D&D 5E Mearls on other settings

[Shasarak]

I'm certainly glad NONE of you work for WotC.

Zardnaar may have bat crazy ideas but at least he is giving it a go, eh?

 

[Hussar]

It's an interesting question to me. Should a setting for DND simply be vanilla DND with a sprinkling of other stuff to differentiate it from baseline? Or should a setting be its own thing, drawing on baseline DND for mechanics but really different enough from another setting that it's almost a new game?

I think there is certainly room for both.

 

[Zardnaar]

Zardnaar may have bat crazy ideas but at least he is giving it a go, eh?

Hey Kender apocalypse was a great idea.

 

[Shasarak]

Hey Kender apocalypse was a great idea.

It was definitely an idea.

 

[Zardnaar]

It was definitely an idea.

No worse than TSR metaplot and the Spellplague.

 

[gyor]

I don't know, I kind of get the idea of adding things to the setting if they fit the setting.

For example, from the little I played of Dark Sun... well, I think we ignored 90% of the point of the setting, but from what I've heard the Desert and the idea of Elemental powers is a big deal. Doesn't the concept of the Storm Herald Barbarian with the path of the Desert fit that kind of setting like a glove?

I don't care if barbarians never existed in Athas before, the idea of a tribal nomad who is able to channel the might of the desert to destroy his foes, in a world where the might of the desert is a big deal, makes perfect sense to me. However, the other two sections of the Storm Herald, especially the cold tundra version, make incredibly little sense. I don't even think they have snow-capped mountains in Athas so having that Barbarian in a game would be a tough sell, I don't think I could accept it.


So, the idea IMO isn't "Can I find a place for my Polar Bear Divine Chanter of Kord character in Athas" but it is asking, are there new ideas and things in the game that make sense to appear in Athas? Are there classes or races that didn't exist in an older edition that fit the setting very well with a minor change or two?


Also, we could look towards potential re-works of ideas, I only played 4e Dark Sun, but the ability to choose whether you preserve or defile with each casting was kind of cool. I was a goody-two shoes so I never did, but I had that option. That seems like a good thing to keep, instead of making a whole new subclass to represent each side of the coin and only using those two.


Orcs in Kyrnn seem to be a big deal to some people (I thought they were there but its been too long since I read the novels) but if it truly messes with the setting that much, fine, leave them out, but I wouldn't leave out Tritons from Dragon Lance, because they seem like they'd make a good interpretation of the Sea Elves (also, I really don't want to see 20 different elf subraces, just, no please no)


I just think we shouldn't limit ourselves if we don't need to. Just because every setting has Humans, Dwarves, Elves and Halflings doesn't mean they are all the exact same setting, very few settings are fully or even partially defined by the races or classes available, and environment, cosmology, and types of threats are a bigger indicator of a setting and what it is meant to be like than what kind of characters are at the table.

Its really weird that we have Sea Half Elves in 5e, but NOT Sea Elves so far.

 

[Zardnaar]

I don't know, I kind of get the idea of adding things to the setting if they fit the setting.

For example, from the little I played of Dark Sun... well, I think we ignored 90% of the point of the setting, but from what I've heard the Desert and the idea of Elemental powers is a big deal. Doesn't the concept of the Storm Herald Barbarian with the path of the Desert fit that kind of setting like a glove?

I don't care if barbarians never existed in Athas before, the idea of a tribal nomad who is able to channel the might of the desert to destroy his foes, in a world where the might of the desert is a big deal, makes perfect sense to me. However, the other two sections of the Storm Herald, especially the cold tundra version, make incredibly little sense. I don't even think they have snow-capped mountains in Athas so having that Barbarian in a game would be a tough sell, I don't think I could accept it.


So, the idea IMO isn't "Can I find a place for my Polar Bear Divine Chanter of Kord character in Athas" but it is asking, are there new ideas and things in the game that make sense to appear in Athas? Are there classes or races that didn't exist in an older edition that fit the setting very well with a minor change or two?


