Dungeons & Dragons Releases New Unearthed Arcana Subclasses, Strongly Hinting at Dark Sun

Wizards of the Coast has released four new D&D subclasses for playtesting, all of which have heavy thematic ties to the post-apocalyptic Dark Sun setting. The four subclasses, released as "Apocalyptic Subclasses," include the Circle of Preservation Druid, the Gladiator Fighter, the Defiled Sorcerer, and the Sorcerer-King Patron Warlock. Although not stated outright, the Gladiator and Sorcerer-King Patron are explicit nods to the Dark Sun setting, set in a ruined world ruled by Sorcerer-Kings where gladiatorial fights were common.

The Circle of Preservation Druid creates areas of preserved land that grants buffs to those who stand upon it. The Gladiator adds secondary Weapon Mastery properties to their attacks, with bonus abilities. Notably, the Gladiator uses Charisma as its secondary stat. The Defiled Sorcerer can expend its hit dice to amp up damage to its attacks and can also steal the life of its targets to deal additional damage. The Sorcerer-King Patron gains a number of abilities tying into tyranny and oppression, with the ability to cast Command as a Bonus Action without expending a spell slot, causing targets to gain the Frightened Condition, and forcing those who attack them to re-roll successful attacks.

The survey for the subclasses goes live on August 28th.

 

[dave2008]

Even with point buy and 2 ASIs the only way to have 20 CHA is to have 16 STR or DEX when a normal Fighter has 20 STR or DEX so you're hugely worse than them at actually fighting. Why are you ignoring that? You can eventually catch up at the cost of 2 Feats, a pretty huge cost when things like GWM exist.

I mean you don't really need a stat above 16 in 5e. You could play a 1-20 campaign with a max stat of 16 and be 100% fine. It could actually be pretty awesome. You are talking about a +2 difference. That just isn't a big deal IME. We max stats at 18 in our game and at level 15 we still have some characters who haven't made that mark.

 

[pukunui]

It's thematic in that it is easier and quicker to cast a spell when defiling. Add in the environmental destruction it is quite thematic. Also keep in mind I am dredging this up from memories 2 odd decades old

I posted the OG 2e preserving and defiling rules upthread. (Not the revised box set version.)

Preserving = default D&D magic-user rules. Defiling = destruction of vegetation plus faster XP / leveling progression.

 

[squibbles]

So... here's my considered take:

Preserver Druids are likely going to represent the entirety of the Preservers. No more difficult decision on whether to Preserve or Defile for Arcane Spellcasters. No. That would be too much power and consideration. Too many moral quandries. DRUIDS are now the Preservers.

Defiler Sorcerers are likely going to represent the entirety of the Defilers. See above. [...]

[...]Arcane Magic defiles. You can hold back, use some of yourself, cast carefully, and preserve. But it is supposed to defile.

Arcane Magic didn't get "Stronger" because you defiled in 2e. It was just magic. It was weaker (took longer) if you preserved. So it created this important choice for you and your character.

Having a "Middle Ground" betrays that choice. And turning around and making Preserving stronger (healing, area, whatever) betrays it even harder. [...]

I agree with the second comment, mostly.

The trouble with dark sun, in its original incarnation as well as now, is how much of the standard D&D player options it keeps. Everything with spells that can't defile ultimately undercuts the core environmentalist themes of the setting. So choosing a Druid in 2e already opted you out of the arcane magic defiles paradigm.

And, in 5e, wizards aren't enough more powerful than druids that having penalties for preserving doesn't just discentivize playing a wizard--where in 2e (I think, correct me if I'm off here) game balance was somewhat less of a thing, and a standard wizard with accelerated level progression would be clearly stronger than a druid.

I don't think you're wrong that the fiction underlying what WotC is cooking will be... unambitious. But I also don't think implicating druids in the preserving/defiling dichotomy is neccessarily bad (though this particular implementation sure is).

But this also all points to the "No Accountability" structure where the Sorcerer Kings get away with everything they've done and the players and NPCs are all unknowing rubes who cannot recognize the SKs for exactly how terrible they truly are. Just like 4e.

I didn't know that about 4e dark sun. Could you elaborate, how is it different from the 1991 presentation of the setting?

[...]Hopepunk is mostly just grimdark where the heroes can win anyway. [...]

Wait... isn't that just, like, regular fiction?

Joking aside, stories where the world is effed and bad people are in charge but our plucky protagonist can rise up and overcome them are as old as the tides, no? Grimdark is a new(ish) type of story where things truly are hopeless; the bad people succeed (or explosively fail) and there are bad outcomes for all. And then you feel bad.*

Does hopepunk contribute something different than being a memeified response to grimdark?

*I just finished reading the Prince of Nothing trilogy; I was irritated through most of the third book and have no intention of reading on.

I’m in a weird spot with this in that I’m cautiously optimistic from a big picture point of view while disliking a large amount of what is presented. [...]

[...]I’m very very excited to see new DS stuff in any form from WotC to be honest, especially if it means the setting opens up on dmsguild. And there’ll inevitably be SOME cool stuff i can mine.[...]

Totally there with you.

And, frankly, I'm quite happy there's a new pretext to talk about dark sun with strangers on the internet.

[...]Having said that, I find it somewhat ironic in that how all the loud angst about WotC converting DS was that they’d (ahem) ‘wokeify’ it in the process of bowdlerising the setting to conform to modern standards. From this very limited slice of content, it seems like the adaptation is going entirely the other way.

Ya, having read through the extant 20ish pages of this thread I'm pretty surprised by what's not being discussed/argued. What always pops up in dark sun discussions on enworld is the "WotC can't do dark sun because it's too edgy" argument, and then the "yes it can, you're just supposed to play good guys tho fight against the edgelords" counterargument.

