D&D 5E How would you wish WOTC to do Dark Sun

[dave2008]

I keep coming back to this point: there are two ways WotC can do Dark Sun

a.) A totally faithful to the 2e setting conversion that requires a near re-write of the PHB (along with the MM and part of the DMG) to basically make a side-adjunct compatible game. WotC is NOT going to release a book that says "toss out half your PHB and every supplement we've produced since" for D&D, but they CAN get away with it if they make Dark Sun a stand-alone game and let people kit-bash it with other D&D products of they want.

b.) A 4e-inspired version where many of the common elements of the PHB are either reskinned or lightly adapted (akin to how WotC has handled Ravnica and Theros) but otherwise finds homes for all (or nearly all) of the classes and many of the races. This version HAS spellcasting bards, wild magic sorcerers, and eldtrich knights (all of which using a defiler/preserver mechanic) along with native tieflings, genasi, dray/dragonborn, etc because those things are in the PHB and they want to keep PC choices as varied as possible.

Ultimately, WotC will have to decide which is more important: Dark Sun being part of D&D or Dark Sun remaining faithful in adaptation. If keeping it D&D is important, then they go with a 4e style skinning. If setting purity is important, a separate game is needed to re-write, add, and remove all the things that would be needed to recreate the 2e version.

An individual DM can do what they want, but WotC is going to try to sell a book to that coveted 60%+ demographic, and a setting where you can't use most of the PHB classes isn't going to past the test.

I guess I disagree. I think there is room for a third option: a campaign guide that explains x, y, and z are not options available (or typically available) in a Dark Sun campaign and provides new options available things for Dark Sun characters. The rest is lore, possibly some DS specific mechanics, and new monsters (possibly a template to make monsters tougher). That way you could to play a faithfully to 2e and not have to throw out the PHB or DMG or MM.

 

[cbwjm]

One reason I suggested contriving a way of bringing back the Sorcerer Kings is because... this kind of means that 5e Dark Sun doesn't have anything new in it. No surprises, new toys, new plots. We've seen it all before, aside from new mechanics to play it with 5th edition.

We can do that, though. Just pretend the metaplot never happened and keep Athas frozen in time. It would make a lot of fans happy and I would certainly buy it.

Maybe I'm just getting old and tired of having my nostalgia sold to me over and over again.

They did this for 4e, from what I can tell, it was set more or less just a few years after the fall of the king of Tyr so all of the other sorcerer kings still exist.

 

[cbwjm]

I guess I disagree. I think there is room for a third option where there is a campaign guide that explains x, y, and z are not options available (or typically available) in a Dark Sun campaign and here are some new things you need for a Dark Sun characters. The rest is lore and new monsters (possibly a template to make monsters tougher). That could allow you to play a faithful to 2e campaign and not have to through out the PHB or DMG or MM.

I think this is the best way. I mean, looking at Theros, WotC was happy to throw out the majority of races from Theros to remain true to the setting (I think pretty much only the only PHB race are humans), I see no reason why the 5e version can't do the same as well as be a little more restrictive with classes which, really, in 2e only removed paladins and changed how bards worked, 4e was more restrictive in that no class with the divine power source was allowed (though there is a sidebar that says you might be able to work with your DM to include them which could be the same in a 5e version) but then it also had themes so that you could still have elemental clerics. Themes were one of the best additions to 4e and supernatural gifts from Theros look somewhat similar to me so I'd expect a dark sun game to also include something in a similar vein.

 

[NaturalZero]

I'm not sure why so many people seem to assume that they'd force every race from the PHB into a 5e Dark Sun. I'm sitting here looking at both Mythic Odysseys of Theros and Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica, which both clearly state "...races of the Player's Handbook are unknown on [Ravnica/Theros], unless they're visiting from other worlds."

WotC clearly has no problem putting out a setting book that explicitly excludes certain core races.

 

[humble minion]

I'm not sure why so many people seem to assume that they'd force every race from the PHB into a 5e Dark Sun. I'm sitting here looking at both Mythic Odysseys of Theros and Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica, which both clearly state "...races of the Player's Handbook are unknown on [Ravnica/Theros], unless they're visiting from other worlds."

WotC clearly has no problem putting out a setting book that explicitly excludes certain core races.

Mostly because of how they bent over backwards to get tieflings etc into 4e Dark Sun I guess. The 5e designers attitude seems to be different, but old scars heal slow.

Tbh I think including PHB races into Dark Sun (except the canonically extinct ones) is much less damaging to the integrity of the setting than including all phb classes and class options.

 

[NaturalZero]

Tbh I think including PHB races into Dark Sun (except the canonically extinct ones) is much less damaging to the integrity of the setting than including all phb classes and class options.

The big elephant in the room is that every single class is magical in the PHB and magic has serious setting restrictions in DS. You'd ideally have a full a Psion AND a psionic subclass for each class to take up the slack, but you're looking at a much thicker setting book once everything starts adding up.

 

[Remathilis]

Mostly because of how they bent over backwards to get tieflings etc into 4e Dark Sun I guess. The 5e designers attitude seems to be different, but old scars heal slow.

Tbh I think including PHB races into Dark Sun (except the canonically extinct ones) is much less damaging to the integrity of the setting than including all phb classes and class options.

Really, the elephant for me is classes. Eberron, Theros, Wildemount and Ravnica have yet to restrict classes (or even backgrounds) and often expanded those options. Looking to other settings, there isn't any other setting (Dragonlance, Greyhawk, Ravenloft, etc.) that has limited class selection (going by 3e versions) either.

And then there's Dark Sun.