Also, we could look towards potential re-works of ideas, I only played 4e Dark Sun, but the ability to choose whether you preserve or defile with each casting was kind of cool. I was a goody-two shoes so I never did, but I had that option. That seems like a good thing to keep, instead of making a whole new subclass to represent each side of the coin and only using those two.


Orcs in Kyrnn seem to be a big deal to some people (I thought they were there but its been too long since I read the novels) but if it truly messes with the setting that much, fine, leave them out, but I wouldn't leave out Tritons from Dragon Lance, because they seem like they'd make a good interpretation of the Sea Elves (also, I really don't want to see 20 different elf subraces, just, no please no)


I just think we shouldn't limit ourselves if we don't need to. Just because every setting has Humans, Dwarves, Elves and Halflings doesn't mean they are all the exact same setting, very few settings are fully or even partially defined by the races or classes available, and environment, cosmology, and types of threats are a bigger indicator of a setting and what it is meant to be like than what kind of characters are at the table.

I allowed Barbarians into DS back in 2E, they even kind of fit the setting as they tended to use stone weapons.

The 2E Barbarian was a 1d12 tough as guts survivalist though not the d20 rager with quasi magical powers (totem). Some of the kits did have them the default Barbarian was fine though.

Orignal 2E DS had defilers and preservers, they later added an otion that a preserver could defile but if you went to far you were a defiler. Kind of like the dark side in Star Wars.

Defilers did not have the option of preserving, it was a bit harder but not impossible to hide their magic. They could use wands/magic or trees of life to hide it. They also changed defiling from casting the spell to memorising the spell (I prefer casting it). Towards the end (and early on in some cases) DS often had contradictory rules. 2E was like that overall though as you could have a wizard from the PHB, wizard handbook, Tome of Magic or Spells and Magic that were all slightly different to each other.

For various reasons I did not think 4E was actually a good conversion of Darksun even if you ignored some of the lore they contradicted or rewrote (healing surges, the way armor worked, inferior materials+ powers , defiling rules etc).

When people mean brutal in 4E terms you had no healing surges (1d3 healing daily) and no healing power over level 5 (5E3rd level+ healing spells) existed for clerics (Druids and Templars were better healers).

Even then AD&D magical healing was less than 3E,4E and 5E (1d8, 2d8+1, 3d8+3 levels for 1st,3rd and 4th level healing spells). And they had rules for things like heat exhaustion, turning CE and killing your companions for water, and a character tree for replacement characters if your main one died. Oh and a lot of "normal" critters were psionic so a Tiger equivalent had camouflage type psionic powers. A bug could mind blast you.

This was not your dads (or elder brothers) D&D.

 

[Bolares]

Hey Kender apocalypse was a great idea.

If all kender die in it I'm in favor XD

 

[Chaosmancer]

I allowed Barbarians into DS back in 2E, they even kind of fit the setting as they tended to use stone weapons.

The 2E Barbarian was a 1d12 tough as guts survivalist though not the d20 rager with quasi magical powers (totem). Some of the kits did have them the default Barbarian was fine though.

Orignal 2E DS had defilers and preservers, they later added an otion that a preserver could defile but if you went to far you were a defiler. Kind of like the dark side in Star Wars.

Defilers did not have the option of preserving, it was a bit harder but not impossible to hide their magic. They could use wands/magic or trees of life to hide it. They also changed defiling from casting the spell to memorising the spell (I prefer casting it). Towards the end (and early on in some cases) DS often had contradictory rules. 2E was like that overall though as you could have a wizard from the PHB, wizard handbook, Tome of Magic or Spells and Magic that were all slightly different to each other.

For various reasons I did not think 4E was actually a good conversion of Darksun even if you ignored some of the lore they contradicted or rewrote (healing surges, the way armor worked, inferior materials+ powers , defiling rules etc).

