Dark Sun 3E rules

[Mach2.5]

Let me explain: in AD&D Dark Sun, they used the AD&D concept of spheres for priests. However, they didn't use the regular AD&D spheres, but instead they expanded the elemental spheres a bit and put all the other spells in the Sphere of Cosmos. Then clerics got minor access to Cosmos and major access to their elemental sphere. This meant that a significant part of their spell arsenal, especially at high levels (since minor access only went to 3rd level), was dependent on their element

Basically, 2e clerics bit hard core, for the exact same reason you specified. Granted, it looked fine on paper, but with higher level spells being limited to only those that delt with their element, they were actually quite inadequate in their spell arsenal. Granted, it was better flavor wise, but it made the higher level cleric lack some very essential party spells without any just compensation. Clerics tended not to last very long in the campaigns I ran because of frustration with this.

They've also basically made templars into divine-casting sorcerers, which is the opposite of what they were in AD&D - they had access to all priestly spells (except for a handful specifically denied them), but fewer spells per day

True. However, originally templars should never had access to the elemental spells, but that's just my opinion. I reworked the spell lists in 2e, giving templars access to such spheres as law, command, and such. Also, templars outside of the cities were woefully underpowered since they lacked the combatative stance neccessary to accomidate the fewer spells. Even if you dislike the divine sorceror aspect presented now, at least a templar now stands on par both within his city as well as outside in the wilderness with other classes (well, mostly on par anyhow, I still think they could use a tweak or two).

And finally, the druid no longer have their specific elemental ties based on their guarded land.

Yours is the very first complaint I have yet heard about this. No one I knew or even spoke with liked the fact that a druid was a part time character, forced by mechanics to leave an adventuring party for longer and longer amounts of time as they grew in levels. Now, they serve the exact same functions as before, but are not tied down with mechanics. They also have more freedom of player developement without the use of PrCs. They are still guardians of the land, but your DM doesn't have to tell you every other adventure, "Errr . . . you have to leave Svandak the Druid behind since he has to sit around and do nothing for the next 6 months . . . ". Sorry, but that entire class mechanic was lame as heck, but once again, that's just my opinion.

Since character trees (creating some three to five characters as spares) have been nixed, some changes needed to be made to the classes to make it possible to utilize any class at anytime anywhere on Athas without being either over powered or under powered. 2e assumed you would simply ditch your druid and switch to another crit for half a year, or leave your templar at the city gates when the rest of the party left for the wastes. Changes made to the classes not only had to abide by 3e D&D rules (not d20, but D&D), but had to work around some of the inheirent flaws of 2e.

 

[Mach2.5]

1. The "Don't use any rules but ours" insular nature (which is probably my BIGGEST gripe) is illustrated in a few places...the races are the first culprit with "only the bonuses and penalties described here," meaning that if someone is, say, an Aarakocra from Faerun and they meet an Athesian Aarakocra, they could be stubtly to wildly different

Sorry, but this one has been bothering me since you first posted (not as in upsetting, just nagging in the back of my mind trying to see from your point of view). So, I took a gander through some other D&D and d20 settings books. Most other settings do nothing different. They too list something as 'not generally allowed' (meaning use it in your game if you want, but it will not find its way into canon) whether its because of flavor, mechanics, or replacement. For example, the Oriental Adventures book lists bards, druids, and paladins as 'Barred Classes', since these classes are european concepts and do not fit the eastern oriental flavor. How does Dark Sun differ? To stick with the OA book, it also alters a race, the dwarf, with a close oriental counterpart, the korobokuru. How is this different than Dark Sun having a different halfling, elf, or dwarf than the core books? Sorry, I'm not flaming or bashing. Simply, attempting to understand.

 

[Imperialus]

Kammakazi Midgit: I have a tough time takeing your critisisems seriously. Have you ever played second ed DS? Ever even seen a box cover?

The "Don't use any rules but our's" complaint seems praticularly rediculous. You want to play a happy go lucky, slightly pudgy halfling bard? Then don't play Darksun. Halflings in Darksun always have and I hope always will be brutal canabalistic savages who view anyone and everyone passing through their territories as potential food. If you want to play Bilbo freaking Baggins then play in Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk. I can pretty much promice you that if such a person exsisted on Athas he wouldn't survive his first second breakfast since the plant he tried to eat ripped his arm off when he tried to pull it from the ground. Athas is a horrible horrible brutal place and any race not designed to survive in such an atmoshphere would simply become extinct. Darksun is catered to a very specific play style. It's as much about fighting the land as it is anything else. When I DM'd Darksun I used to award XP for stuff like finding water or wood for a freaking fire. There was a reason that you used a character tree in that game and a good one at that.