You could probably get away with putting a "paladin are rare, check with your DM" note and then a universal defiling mechanic for all classes (as well as a few new subs) and be done... IF you except the 4e vision of DS. The problem is moreso than any other setting, Dark Sun seems to want to ban anything that wasn't in the 90s box set. The most extreme version bans things like Barbarian because of unarmored defense breaking DS armor rules (!) And only allows one subclass per class if the class is allowed at all.

Every other setting so far has been an expansion of the rules: Dark Sun would be a reduction. Playing in it gives you less options for PCs then any other setting. Just to replace what is in the PHB, you'd have to design a Xanathar-like book of options, most of which probably would have incompatibility issues with moving them back to Eberron, Ravnica or The Realms. Plus, Races are easy (WotC does them all the time) but classes and subclasses take lots of time and playtests to see the light of day.

Ultimately, I see WotC taking the path of least resistance; a 4e-like guide that mostly reskins what's in the PHB and suggests how to use them along with some new options to flesh them out. You know, treat Dark Sun like a D&D setting, not an edgelord teenager who is trying to rebel against it's parents.

 

[Coroc]

The core can easily be setting neutral enough.




Core rules do well to avoid any cosmological assumptions.

Especially, religions need to be more diverse and customizable in D&D, more like Eberron - so reallife religious minorities can feel more welcome.

And religious diversity makes it more convenient to world-build homebrew settings that have special assumptions.



With regard to classes, setting-neutral classes and archetypes make it easy to cut-and-paste the concepts that are relevant and to leave out the ones that are less relevant.

Especially the basic classes - Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard - need setting-neutral mechanics, to plug-and-play into a diversity of homebrew settings.



With regard to Dark Sun specifically:

Athas Bard = 5e Assassin
Setting neutral assassin description, perfect.

Totem Barbarian is fine. Dark Sun has Druids who animistically venerate the plants, animals, and elements that are significant to a specific landscape feature. So a totem of an animal at that location feels appropriate in Dark Sun.

A Cleric description devoid of baked-in cosmological setting assumptions makes it very easy to reflavor official domains, and even very easy to customize new domains. The Cleric mechanics are conveniently customizable, but it is the baked-in flavor that ruins the Cleric.

Fighter is fine in Dark Sun. Wizard is fine in Dark Sun. Eldritch Knight is fine in Dark Sun. Indeed, I prefer the Eldritch Knight for the Templar. If Templar were Cleric, it makes less sense that the Templar would receive spells from the dragon-sorcerer that the dragon-sorcerer Wizard doesnt know. But the Eldritch Knight as Templar can normally learn Wizard spells from a dragon-sorcerer Wizard.

Monk as a psionic class can work well. The Shadow Monk feels awesome as a psionic mystic who engages with the Dark Sun plane of the Black.

Ranger needs a fix anyway. I have no opinion about it Dark Sun. Maybe a Scout Rogue works better. In any case, as long as setting-neutral mechanics are siloed as separate options without entangling baked-in flavor, then it is easy and useful to plug-and-play some classes and races, while leaving other classes and races out.

Sorcerer is actually one of the classes I would leave out of Dark Sun, in order to pressure the dilemma between preserving plantlife versus defiling it. On the other hand, the psionic Psychic Soul Sorcerer might be a thing, and can work well in Dark Sun.

For Warlock, I would either leave the class out, or else specifically flavor it as "Athas Elf magic", allowing fey and hexblade focusing on preservation. Still undecided, but in any case the availability of setting-neutral class mechanics helps me.



Spell names dont need to gratuitously add character names for core rules.



In sum, setting-neutral class descriptions for the core rules makes it easier to plug and play into Dark Sun flavor, ... and also into any homebrew setting flavors.

Setting neutral core rules helps ME! world build.




Races/species need to be far more customizable anyway. The customizability helps a player feel more comfortable about reallife concerns about ethnicity. The same customizability makes it easy for the DM to tweak it to make it more resonant for a different setting.

So on one hand the cosmology aspect best not mentioned to be neutral otoh some ruling to cater to those people who cannot distinguish between a game and real life?

 

[hawkeyefan]

Psionics is probably the big piece that needs to be sorted, and then they can build around that.

I mean, if they restrict arcane magic to wizard and sorcerer, and make the magical subclasses such as Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster instead rely on psionics, that’s a pretty simple solution. Then establish a way to handle defiling/preserving, and you’re pretty much there. It makes arcane magic less common and gives it the dangerous element that it should have, while still allowing all the subclass options.

Then just go race by race and class by class and establish how it tends to work on Athas. Elves are different in this way, Druids are different in that way.

Then something like:
“Gnomes are believed to be extinct, wiped out by one of the sorcerer-kings’ ancient genocides; however, the Pristine Tower mutates some creatures that come near it, so it’s entirely possible that a gnome PC could be a mutated member of another race. Or perhaps some gnomes survived the extinction, and have remained hidden in some way for the centuries since. Discuss with your DM how they’d like to handle this in your game. ”

I think if they simply suggest limitations and explain why, then there’s no need to actually remove any options. Leave it all on the table and let each group decide what’s best.

Class and race restrictions, while present in the setting and one of the most immediately obvious differences, are not really the important things that make Athas interesting and unique. Each group can handle it however they want. Plus, removing any and all mention of gnomes or tieflings in a Dark Sun setting book doesn’t mean that players might not still ask to play one. Those options are still known to players....so they’re going to ask anyway, if they really want to play one.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The psionics thing is a problem. I wish they'd go with a concept that works and not throw out everything that doesn't get 80% + buy-in from hard core fans.