When people mean brutal in 4E terms you had no healing surges (1d3 healing daily) and no healing power over level 5 (5E3rd level+ healing spells) existed for clerics (Druids and Templars were better healers).

Even then AD&D magical healing was less than 3E,4E and 5E (1d8, 2d8+1, 3d8+3 levels for 1st,3rd and 4th level healing spells). And they had rules for things like heat exhaustion, turning CE and killing your companions for water, and a character tree for replacement characters if your main one died. Oh and a lot of "normal" critters were psionic so a Tiger equivalent had camouflage type psionic powers. A bug could mind blast you.

This was not your dads (or elder brothers) D&D.

Okay, I know I'm in a bad emotional headspace right now because of real life stuff, but I don't get what you are saying.



Who cares if 2e was more brutal and 4e was more superheroic? What does it matter? IT kind of feels like saying Star Trek has better science than Star Wars. You have a point but that doesn't change the conversation.


YOu want psionic monsters where everything you encounter is a deadly threat to the party. Fine, a new Darksun could potentially do that, but if you want to strip all magic away from the game except for the new defiler wizard class and the new preserver magic class... well, you're kind of out of luck. You've only got around five options for subclasses at that point (I built an all non-magic team once, couldn't even get six characters and that was including the monk, ended up with a ranger as the sixth person). The game doesn't support that like it used to. And, I doubt they are going to do a lot to alter that in a new book.


I don't know where I'm going with this anymore, I'm too distracted. 2e Darksun was 2e, you aren't going to get anywhere if you except nothing more or less mechanically. I like the idea of people being able to choose to give up defiling if you change their outlook, or that a persever could end up defiling. Perhaps make defiling a default and weaken spells if you preserve, but I don't think it serves us to have them made their own class. I don't think it serves us to hew absolutely to the way things used to be instead of looking at how they could end up. There is no point, the people who want 2e Darksun would just go and play 2e Darksun anyways, or adjust things to fit the vision they want anyways.

I don't want 2e Darksun, I want 5e Darksun, whatever that ends up looking like.

 

[Remathilis]

I don't know where I'm going with this anymore, I'm too distracted. 2e Darksun was 2e, you aren't going to get anywhere if you except nothing more or less mechanically. I like the idea of people being able to choose to give up defiling if you change their outlook, or that a persever could end up defiling. Perhaps make defiling a default and weaken spells if you preserve, but I don't think it serves us to have them made their own class. I don't think it serves us to hew absolutely to the way things used to be instead of looking at how they could end up. There is no point, the people who want 2e Darksun would just go and play 2e Darksun anyways, or adjust things to fit the vision they want anyways.

I don't want 2e Darksun, I want 5e Darksun, whatever that ends up looking like.

That is the problem; people can't let go.

There is a phenomenon I've witnessed I call "First Love Syndrome" which basically says nothing will ever be as good as the first time you came in contact with it. Whatever it was that drew it to you, you accept it 100% (warts and all) and any attempt to change or improve on it is sacrilege. Name a fandom, you'll find examples. Its why people prefer the original theatrical releases of Star Wars to the Special Editions. Its the rationale for "You never forget your first Doctor" in Doctor Who. Its why people You get Kirk vs. Picard debates, and why reboots and spin-offs almost never please hardcore fans of the originals. Its why people argue endlessly over why the edition of D&D you grew up on is the best version of D&D. And it the origin of the phrase "raped my childhood".

So when people discuss a setting, they look at through the lens of First Love; everything since then has diluted, changed, or "ruined" the setting. Adding anything changes how it was when you fell in love with it, and makes it no longer perfect. Of course, its not a universal syndrome; plenty of people enjoy watching a fandom grow and change. But as with any human endeavor, you'll find fundamentalists unwilling and unable to see their perfect vision ruined.

EDIT: I knew TVTropes would have another name for it: Nostalgia Filter. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NostalgiaFilter