Many of these complaints read as if the individuals in question didn't read what Rich actually wrote and are subsequently making a mountain out of a molehill.
For example:
This is absurd and clearly indicates you haven't even read what the Feywild in Dark Sun actually entails, as Rich Baker on his blog puts it:
I mean how is any of that similar to what you wrote?
1) The Feywild - like Athas - is dying. It's not a safe haven. This inherently destroys any point you've actually made with this, but we'll continue.
2) It is not continuous at all. There may be 'threads' of it behind where you can teleport for extremely short distances, but not enough for any significant travel on the plane.
3) It's just as evil as the Athasian desert and probably worse - given it's actually a more extreme version of the desert. Do you honestly think a PC escaping for a more deadly desert is at all equivalent to what you're saying?
4) We don't even know if Athasian Eladrin can still teleport, the Dark Sun book could well give them another racial power. This wouldn't be unheard of.
Let's also examine that by canon and what Rich Baker wrote:
Now you're perfectly entitled to dislike the feywild and similar in Athas. You can remove Eladrin if you like as well. It would be nice though if you could get the basic facts about how it works in Athas right when you're complaining about it. I think that's why you are seeing so many people breaking their "criticism detectors", it's because what you're criticizing isn't valid to begin with - not that you're criticizing it. You've basically set up something that isn't what Rich Baker wrote the Feywild in Athas is to begin with.
You didn't say you "paraphrased" his quote, you did this:
And believe it or not "" are in fact quote tags - they aren't fancy BB quote tags but they have the exact same purpose. They are used when you are indicating a direct quote from another person - in this case Rich Baker. The core difference between what you claimed Rich Baker said and what he actually wrote are worlds apart if you even for a moment analyze what you claimed he wrote and what he did in fact write.
This is pure pedantry on my part, but when you're going to butcher what someone else wrote so badly while trying to protest you're being misquoted, the irony is far too much for me not to make a comment.
The actual point here is that they thought they had an element they could choose to exclude or include (one of the core races). They had a logical and well supported way of inserting it into the setting. They did so. In the case of something else like paladins and divine classes before you bring it up, they made a choice not to put in divine classes because they didn't see the need to in a world where the gods were dead. People bought up elemental classes, but the reason elemental clerics were in 2E has simple logic, as demonstated by Rodney Thompson:
So that is why elemental priest went from being a cleric to a primal power source related theme. There wasn't a justification that could be used or a way of logically integrating divine classes into the setting. At the same time returning to the Eladrin/Feywild part, they had a logical justification and a way of putting in Eladrin into Dark Sun. So they did so.
For example:
Kamikaze Midget said:Like a cell phone in a horror movie: Because of the availability of escape, if I as a DM wanted to instead focus on the problems of Athas, rather than of the sidebar world of the Feywild, and the party wants to escape Athas by use of the Feywild, they're forced to contrive some method to prevent the PC's from accessing it in any way more significant than the mechanics of a teleport or two.
This is absurd and clearly indicates you haven't even read what the Feywild in Dark Sun actually entails, as Rich Baker on his blog puts it:
Rich Baker said:The Feywild of Athas is dying, however, and it no longer exists as a continuous, parallel plane. It’s a few scattered pockets that don’t connect to each other; journeying from one Feywild locale to another means returning to Athas to make the trek.
I mean how is any of that similar to what you wrote?
1) The Feywild - like Athas - is dying. It's not a safe haven. This inherently destroys any point you've actually made with this, but we'll continue.
2) It is not continuous at all. There may be 'threads' of it behind where you can teleport for extremely short distances, but not enough for any significant travel on the plane.
3) It's just as evil as the Athasian desert and probably worse - given it's actually a more extreme version of the desert. Do you honestly think a PC escaping for a more deadly desert is at all equivalent to what you're saying?
4) We don't even know if Athasian Eladrin can still teleport, the Dark Sun book could well give them another racial power. This wouldn't be unheard of.
Let's also examine that by canon and what Rich Baker wrote:
Indicates that as the DM, you can choose that day to be immediately and all that Feywild stuff no longer exists and is now stuck properly on Athas. As was indicated by the whole part where the feywild is dying and only isolated pockets are left part.It’s only a matter of time until the Lands within the Wind cease to exist altogether, and things that were hidden return to the mortal world—but the eladrin hope to stave off that day as long as they can.
Kamikaze Midget said:If that fairly reasonable dispute about a fairly minor point in what looks to be something I'm going to be overall a fan of makes me a hater in someone's mind, I think that poster may need to re-calibrate their Criticism Detector. Because "I think adding the Feywild hurts the feel of Dark Sun" is at least a notch or two below a Helen Thomas-level scandal, though you wouldn't know it from the tone of some of the reactions here.
Now you're perfectly entitled to dislike the feywild and similar in Athas. You can remove Eladrin if you like as well. It would be nice though if you could get the basic facts about how it works in Athas right when you're complaining about it. I think that's why you are seeing so many people breaking their "criticism detectors", it's because what you're criticizing isn't valid to begin with - not that you're criticizing it. You've basically set up something that isn't what Rich Baker wrote the Feywild in Athas is to begin with.
Wik said:Okay. I paraphrased his quote. I'm sorry - I assumed everyone had read his blog post, in which he said:
You didn't say you "paraphrased" his quote, you did this:
Wik said:I was looking at Rich Baker's blog, who said, flat out "We need to include Eladrin, as we don't want to alienate the guy that always plays an Eladrin"
And believe it or not "" are in fact quote tags - they aren't fancy BB quote tags but they have the exact same purpose. They are used when you are indicating a direct quote from another person - in this case Rich Baker. The core difference between what you claimed Rich Baker said and what he actually wrote are worlds apart if you even for a moment analyze what you claimed he wrote and what he did in fact write.
This is pure pedantry on my part, but when you're going to butcher what someone else wrote so badly while trying to protest you're being misquoted, the irony is far too much for me not to make a comment.
The actual point here is that they thought they had an element they could choose to exclude or include (one of the core races). They had a logical and well supported way of inserting it into the setting. They did so. In the case of something else like paladins and divine classes before you bring it up, they made a choice not to put in divine classes because they didn't see the need to in a world where the gods were dead. People bought up elemental classes, but the reason elemental clerics were in 2E has simple logic, as demonstated by Rodney Thompson:
We definitely keep the idea of having a big hunk of people in Dark Sun be worshipers of the elements, we just didn't limit that to the divine classes (which, as someone else pointed out, kind of felt like it was a hack to keep the healing coming for 2nd Edition players). Obviously the themes tie into this (so keep an eye out for the next Design & Development column), but the nature of 4E's class structure makes it really easy to cut out an entire power source and still have the adventuring party be 100% functional.
So that is why elemental priest went from being a cleric to a primal power source related theme. There wasn't a justification that could be used or a way of logically integrating divine classes into the setting. At the same time returning to the Eladrin/Feywild part, they had a logical justification and a way of putting in Eladrin into Dark Sun. So they did so.
Last edited: