive ones. I expect variant rules for nonmetal armor that doesn't change AC values, defiling/preserving as an option for all casters, etc. Lastly, the psionics rules will be fleshed out and the new spells will round out the list. That plus world info and monsters would fill a Rising from the Last War sized tome.
 

Arnwolf666

Adventurer
When I played a game of 2E dark sun with a PC with a 24 strength I knew that game was broken. And a 24 Strength in 2E was a lot more than 5E. So I hope they do a better job mechanically than 2E. I doubt they can do a better job thematically.
 

toucanbuzz

Explorer
For the sake of argument, I worry they'll water it all down to a Forgotten Realms high fantasy desert adventure, reskinning medium-sized goliaths as half-giants and like 4E allowing everything in because they want to appeal to as broad a purchasing class as possible.

I worry they'll provide superficial lore for the sake of space and encourage people who want lore to simply buy older-edition material, ensuring that interest in Dark Sun with newer players is muted.
 

neogod22

Explorer
Ravenloft wasn't "supported" either. I wouldn't expect more than one book per setting, at least until they run out of settings.
I don't even count that as Ravenloft. That was just the "Curse of Strald" campaign. There was nothing in the book for doing anyrhing outside of the campaign.
 

PsyzhranV2

Adventurer
6) Big fundamental issue, 5E is about pretty much everything being compatible and only individual DMs saying no. DS, however, says no to vast chunks of stuff. No to loads of monsters, including D&D classics. No to loads of subclasses and subraces. No to some spells. No to entire concepts (gods, for example). It would be incompatible with virtually all WotC released adventure paths and some entire books. This again might lead WotC to just change DS, making it something else entirely, as it would be so much easier and potentially more profitable than not doing so.
I can see certain classes and subclasses being a problem, along with the limited spell selection, but as for the issue of certain core races not being playable and the lack of explicit divinities, isn't that the same situation as Ravnica? And I believe that turned out okay? Nobody was really raging about not being able to play a gnome or dragonborn in that setting.
 
I can see certain classes and subclasses being a problem, along with the limited spell selection, but as for the issue of certain core races not being playable and the lack of explicit divinities, isn't that the same situation as Ravnica? And I believe that turned out okay? Nobody was really raging about not being able to play a gnome or dragonborn in that setting.
Ravnica didn't outright ban any spells or subclasses, and the racial limits came down to "other races are unknown unless they traveled there magically". You're not likely to meet any native dwarves or dragonborn, but nothing if stopping them if the DM wants.

Dark Sun, at it's most conservative possible approach, bans most of the core classes and/or limits them to 1-2 subs tops. It additionally bans most races and makes the few remaining need specific DS variants or subraces. And that ignores races from Volo and other sources.

A Dark Sun that closely resembles the Ravnica model would have most of not all the classes and some of the races with the option to expand as desired. I think WotC will be a little not conservative than Ravnica, but far less than people in this thread want.
 

tetrasodium

Explorer
I think that Rising showed that WotC learned their lesson from 4e & accepted that not every setting needs to be lore/tone compatible so I'm not too worried about the lore aspects. With that said, my fear is that they will not include meaningful rules for overland travel & equipment damage like can be found in Darker Dungeons (the first is goodm, the second is good but imo too insignificant at needing a 1)
 

Larnievc

Explorer
One thing I've always thought would be better is if the distances were MUCH longer from place to place. In my mind's eye I'm thinking x5 the distance between places.

And then say that you cannot recover HD out in the desert under normal circumstances. Back in the day my players (to be fair we were only about 19 odd) thought northing of walking half the way across the map.

Boy howdy, I surely like to finish the Dragon Crown module.
 

Advertisement

Top