D&D 5E Mearls on other settings

[Remathilis]

The 2E Athasian Bard was not a spellcaster, they rewrote it because magic is hard. The PHB Bard was a spellcaster, on Darksun it was not.

In 5E terms it would be an Rogue:Assassin with the perform skill and poison use.

You were talking about Greyhawk in the quoted text, not Dark Sun. I think you're mixing your terms.

Themes are not used to club people into submission.-

They are when they are used to arbitrarily nerf PCs.

I'll give DS a break for a moment. Ravenloft tries to keep a theme of "horror" going with its rules. It does so by intentionally nerfing a lot of abilities that either confront undead (turn undead) or help give away the plot (divinations). As the setting progressed through, more and more things were used to club PCs who thought to use them as advantages. Animal Companions and Familiars betrayed their masters. Resurrection magic faltered, healing magic had a chance of failing. Almost any magic used to harm someone required a Power check (not just necromancy). Domain Lords routinely could ignore the PCs efforts with impunity. It could get so bad that it felt railroaded; do what the DM says because "the Mists block every other option".

One of the tropes of Gothic Horror is a sense of powerlessness, I get that. But when it get so bad that most PCs can't perform their class functions, you might need to dial back the "theme" a bit.

Which is my point; if the rules require I be near useless and most of primary tools (be it magic, weapons, or class functions) be removed or nerfed to keep the theme, its time for the theme to dial back some.

 

[Hussar]

The lack of Warlords is an easy one. There simply weren't enough 4e players to make a difference. That's the hard and fast truth. Instead of being 10% of players being pissed that warlords were excluded, it's 1% (totally made up number) simply because so few fans were 4e hold outs. So, you don't get the gnome effect.

However, if you exclude monks, barbarians, and a bunch of other stuff, it's pretty darn likely that you're going to run into it. At least a LOT more likely anyway.

And, so what if it was one of the top 5 TSR settings? Woohoo? That's like being Valedictorian in Summer School. Sure, you're the best in the class, but, the class is made up of those that couldn't actually make the grade. Again, that's the hard truth.

There's Forgotten Realms and then there's everyone else. The space between 1st place and everyone else is so large that everyone else is a rounding error. And, quite frankly, WotC appears to have zero interest in appealing to any niche products. If it's not going to break that 100k sales bar, it's not going to get published.

Which means that any published product has to appeal as broadly as possible.

They were reptilian anthromorphic people, that is fine. The mammal based ones do not really fit, most of the mammals do not exist.

Dinosaur people in the far future fits, but, not cat people or coyote people? Seriously?

Look, I've got no horse in this race. I really, really don't care what they include in the book since I'll most likely never buy it and most likely won't play it. But, I also recognize that marketing and business has to play a bigger role here or the product goes in the toilet. No, highly restrictive settings are not popular enough to make the product line. They just aren't. I'm sorry, but, that's the bottom line. There is zero chance that any WotC published setting will not make full use of every other published book.

The days of setting for setting's sake books are long behind us. It's just not going to happen.

 

[Zardnaar]

I agree with all of the above.




And now you've lost my support. The publisher absolutely should do that. But, the publisher should also provide helpful advice/options for people to go against the themes of the setting if they choose to.

In general, the book should be written with the restrictions assumed. And then you add in little sidebars or a single section about how to include a thing that's ordinarily restricted if the group wants to.

More or less this. The only things out right banned on Darksun would be.

Aquatic races
Races from other setting (Warforged, Kender etc).
Water/metal themed classes and races
Things from other genres (Oriental Adventures- no Samurai).
Drow (birght sun, underground race)
Basically things that really do not fit.
Things wiped out from the world (Orcs, Gnomes)

Other things would be restricted AKA ask your DM. Individuals might exist but they are not assumed to be a default part of the setting or are not known to the world at large.

Dragonborn
Tieflings
Other races that may or may not exist (Goliaths, various reptilian races that are not lizard men)
Existing Darksun races that are very rare/unknown to the world at large (Lizardmen, Thamasku Halflings, 2E Dray, Ghost Elves, Pyreen, things from Ur Draxa, Saragar etc)

 

[Hussar]

I agree with all of the above.




And now you've lost my support. The publisher absolutely should do that. But, the publisher should also provide helpful advice/options for people to go against the themes of the setting if they choose to.

In general, the book should be written with the restrictions assumed. And then you add in little sidebars or a single section about how to include a thing that's ordinarily restricted if the group wants to.

I'm just being realistic here. WotC is not going to do this. They just aren't. It's suicidal business practice to create a product that is only going to appeal to a tiny slice of your already pretty darn small consumer base without making sure that that product appeals to as many as possible. The more restrictive you make the setting, the less it appeals to the broader audience.

WotC doesn't do vanity projects anymore.

 

[MechaPilot]

I'm just being realistic here. WotC is not going to do this. They just aren't. It's suicidal business practice to create a product that is only going to appeal to a tiny slice of your already pretty darn small consumer base without making sure that that product appeals to as many as possible. The more restrictive you make the setting, the less it appeals to the broader audience.