 

[Staffan]

Basically, 2e clerics bit hard core, for the exact same reason you specified. Granted, it looked fine on paper, but with higher level spells being limited to only those that delt with their element, they were actually quite inadequate in their spell arsenal. Granted, it was better flavor wise, but it made the higher level cleric lack some very essential party spells without any just compensation. Clerics tended not to last very long in the campaigns I ran because of frustration with this.

I see the problem. The main thing I'm complaining about isn't so much the addition of "regular" cleric spells as it is the very small amount of elemental spells they get. An approach like 2e but with more access to higher-level Cosmos spells would be much better.

Oh, and while I'm complaining about the elementalness... I *really* don't like Elemental Strike. Flame Strike should be reserved for Fire clerics - Fire is the most destructive element after all.

True. However, originally templars should never had access to the elemental spells, but that's just my opinion. I reworked the spell lists in 2e, giving templars access to such spheres as law, command, and such. Also, templars outside of the cities were woefully underpowered since they lacked the combatative stance neccessary to accomidate the fewer spells. Even if you dislike the divine sorceror aspect presented now, at least a templar now stands on par both within his city as well as outside in the wilderness with other classes (well, mostly on par anyhow, I still think they could use a tweak or two).

I don't see that having templars mostly useless outside cities as being that big a problem. Templars are supposed to be the police force/bureaucracy of the Sorcerer-Kings, and outside that area of power they should be weaker.

Yours is the very first complaint I have yet heard about this. No one I knew or even spoke with liked the fact that a druid was a part time character, forced by mechanics to leave an adventuring party for longer and longer amounts of time as they grew in levels. Now, they serve the exact same functions as before, but are not tied down with mechanics.

I don't mean the "has to stay at home half the time" thing, but the way their abilities were based on their guarded lands - both their spells (on account of getting major access to one elemental sphere and possibly minor to another) and their other abilities. Many abilities were usable earlier if they were on their guarded lands, others were limited to animals found on their lands, and so on.

 

[Mach2.5]

I see the problem. The main thing I'm complaining about isn't so much the addition of "regular" cleric spells as it is the very small amount of elemental spells they get. An approach like 2e but with more access to higher-level Cosmos spells would be much better.

I do agree. Its a flaw in the domain concept. Personally, I house rule multiple domain access even in a more 'standard setting'', so to me, its no biggie.

Oh, and while I'm complaining about the elementalness... I *really* don't like Elemental Strike. Flame Strike should be reserved for Fire clerics - Fire is the most destructive element after all.

Heh, once again, I almost agree. Flamestrike though is a major balancing spell for standard clerics, one of the nicer damage based spells they have. Remove it from 1/7th the number of elemental priests on Athas, and you have a problem though. Besides, I rather like the idea of silt strike. Adds variety. Actually, I like that most spells are now 'elemental neutral' and can be adapted by a priest of any element. Less hinderances, more options, blah, blah, that whole 'options not restrictions' thing.

I don't see that having templars mostly useless outside cities as being that big a problem. Templars are supposed to be the police force/bureaucracy of the Sorcerer-Kings, and outside that area of power they should be weaker.

That's perfectly fine for writing a novel. Not playing a game where you need to think of balance and game continuity. If the templar blows outside the city states, either A: any PC templars will never leave the city state knowing their going to be fodder for a rampager; B: NPC templars outside the city state will still be a laughing stock villain; C: next to no players will even attempt to play a templar and few DMs will run templars as major villains because of that limitation which means that there's absolutely no need for a templar class at all.

