Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wik" data-source="post: 5214564" data-attributes="member: 40177">Correct.&nbsp; I'm basing my opinions off WotC's recent history in such matters - and they've been very fond of the feywild since 4e.&nbsp; So it doesn't bode well if you hold my views.If it's a part of athas, why make it seperate at all?&nbsp; The only reason to have it is to break the natural rules of physics (which another poster mentioned earlier).&nbsp; But a general &quot;shade plane&quot; could do that just as well - why does Athas need a Feywild, and all that entails?&nbsp; The natural world in Athas is already pretty messed up. It does not, in my opinion, need a &quot;even more messed up!&quot; version of itself.&nbsp; Yes.&nbsp; Because it is either a place that is less brutal than athas, in which case it would logically be a place of escape for those with the means to do so, or a place that is more brutal, which by its very nature would make Athas less brutal.&nbsp; It cannot be &quot;the same, but different&quot;.&nbsp; If it is &quot;the same, but different&quot;, it is subtracting from the majesty of Athas by diluting the athasian theme and focus on the wilderness/desert.&nbsp; My two cents, of course.No.&nbsp; The SKs will be SKs regardless.&nbsp; But depending on how the Feywild exists, it could affect how the SKs are presented.&nbsp; Will Lalali-Puy of Gulg have Feywild connections?&nbsp; It could happen - even though I hope it doesn't.&nbsp; I answered my view on this above.&nbsp; People have presented options on why the feywild exists in Dark Sun, and while some of those ideas are nifty enough, I do not personally believe there is enough there to warrant the feywild's inclusion.&nbsp; But I'm not going to convince you, and you're not going to convince me.&nbsp; Fair enough.But tell you what.&nbsp; When 4e Dark Sun comes out, I'll give the feywild at least a chance, if you promise me you'll give playing WITHOUT the feywild a chance.&nbsp; Try to see where I'm coming from, and I'll promise you right here and now that I'll try and see if a feywild makes my game any better.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wik, post: 5214564, member: 40177"] Correct. I'm basing my opinions off WotC's recent history in such matters - and they've been very fond of the feywild since 4e. So it doesn't bode well if you hold my views. If it's a part of athas, why make it seperate at all? The only reason to have it is to break the natural rules of physics (which another poster mentioned earlier). But a general "shade plane" could do that just as well - why does Athas need a [i]Feywild[/i], and all that entails? The natural world in Athas is already pretty messed up. It does not, in my opinion, need a "even more messed up!" version of itself. Yes. Because it is either a place that is less brutal than athas, in which case it would logically be a place of escape for those with the means to do so, or a place that is more brutal, which by its very nature would make Athas less brutal. It cannot be "the same, but different". If it is "the same, but different", it is subtracting from the majesty of Athas by diluting the athasian theme and focus on the wilderness/desert. My two cents, of course. No. The SKs will be SKs regardless. But depending on how the Feywild exists, it could affect how the SKs are presented. Will Lalali-Puy of Gulg have Feywild connections? It could happen - even though I hope it doesn't. I answered my view on this above. People have presented options on why the feywild exists in Dark Sun, and while some of those ideas are nifty enough, I do not personally believe there is enough there to warrant the feywild's inclusion. But I'm not going to convince you, and you're not going to convince me. Fair enough. But tell you what. When 4e Dark Sun comes out, I'll give the feywild at least a chance, if you promise me you'll give playing WITHOUT the feywild a chance. Try to see where I'm coming from, and I'll promise you right here and now that I'll try and see if a feywild makes my game any better. [/QUOTE]

Verification