WotC doesn't do vanity projects anymore.

Re, the bolded part: isn't that what the sidebars and/or sections with advice and/or options for including things that are normally restricted going to do?

I mean, if the book just said "X, Y & Z are banned" then you'd have a point. But, if the book says the following (which is what I'm advocating for), the limited appeal based on restrictions argument evaporates, "X, Y & Z are normally not a part of the setting. Here are some variants that will fit with the themes of the setting. And, if you are set on using the originals, here are some ways you can incorporate them into the setting."

 

[Zardnaar]

You were talking about Greyhawk in the quoted text, not Dark Sun. I think you're mixing your terms.



They are when they are used to arbitrarily nerf PCs.

I'll give DS a break for a moment. Ravenloft tries to keep a theme of "horror" going with its rules. It does so by intentionally nerfing a lot of abilities that either confront undead (turn undead) or help give away the plot (divinations). As the setting progressed through, more and more things were used to club PCs who thought to use them as advantages. Animal Companions and Familiars betrayed their masters. Resurrection magic faltered, healing magic had a chance of failing. Almost any magic used to harm someone required a Power check (not just necromancy). Domain Lords routinely could ignore the PCs efforts with impunity. It could get so bad that it felt railroaded; do what the DM says because "the Mists block every other option".

One of the tropes of Gothic Horror is a sense of powerlessness, I get that. But when it get so bad that most PCs can't perform their class functions, you might need to dial back the "theme" a bit.

Which is my point; if the rules require I be near useless and most of primary tools (be it magic, weapons, or class functions) be removed or nerfed to keep the theme, its time for the theme to dial back some.

I'm not a Ravenloft fan and I did not read that much about what came later in the setting.

I'm fine with most of that, but if I did Ravenloft as a setting I would base it off the 1992 boxed set. CoS is not really a Ravenloft setting as such.

I don't like RL for thematic reasons not the actual mechanics. There was also an old 2E saying it was something like "Ravenloft Demiplane of Terror ha try being stuck in the wastes of Athas with the Dragon breathing down your neck". RL was kind of a paradise compared to Athas.

I'm not a fan of Dragonlance either (Kender Apocalypse jokes aside) but if I was going to redo that setting I would probably set it during the War of the Lance time frame (unless the DL fans are clamouring for a latter timeline). I would not want them to change DL or RL to suit my preferences though there is nothing they could really do to make me like those settings while keeping them unique/interesting.

I like Darksun as a minimalist setting, 5 PHB race, a few new ones that is it (lkike the 1st boxed set). The 4E one among its other crimes gave away to much to early like stating out the Sorcerer Kings in its creature books. There was no hint the SK's were Dragons for example in the original material.

 

[Remathilis]

Is it my imagination or are Remathilis and Zardnaar moving closer to each other?

Remathilis seems more respectful of the tropes of a setting, and what doesnt really fit. Or at least advocating what would fit well.

Zardnaar seems more flexible about what new things might fit after all.

I've always been respectful. My point is that there is nothing in the tropes of Dark Sun (post-apocalyptic wasteland, psionics, strained magic, remote gods, strange creatures, and non-metal technology) that precludes dragonborn, warlocks, or monks. Only the silly notion that the setting cannot change or adapt to fit more of the default PHB offerings (reflavored as needed) and must only use the barest subsection of rules to remain faithful to the setting "as first described".

Yet people somehow think this means I want full knights in shining armor charging through with lances on horseback in Athas. Nothing can be further from the truth. I want an Athasian version of the dragonborn, I want them to find a place among the Wastes. I see no reason why an altered backstory and origin (as well as some new personality/cultural traits) can't be done to make them fit. They're no weirder than sentient mantises who can't talk.

My point has always been to look at a setting and think "The PHB views the D&D tropes through a High Fantasy lens. What would D&D look like through a Sword & Sorcery (or Gothic Horror, or Epic Fantasy, or Pulp, or Wuxia, etc) lens instead? How would that color what is in the Core books? How do tieflings fit in gothic horror or monks in Epic Fantasy? And there should be some respect for the past, but slavish devotion to it breeds stagnation.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm not a Ravenloft fan and I did not read that much about what came later in the setting.

I'm fine with most of that, but if I did Ravenloft as a setting I would base it off the 1992 boxed set. CoS is not really a Ravenloft setting as such.

I don't like RL for thematic reasons not the actual mechanics. There was also an old 2E saying it was something like "Ravenloft Demiplane of Terror ha try being stuck in the wastes of Athas with the Dragon breathing down your neck". RL was kind of a paradise compared to Athas.

I'm not a fan of Dragonlance either (Kender Apocalypse jokes aside) but if I was going to redo that setting I would probably set it during the War of the Lance time frame (unless the DL fans are clamouring for a latter timeline). I would not want them to change DL or RL to suit my preferences though there is nothing they could really do to make me like those settings while keeping them unique/interesting.

