Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 4890652" data-attributes="member: 7006">Now here's the question I'd like to ask all the Dark Sun fans and DMs out there with regards to how best to address the races / classes issue.If I remember correctly... because there were no gods to speak of, there were no clerics or paladins or divine characters of any sort in the original setting.  So which of these methods do you think WotC should use to address this issue:1) Identify and list all the races and classes that are found within Dark Sun and not mention the ones that aren't, or...2) Identify and list all the races and classes that are found within Dark Sun and specifically say 'the following races and classes do not appear within the Dark Sun Campaign World and should not be used'?The first point is more confusing for new players or entrants into the setting, because you give no indication why these races and classes are not listed (and basically making DMs guess as to their potential use or non-use).  However, you are leaving things open-ended so that a DM could include them if he wanted, and WotC doesn't have to run the risk of telling players 'hey, you're doing it wrong'.The second point is more true to the setting that has been established, and more in line with focusing on the very specific fluff that has made the setting as successful and popular as its been.  However, it does basically say to the DMs 'tell your players NO' on these issues, and it strips away whole chunks of the game (along with the corresponding potential book sales and miniature sales of anything divine-related or non-DS race related for example).  Which might not be something WotC wants to get in the habit of doing.***Now if either of these two options doesn't seem like the way you'd want to go, there are the third and foruth options:3) Mention that everything in D&D could find a place within the setting, but that some parts should be exceedingly rare and would be an extremely big deal if they did appear (basically, the 'every race can have a dragonmark' concept).4) Include everything that is in D&D into the Dark Sun setting, and just retcon and/or refluff things as necessary to make them stay somewhat within the realm of the original fluff (the Realms or Eberron methodology).The third choice puts the onus onto the DM to decide whether or not to say 'no', as well as potentially having to steer his campaign into a direction where the 'obscure' bits that players want have to end up being a focus.  If tieflings are potentially unheard of in Dark Sun, and one of his players wants to play one, the DM now has to decide whether this million-to-one event has to be considered an important part of his game.And as far as the fourth option... it solves pretty much everything as far as WotC's concerned, because it keeps everything they've created still in play, and means they have to spend less space in their books giving explanations for 'no', instead of space for all the 'yes's.  The downside of course is potentially alienating their long-time Dark Sun fans who feel like their setting got destroyed because of this continued WotC reasoning that 'everything in D&D should have a place in everything else connected to D&D'.***I myself have no good answers to this... but I'm curious what others feel about it.  This will be the first setting they'll produce in 4E where huge chunks of the game had originally been "written out" of the setting the first time, and where they'll really have to decide whether or not to do that again.  Should be interesting.</blockquote>

Verification