Well, not in this UA you're not; edgelord is half the content.

 

[Eubani]

This is from the revised edition

 

[Eubani]

So to be exact with defiling in the revised 2ED Dark Sun, when memorizing you make the choice to defile then make an Int check. On a failure lose effective spell level on spell. On a success cast as normal. On a success greater than amount based on local terrain, cast at higher spell level. Also Preservers and Defilers were separate classes with separate advancement charts.

 

[grimslade]

Didn't think we would see this so soon; 5.26E Dark Sun, neat.
I am going to take this UA at face value. No point reading defiled tea leaves over what this means for the setting.
Circle of Preservation Druid
It is an interesting subclass. Potentially some broken shenanigans with the cube of life. I enjoy the irony that the preservation is nothing of the sort. The restoration is fleeting and filled with anger. The Druid might not be able to save Athas, but they make damn sure they avenge it.
Gladiator
This one feels like a miss. I see what they are trying to do mechanically, riffing off the weapon specialization, but it falls a little short. It seems like a different way to skin a battlemaster. It doesn't scream showman in the pit.
Defiler Sorcerer
This is like the uber defiler. I like it, but it is an NPC class. Mechanically, there is a lot that can be mined into feats.
Sorcerer Monarch Patron Warlock
The Templar. Love it. No notes. Well one note, what happens if you become an Apostate templar? No powers? Or no advancement in class? Or do you add a mechanic to show a contest of wills to siphon power from a Sorcerer King to bring about rebellion?

 

[Echohawk]

I'm not sure about Orcs either, and isn't Athas supposed to not have Gnomes either?

Didn't the Orcs get genocided with several other races in the distant past of the cannon?

Dealing with a world in which some races are not present by default is hardly a new problem for WotC to solve. In chronological order...

Here's how 4e's Dark Sun Campaign Setting dealt with this:

Here's how 5e's Mythic Odysseys of Theros dealt with this:

Here's how 5e's Dragonlance: Shadow of the Dragon Queen dealt with this:

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

No. Every piece of media does not have this issue, only those that get remade. Instead of remaking media, I'd like to see new media be made.

We have become a civilization of artistic pillagers and creative parasites. Shame on us.

I am by no means opposed to trying new things, exploring new worlds, telling new stories, etc., but we are a species of storytellers and we've been creating new/updated takes on old stories and gradually figuring out how/if to work them into the collective consciousness for millennia.

We may be thinking about it in terms of a specific TTRPG setting or media franchise, but consider a comparison to mythology: To paraphrase Red of Overly Sarcastic Productions, people have been writing Greek mythology fanfiction since before there was Greek mythology. The entire concept of syncretism is about one mythological tradition bumping up against another, and then finding ways to integrate the new stories and characters they hear about into their existing mythological framework.

Any shared "setting" inevitably changes with the times and the people telling stories within it - that's true regardless of whether the version of the setting your working from is a new "official" update or an older version you've been building upon "unofficially" for decades.

The only other option is that people stop telling stories and the setting dies out.

 

[tombowings]

I am by no means opposed to trying new things, exploring new worlds, telling new stories, etc., but we are a species of storytellers and we've been creating new/updated takes on old stories and gradually figuring out how/if to work them into the collective consciousness for millennia.

We may be thinking about it in terms of a specific TTRPG setting or media franchise, but consider a comparison to mythology: To paraphrase Red of Overly Sarcastic Productions, people have been writing Greek mythology fanfiction since before there was Greek mythology. The entire concept of syncretism is about one mythological tradition bumping up against another, and then finding ways to integrate the new stories and characters they hear about into their existing mythological framework.

Any shared "setting" inevitably changes with the times and the people telling stories within it - that's true regardless of whether the version of the setting your working from is a new "official" update or an older version you've been building upon "unofficially" for decades.

The only other option is that people stop telling stories and the setting dies out.

Sure. Oral traditions were necessary to pass on ideas from one generation to another. Inevitably, improvisation and mutations occurs. Thanks to the printing press, that is no longer necessary. I can read A Princess of Mars without the need for bards, orators, and rapsodes to butcher or reinterpret Edgar Rice Burroughs's original.

If someone is inspired by Edgar Rice Burroughs or believe he/she can do better, a new book/setting/film/comic book with a new world and set of characters can be invented. No need to disrespect the original art.

Similarly, Timothy B. Brown and Troy Denning created Dark Sun. That setting can be reprinted as is. No need to butcher or reinterpret.

What I don't understand is why the WotC posse is so deprived of artistic vision and creativity that they can't create their own setting that incorporates everything like about another setting and excludes everything they don't. They can make a post-apocalyptic wasteland setting without butchering or reinterpreting the world of Timothy B. Brown and Troy Denning.

If the WotC posse can do better than Timothy B. Brown and Troy Denning, I see let them try. Let them have at it. But I don't see why they need to lean on Timothy B. Brown and Troy Denning's work as a crutch. Are they so artistically inferior that they cannot measure up? Perhaps--perhaps not.

And no, I do not care about corporatists arguments. Let's keep politics out of art/gaming/everything meaningful to the human condition.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

If there is going to be a Dark Sun book, I wonder what made them change their tune? Dark Sun represents pretty much everything current Wotc is set on avoiding.

Unless we're getting a family friendly version of Dark Sun...ugh...

Basically everyone that was in the D&D leadership when that statement was made has since left WotC. Including Kyle Brink, who made the statement about Dark Sun being too problematic to bring back.