I like Darksun as a minimalist setting, 5 PHB race, a few new ones that is it (lkike the 1st boxed set). The 4E one among its other crimes gave away to much to early like stating out the Sorcerer Kings in its creature books. There was no hint the SK's were Dragons for example in the original material.

And that's great for YOUR Dark Sun setting. WotC has to make one that caters to more than just you. The 5e PHB had, for example, a credo to have some representation of all the races and classes in the PHB for every edition (which they did, at least according to some people *cough*battlemasterisawarlord*cough*). At the very least, WotC isn't going to alienate the people who got into DS via 4e, so expect that will stick.

In the end, neither me nor anyone here nor WotC itself cares if you by the Templar's Guide to the Wastes* and declare only 5 usable PHB classes and 5 races are playable. But WotC has to make a version that will appeal to a large swath of its fans, not just you. It has the best shot of that by making the default setting as inclusive as possible than then letting the DM work on restricting it so he can capture the feel of the 2e boxset or the 3e Dragon mag or the 4e setting book...

 

[Zardnaar]

I've always been respectful. My point is that there is nothing in the tropes of Dark Sun (post-apocalyptic wasteland, psionics, strained magic, remote gods, strange creatures, and non-metal technology) that precludes dragonborn, warlocks, or monks. Only the silly notion that the setting cannot change or adapt to fit more of the default PHB offerings (reflavored as needed) and must only use the barest subsection of rules to remain faithful to the setting "as first described".

Yet people somehow think this means I want full knights in shining armor charging through with lances on horseback in Athas. Nothing can be further from the truth. I want an Athasian version of the dragonborn, I want them to find a place among the Wastes. I see no reason why an altered backstory and origin (as well as some new personality/cultural traits) can't be done to make them fit. They're no weirder than sentient mantises who can't talk.

My point has always been to look at a setting and think "The PHB views the D&D tropes through a High Fantasy lens. What would D&D look like through a Sword & Sorcery (or Gothic Horror, or Epic Fantasy, or Pulp, or Wuxia, etc) lens instead? How would that color what is in the Core books? How do tieflings fit in gothic horror or monks in Epic Fantasy? And there should be some respect for the past, but slavish devotion to it breeds stagnation.

My opposition to Dragonborn is thematic.

To the world at large there is only one Dragon on Athas- The Dragon (singular). Even using some knowledge from latter sources there are only around 8 more Dragons on Athas with 1 undead one. Dragonmen wandering around the surface kind of defeats that theme.

2E did have Dragon men it it. They were Dray and they were different to Dragonborn. 4E shoehorned them in and did so in a bad way. Now for example lets just assume I agree with refluffing the Dray as Dragonborn (I do not BTW) the 4E conversion shoehorned them in and made Dregoth a King of Giustanel and the Dragonborn were just another race.

I would have stated out the Dray and even if I refluffed them as Dragonborn I would have included them in a logical way. Basically " Dray are very rare on Athas. You can be one however but you are a exile/Spy/amnesiac and to the world at large you are a mutant". I may have been able to handle the Dray as a sub race of Dragonborn if the original Dragonborn were not available so you still get to play a Dragon man or even Dragonborn and you fit them in to the setting that makes sense. To me that is win win.

The existing PHB Dragonborn do not fit on Athas (no metallic/chromatic Dragons).

4E tanked remember in a large part because it enraged fans of 3E (and even 2E) due to things like the Spellplague and shoehorning in races. The 4E fans were very good at yelling "fake news" or the equivalent to convince each other how well the edition and changes were received.

The Dray also have a sub race so an Athasian Dray could have 2 subraces to pick from.

 

[Zardnaar]

And that's great for YOUR Dark Sun setting. WotC has to make one that caters to more than just you. The 5e PHB had, for example, a credo to have some representation of all the races and classes in the PHB for every edition (which they did, at least according to some people *cough*battlemasterisawarlord*cough*). At the very least, WotC isn't going to alienate the people who got into DS via 4e, so expect that will stick.

In the end, neither me nor anyone here nor WotC itself cares if you by the Templar's Guide to the Wastes* and declare only 5 usable PHB classes and 5 races are playable. But WotC has to make a version that will appeal to a large swath of its fans, not just you. It has the best shot of that by making the default setting as inclusive as possible than then letting the DM work on restricting it so he can capture the feel of the 2e boxset or the 3e Dragon mag or the 4e setting book...

Its not just me though I suspect that the 2E one is alot more popular than the 4E version. It had around 13 novels tied to it and a lot of setting material and that edition outsold 4E by around 7-1 by most accounts. See previous comment on how to integrate stuff correctly. Also see fan reaction to FR 3.0/5E vs the 4E reaction.

They should also use someone who knows what what when they do convert DS (if they do), however they do it. They used freelancers for the 3E Dungeon/Dragon conversions who did not actually know that much about the world, its how we got Hamanu depicted as a half man/half lion centaur type when a were lion depiction would have been better.

Then you would also have better integration of the new stuff into the world.