Also, the 'should be weaker' thing is not really allowed. The team does have to follow the rules set down from above on that one, along with the precedences set by the core rules. Rangers are still fine in the city, paladins are balanced in the wilds, etc. Presedence: every class must be balanced against every other class. Of course, if this were a d20 conversion that would be different, but then a d20 conversion can't have flavor text either

I don't mean the "has to stay at home half the time" thing, but the way their abilities were based on their guarded lands - both their spells (on account of getting major access to one elemental sphere and possibly minor to another) and their other abilities. Many abilities were usable earlier if they were on their guarded lands, others were limited to animals found on their lands, and so on

Enough people I guess were rather against the stay at home style druid. That particular druid is going to be covered by a PrC instead. You run into the same problem as you do with the templar. What person is going to play a class that is only balanced with other classes on a few miles of land. Its rather like playing a paladin who, when outside his church, becomes the equivalent of a warrior NPC class.

 

[Mach2.5]

The "Don't use any rules but our's" complaint seems praticularly rediculous. You want to play a happy go lucky, slightly pudgy halfling bard? Then don't play Darksun. Halflings in Darksun always have and I hope always will be brutal canabalistic savages who view anyone and everyone passing through their territories as potential food. If you want to play Bilbo freaking Baggins then play in Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk

Hey chief, lets not start a flamewar. Keep it . Everyone runs things different. Plus, I don't think the reference was in the psych aspects of halflings, but the stats themselves. Since the Dark Sun races are now balanced against the core races, there's no problem with altering stats to fit more standardized ones. If you still use the CR and XP system from the core, you can easily port any of the standard races in, or port the Athasian races out into any other setting without adjustments. Technically, Bilbo has an equal chance at surviving the wastes as anyone else, but I'd still shove is fat arse into a den of tembo in an instant. Then again, that's just me and I keep my tembo well fed

 

[Staffan]

Also, the 'should be weaker' thing is not really allowed. The team does have to follow the rules set down from above on that one, along with the precedences set by the core rules. Rangers are still fine in the city, paladins are balanced in the wilds, etc. Presedence: every class must be balanced against every other class. Of course, if this were a d20 conversion that would be different, but then a d20 conversion can't have flavor text either

The way I see it is that it's fine for a class to be specialized in one area as long as it's not worthless outside that area. In DS2e, templars were very strong in their own city-state (on account of the political/judicial abilities), but rather weaker outside it. They weren't pointless, though, since they were rather unique in having access to all priestly spells (even if they couldn't cast as many). The were also a bit stronger than druids and clerics combat-wise, on account of being able to use any weapon (which clerics were limited in) and armor (which druids were limited in). Though to be fair, I never much considered the balance of templars in DS2e since they were pretty much NPC-only (at least IMC).

The same goes for druids: they were OK outside their guarded lands (especially due to having major access to the Sphere of Cosmos, which made them better spellcasters than clerics), but on their home turf they were nightmares. I do see that you're making that sort of druid a prestige class, which I guess makes things a little better.

 

[Mach2.5]

I will give the team a lot of credit. They changed some things about Athas to adapt both to the 3e rules, as well as the edicts set down by WOTC regarding their conversion (note though that WOTC had no hand in creating anything for this conversion). They got a lot of flack from the community (and still do *nudge, nudge*) for some of the changes that seemed like a radical departure from the orignal DS setting. I've still a gripe or two myself about a few things in the core rules doc, but otherwise, they've done the best under the circumstances. Had WOTC let them do a total d20 conversion, things would have looked very different, but the team was not allowed to do so and still use any flavor text in the docs. I'm sorry, I know I sound a bit like a 'yes man' here, but I'm just trying to let people know the logic behind some of the changes and adaptations that were made for those that haven't been following the process for the past two years. Even if I don't agree with 100% of the conversion myself, I at least understand some of the reasoning behind what was changed and I do agree with the logic behind it.

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

I am really happy. Dark Sun was my favorite campaign setting in 2E (Planescape was almost there.)

The only thing I noticed was that there is no suggestion of what level PCs should start at. Is it still 3rd level, or have the powers that be nixed that one?

 

[Mach2.5]

That was always a strange mechanic that I never understood. Thankfully, its been nixxed. You can begin with most races as a 1st level character. Some of the races however, like the half-giant and thri-kreen, are far more powerful than your typical human and follow the ECL and LA rules. I'm still trying to push for the option to begin any race at 1st lvl (by way of the Savage Species racial builds), but I'm not sure if they are allowed to do that due to their agreement with WOTC to make it as 'core rules' friendly as possible. For now though, its just nice that its mostly finished.